Strategy In A League That Is QB-Centered

[Danny Zuko]

My new league gives points left and right for QBs. In fact 16 of the top 20 scorers were QBs. Only 1 Wr cracked the Top 20. I am not sure how this changes my strategy when drafting since other than Manning it seems to me that most solid QBs differ from year to year. I don't want to be the guy who overvalues a guy like Caulpepper last year when I can be the guy who drafts a guy like Brees in the 7th round. Please advise...

[sdrewp75]

I wouldn't go chasing a QB too early but if you see them starting to fall fast then grab one.

Edited May 15, 2007 by sdrewp75

[Bronco Billy]

What is more important than 16 QBs in the top 20 is what the interval is between QBs. Who were & how many points did the #1, #2, #3, #5, #10, #15, & #20 QBs score last year? If you can provide that, you'll get a lot better advice.

[Savage Beatings]

What is more important than 16 QBs in the top 20 is what the interval is between QBs. Who were & how many points did the #1, #2, #3, #5, #10, #15, & #20 QBs score last year? If you can provide that, you'll get a lot better advice.

 

 

Exactly... it's the dropoff in talent at a particular position that determines when to grab a stud at that position or not.

[Big Country]

Darn East Coasters beat me to the point. As noted, it is the interval between the QBs. Basic valuation- take the last starter from each position (in most typical 12 team leagues, that's be the #12 QB, #24 RB, #36 WR #12 TE), and subtract that score from each of the other players at that position. This will give you a value score that is a better measure for comparing across positions. In most leagues, you will find a lot of QBs get bunched together with maybe 1 or 2 QBs jumping well ahead of the pack, while the top 5-8 RBs and usually top 3-4 WRs jump well ahead of the pack.

[Grits and Shins]

here are the stats from the end of last season. keep in mind they include the playoffs to guys like p maning, brees, and brady should all be 100 points lower.

 

1. P Manning 848 (includes playoffs)

2. Brees 743 (includes playoffs)

3. Bulger 628

4. Brady 596 (includes playoffs)

5. Palmer 572

 

10. Farve: 469

11. Grossman: 461 (includes playoffs)

12. Pennington: 458 (includes playoffs)

 

 

Your stats are meaningless when you include playoff stats for some where others don't have playoff stats. Provide the stats for each as of the end of the regular season prior to any playoff points.

 

But just from the numbers you have shown it appears quite clearly that the differentiation between 1 and 5 won't really be that significant end even the differentiation between 5 and 10 is only 103 points, or 7.92 points per week.

[Big Country]

true, however aren't guys like brady worth an early pick because they are reliable to put up top 5 or better stats vs. most other qbs who can fall anywhere on the top 20?

 

 

It's all about the cost. Generally speaking (and until you run the numbers for RB and WR, can't say for sure), your dropoffs at RB, and to an extent WR are much more severe than you see at QB, so, the cost of using an early pick by taking a guy like Brady is that you take an even bigger hit by not going RB or WR (of course, this is all based upon your predictions being fairly accurate).

[Bronco Billy]

It's all about the cost. Generally speaking (and until you run the numbers for RB and WR, can't say for sure), your dropoffs at RB, and to an extent WR are much more severe than you see at QB, so, the cost of using an early pick by taking a guy like Brady is that you take an even bigger hit by not going RB or WR (of course, this is all based upon your predictions being fairly accurate).

 

 

Agreed. Once you get past the top 4, the difference between QB5 & QB 12 isn't enough to justify an early pick. And by jumping up early to grab a top 4 QB, you sacrifice other critical positions. I would target the top QBs as maybe Manning in the 2nd, and any of Brees, Bulger, or Palmer around the 4th. If one of them is there it would be worth drafting them - if they go earlier stick with the other skill positions and come back with QBs somewhere from bwteen the 7th to 10th rounds and play QBBC all season.

Edited May 15, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[Big Country]

Agreed. Once you get past the top 4, the difference between QB5 & QB 12 isn't enough to justify an early pick. And by jumping up early to grab a top 4 QB, you sacrifice other critical positions. I would target the top QBs as maybe Manning in the 2nd, and any of Brees, Bulger, or Palmer around the 4th. If one of them is there it would be worth drafting them - if they go earlier stick with the other skill positions and come back with QBs somewhere from bwteen the 7th to 10th rounds and play QBBC all season.

 

 

Funny you mention Bulger... in WCOFF last year we got him in the 9th round as the 12th QB off the board. We had him at like the #6 QB or so heading into the draft.. only reason we kept waiting was we already had a QB (took Warner in the 7th I believe), but decided with Warner's injury history, and the fact that it left a very weak group of QBs out there for the two teams that waited too long, we jumped on Bulger.

[Grits and Shins]

qbs are tough to predict. that is why i am thinking it may be worth a #1 round pick on manning and a #2 on "sure things" brady and palmer.

 

 

If you have your mind made up ... why did you ask?

 

I'd happily let you have Manning in the 1st so I can "settle for" Palmer in the 5th. Then we can compare my RBs to your RBs ... I'll have a Stephen Jackson/Frank Gore/Rudi Johnson type back ... you'll have a Julius Jones/Tatem Bell/Warrick Dunn type back.

[Bronco Billy]

qbs are tough to predict. that is why i am thinking it may be worth a #1 round pick on manning and a #2 on "sure things" brady and palmer.

 

 

It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself, and it also sounds as though you are doing a good job of it.

 

The others here will most probably give you the same advice, I'm about to give you:

 

If you use that high of a pick for the QBs you've mentioned above, the best you're probably going to be playing for next year is a slot in the playoffs instead of being a contender for the championship. You'll be behind every other team drafting - unless they make a similar mistake - for 7 to 8 rounds in your draft. There's no way a QB can score enough points to make up that difference.

[Bronco Billy]

again, i am not convinced about anything. believe me i don't want to draft a qb any earlier than i need to. so how early do you think manning would/should be drafted. same question for palmer. according to my VERY early research after the top 18 rbs there are about 10 or so who could go either way.

 

 

 

Agreed. Once you get past the top 4, the difference between QB5 & QB 12 isn't enough to justify an early pick. And by jumping up early to grab a top 4 QB, you sacrifice other critical positions. I would target the top QBs as maybe Manning in the 2nd, and any of Brees, Bulger, or Palmer around the 4th. If one of them is there it would be worth drafting them - if they go earlier stick with the other skill positions and come back with QBs somewhere from bwteen the 7th to 10th rounds and play QBBC all season.

 

[Big Country]

WRs generally are bunched. You generally have 3-5 that in preseason look to be standouts, then a 2nd/3rd tier that could go as deep as about #22 or so, then an even deeper 3rd/4th tier that includes a lot of young guys that have potential, the solid but unspectacular veterans, and, in PPR leagues, the non-glory possession WRs that make up ground with the PPR.

 

QBs, you generally have Manning, then 2-3 other guys that appear to be ahead of the others (Palmer, maybe Brady here), then a group of about 8-10 that are your solid yearly performers (Bulger, Favre, Hasselbeck) and the guys that look to be in good situations/capitalize from a strong previous season (Brees, Kitna). Thing is that entire group is generally projected for similar stats, but, the main difference is that some are more solid and not likely to do much better/worse than that (group 1 above) while the others are more volatile and could likely produce near the level of the 2-3 guys, but, could also stink it up just as easily and be non-FF starter material. Risk/Reward factor here.

 

With RBs, year in and year out, you have, at least for the last 5 years, LT, then 2-3 potential pretender's to the throne (SA, LJ in previous years, SJax this year), then a steady decline from there for the top 5-8 RBs, then a much more significant drop after that. This is the key position in FF, if for no other reason than supply and demand. How many of the 32 NFL teams out there have a clear cut #1 RB? How many are going with RBBC or have significant situational players that cut into the main startes production (see Brandon Jacobs, Duckett, Benson, etc. in previous years). So, in a standard 12 team league requiring at minimum 2 starting RBs, you need at minimum to field 24 NFL Rbs in a given week. Well, there are not 24 clear cut NFL primary RBs in the league. At QB, you have 32 clear cut NFL starters (well, generally 32, only a few teams may have debate) but only need to have 12 starters in a given week, at WR, there are 64 starters, and, as many teams have productive 3rd WRs, probably a bit closer to 75 potentially productive NFL WRs, and even with 3 required WRs, you only need to start 36 in a given week.

 

That is why the owner that jumps on Manning (and to an extent Palmer or any other early QB) will need him to put up 50 TDs or needs to get lucky in picking the right sleeper, because the drop off is a lot faster at RB, and to an extent WR. Because there is a band of about 8 QBs that likely will put up similar numbers, it is safer to wait on that position and hope to hit on a QB or two that blows up while getting the lower risk/high reward RBs early, the consistent WRs in the early/mid rounds, a productive TE (if mandatory) if one of the few that produces is there at the right time (late 5th/early 7th based on past record, though Gates will go from late 2nd to mid 3rd most likely) then one of the QBs in the later part of the first half of your draft (generally the 7th-10th round, assuming a 16 round draft), unless one of your guys that you have in that 2-3 QB group above the pack make it to you in the late 5th/early 6th and you feel your early corp of players is quite strong.

[Big Country]

That was a good read. And I hear what everyone is saying. I know drafting RBs early and often is a must. I just get nervous around the 18th RB or so. Guys like Jacobs, Jones Drew, Peterson, and Lynch all could have very good numbers. But at the same time might not even get more than 10 carries a game. At that point isn't a Tatum Bell, Deangelo Williams, or 10 other guys, who can be had anytime from the 4th-6th round, just as likely to be a waste of a pick than they are to hit gold?

 

At what point to you take a break from the high risk/moderate reward RBs in favor of that "safe" WR?

 

 

IMO, that decision is largely dependent on exactly who you got early on. If you got a relatively "safe" early RB (guy like LT, SJax, etc,) or a higher risk guy (Westbrook, Gore). If safe, I go for WRs a bit earlier, if risky, I look ot have that RB insurance and hope one of those high risk/high reward guys hits gold.

[Bronco Billy]

That was a good read. And I hear what everyone is saying. I know drafting RBs early and often is a must. I just get nervous around the 18th RB or so. Guys like Jacobs, Jones Drew, Peterson, and Lynch all could have very good numbers. But at the same time might not even get more than 10 carries a game. At that point isn't a Tatum Bell, Deangelo Williams, or 10 other guys, who can be had anytime from the 4th-6th round, just as likely to be a waste of a pick than they are to hit gold?

 

At what point to you take a break from the high risk/moderate reward RBs in favor of that "safe" WR?

 

 

Funny that you mention the 18th RB off the board in this discussion. In many leagues, RB & WR value flip right around the 16th to 18th RB/WR off the board. That's the point where RB scoring goes down enough for WR scoring to catch & pass the RBs, meaning in a flex league it can be more beneficial in regard to cumulative points to switch to loading up on top WRs. Theoretically, this is also the time when 18 RBs & 18 WRs are off the board, but we rarely see this happen because of the stud RB mentality of FF owners. I do happen to agree with you - around the 16th to 18th RB there is enough risk associated where owners can back off drafting RBs and wait for later bargains who might be a bit more risky, but not so much that owners ought to be ignoring top players at other positions.

 

I'm a huge fan of getting a RB in the 1st round and then fishing for the next highest scorer in the next 3 rounds - and quite often that means drafting WRs & sometimes a QB in rounds 2-4. This strategy is very effective in a flex league where you only have to start 1 RB with 3 to 4 WRs, but also works in flex league where you can start up to 3 RBs. In those 3 RB leagues, everyone is so nuts to accumulate 3 RBs in the early rounds that they leave stud WRs littering the draft board well into the 3rd and sometimes the 4th round. I have no problem using a guy like Dunn, A Green, McAllister, MBIII, or Betts as my #2 RB knowing that I'll have a WR corps that has 3 of the top 12-15 WRs in the league. It's served me well over the past few years.

Edited May 16, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[i_am_the_swammi]

If you have your mind made up ... why did you ask?

 

I'd happily let you have Manning in the 1st so I can "settle for" Palmer in the 5th. Then we can compare my RBs to your RBs ... I'll have a Stephen Jackson/Frank Gore/Rudi Johnson type back ... you'll have a Julius Jones/Tatem Bell/Warrick Dunn type back.

 

 

I wouldn't go that far...not this year, with the dearth of RB talent avaliable.

 

Suppose its a 12-team league....Zuko is drafting, say, 8th, and takes Manning there. He then has to wait until 2.05 (17th overall) to select an RB. Here are some recent ESPN rankings of RB:

 

1. LT

2. LJ

3. S JAX

4. Gore

5. Willie Parker

6. Brian Westbrook

7. Joseph Addai

8. Rudi Johnson

9. Shaun Alexander

10. Reggie Bush

11. Travis Henry

12. Willis McGahee

13. Ronnie Brown

14. Deuce McAllister

15. Maurice Jones-Drew

16. Cedric Benson

17. Laurence Maroney

18. Thomas Jones

19. Edgerrin James

20. Marshawn Lynch

21. Marion Barber

22. Clinton Portis

23. Brandon Jacobs

24. Ahman Green

25. Caddilac Williams

26. Jamal Lewis

 

Assuming everyone else goes RB/RB, Zuko would be taking the 16th-best RB (or someone from those ranked below #16). This year, that would be guys like Portis, Maroney, Jacobs, T. Jones, James, etc (using the list above). Thats a far cry from Julius Jones and/or Warrick Dunn.

 

With the way Manning dominates his position year-in/year-out, you'd be hard-pressed to tell me my combo of Manning/Portis would be inferior to someone who drafted, say, Westbrook/McCallister with their frist two picks, and had to rely on an Eli Manning-type as their QB.

 

Further, look at these rankings..I've seen Maroney as high as #7 on some lists; Portis as high as #14; McGahee and brown in the Top-10; Jacobs in the Top-15....this year is a crap-shoot as to which RBs are going to finish the year at the top. Unless you have a certain RB you absolutely want, why not grab the Top QB early (especially one so consistent as Manning), and take two "lesser" RBs with your 2nd & 3rd picks who have just as much chance to finish in the Top-10 as those taken late in Round 1?

 

In year's past, RB/RB was always the way to go...but with so many questions as to who the Top-RBs will be this year, I think you can grab a stud QB earlier than usual, and take a chance that a 2-man combo of Caddy/Portis/Jamal/Maroney/Edge/Jones/Benson will be mor than adequate at RB.

[Big Country]

Manning does not neccessarily dominate his position. In most scoring postions, while he is almost always in the top 5, he usually is not the #1 QB. Even the year he went for 50 TDs, Culpepper outscored him in most scoring systems.

 

If you would like to "roll the dice" for both of your RBs, which is the hardest position to fill, especially once the season gets going, feel free but you are doing that, rolling the dice. If you hit, great, you do well, if you miss, which happens more often than not, you are cellar fodder.

 

QB generally is the easiest position to find a consistent producer. You can find a QB in the 4th-7th round that will consistently put up 225-250 yards and 2 scores a game.

 

Given that, why not take an RB that is much less of a gamble, so you are not rolling the dice for so much, then you can afford to take the best available RB or WR in the 2nd rather than pretty much have your hand forced into taking an RB that is a much large risk and may not be the best available player on the board.

 

Strictly looking at the value brought to the table, Manning generally will provide top 10-12 "value", however, his cost is a lot greater because you can find greater "value" QBs much later than you can RBs, so, it hurts your overall team to take the higher value Manning early compared to taking an Addai/Rudi/SA/Bush type RB and then getting a decent QB later on.

[i_am_the_swammi]

If you would like to "roll the dice" for both of your RBs, which is the hardest position to fill, especially once the season gets going, feel free but you are doing that, rolling the dice. If you hit, great, you do well, if you miss, which happens more often than not, you are cellar fodder.

 

 

I don't know if selecting a two-man combo of Caddy/Portis/Jamal/Maroney/Edge/Jones/Benson/Jacobs is such a "roll of the dice". In years past, I 100% agree with you. But because the RB pool is so deep this year, I can't really say if RB #20 is that much worse than RB #10.

 

That being said, grab value...and Manning's consistency in an offense built for him to thrive is just that. LT is gold because he produces #1 or #2 stats every year...Manning means the same thing to the QB position.

 

And if you are in a QB-wieghted league, where you need serious QB production every week, you could do worse than ensuring Manning is on your team with Portis/James as your RBs.

 

And don't fool yourself...there aren't many guaranteed 3,500 yard, 32 TD QBs (225/2TD per week, as you stated) available in the 5th-7th rounds. In fact, I can't think of one.

[Big Country]

Guess I should have said more like 1.5 TDs a game More in the the 3000-3300/22-25 type guys.

 

The thing is that with so many RBs in that 10-20 range that could be either 10 or could be 20, and QBs generally having a similar "muddle" in the 5-10 range, would you not prefer to lock down one of the more sure RB candidates with your first round pick, giving you the flexibility in round 2 to either take a top flight WR if one catches your eye or your personal favorite of those RBs, rather than be forced to take one of those RBs (unless you go WR, then you are looking low end of that spectrum for your #1 RB)

 

I think we just take different approaches to handling the same situation. IMO, that muddle of RBs that are very hard to value (some young and relatively unproven, some older and maybe splitting more, some on new teams, etc.) makes me increase even more the value of those RBs not in those situations.

 

Yet, I approach the QB situation, which has been like this for many years, as almost a plug n play type deal in that either of those QBs are likely to get me similar stats, so I can wait on that. I much prefer the hopeful consistency of a first round RB coupled with steady average stats of a later round QB then having a consistently above average QB coupled with a pair of potentially suspect RBs

[Bronco Billy]

And don't fool yourself...there aren't many guaranteed 3,500 yard, 32 TD QBs (225/2TD per week, as you stated) available in the 5th-7th rounds. In fact, I can't think of one.

 

 

 

Including Manning. He's only thrown for 32 or more TDs in a season twice in his career.

 

Perhaps we're setting our sites a bit high regarding FF QBs....?

[Bronco Billy]

QBs who have thrown for 3200+ yds in a season since 2003:

 

2006

 

Drew Brees

Peyton Manning

Marc Bulger

Jon Kitna

Carson Palmer

Brett Favre

Tom Brady

Ben Roethlisberger

Philip Rivers

Chad Pennington

Eli Manning

 

 

2005

 

Tom Brady

Trent Green

Brett Favre

Carson Palmer

Eli Manning

Kerry Collins

Peyton Manning

Drew Bledsoe

Drew Brees

Matt Hasselbeck

Jake Delhomme

Jake Plummer

 

 

2004

 

Daunte Culpepper

Trent Green

Peyton Manning

Jake Plummer

Brett Favre

Marc Bulger

Jake Delhomme

Donovan McNabb

Aaron Brooks

Tom Brady

Vinny Testaverde

David Carr

Kerry Collins

Matt Hasselbeck

 

 

2003

 

Peyton Manning

Trent Green

Marc Bulger

Matt Hasselbeck

Brad Johnson

Tom Brady

Jon Kitna

Aaron Brooks

Daunte Culpepper

Tommy Maddox

Brett Favre

Quincy Carter

Jake Delhomme

Donovan McNabb

Steve McNair

 

***************************************

 

QBs who have thrown for 32+ TDs in a season since 2003:

 

 

2006

 

 

2005

 

Carson Palmer

 

 

2004

 

Peyton Manning

Daunte Culpepper

 

 

2003

 

Brett Favre

[Big Country]

Your point?

 

j/k - Yes, I was overstating the QBs. 1.5 per game is a more realistic goal for your "typical" QB that we are discussing that would be rated in that 5-10 range.

[Bronco Billy]

I guess the only thing to consider is becase there are so many RBs with potential this year, this season, more than any, could be the one to grab as many as possible and as quickly as possible.

 

 

That's completely counterinuitive. The more capable players that play a certain position, the less value they have. I'd sure like you to make your argument for drafting a bunch of RBs with high draft picks.

[Bronco Billy]

If there are were enough solid options for everyone, then yes, RB would be less important. But this year there are about 25 solid options, enough for only a few teams to get 3 of them.

 

 

Great. So your thinking is that it's better to start a #3 RB than to start a top 10 WR? Because that's what your sacrificing to get that 3rd starting RB on the roster.

[Danny Zuko]

You are assuming you can't get both.