5th pick

[APinMN]

Found out I have the 5th pick in the draft, was hoping for top 4 to ensure AP,CJ, MJD or Rice, but presuming they are gone which guy do you go with then? Do I take the top WR in AJ or get a top 2nd teir RB in Gore or Turner. I could get a QB but seems to early for that. What would y'all do?

 

Btw, .5 ppr

[Men In Tights]

QB's get 4 for a TD? If yes I would go Andre Johnson. If they are 6 I woudl take A_Rodg.

[Jackass]

i had the 5th pick and took Turner. i would've taken him over Rice.

[Big Country]

QB's get 4 for a TD? If yes I would go Andre Johnson. If they are 6 I woudl take A_Rodg.

 

 

6 vs 4pt passing TDs does almost nothing to QB value, so not sure why there is a caveat, unless you think Rodgers is going to do something absurd like throw for 20 more TDs than the next closest guy, but, either way, if Rodgers is the pick, he is the pick in a 4 or 6 pt TD. There was a difference of 8 TDs between the top 12 QBs last season.... that's a whopping 16 point difference over the course of the season, not exactly a major value changer.

 

 

 

OP - lineup reqs, scoring system and number of teams? Without this info, can't really answer the question

[APinMN]

qb, rb,rb,wr,wr,rb/wr,te.....10 teams....half point per reception

[Big Country]

qb, rb,rb,wr,wr,rb/wr,te.....10 teams....half point per reception

 

so, no points for yardage or scores?

[APinMN]

so, no points for yardage or scores?

 

 

4 points per passing TD...everything else pretty standard

[wildbluefan]

6 vs 4pt passing TDs does almost nothing to QB value, so not sure why there is a caveat, unless you think Rodgers is going to do something absurd like throw for 20 more TDs than the next closest guy, but, either way, if Rodgers is the pick, he is the pick in a 4 or 6 pt TD. There was a difference of 8 TDs between the top 12 QBs last season.... that's a whopping 16 point difference over the course of the season, not exactly a major value changer.

 

 

 

OP - lineup reqs, scoring system and number of teams? Without this info, can't really answer the question

 

 

The way RODGERS looks so far in pre-season, 20 more TD difference may be conservative...LOL

[vikinglion]

One vote for Rogers.

[Chief Dick]

I'd look at Gore there. You can get a QB much later that will give you decent value.

[Donutrun Jellies]

I'd look at Gore there. You can get a QB much later that will give you decent value.

Agreed.

[Metalhead316]

My only thoughts on QBs is this...its when and how they build their stats. Just throwing out some random numbers to hopefully make the point.

 

If Rodgers threw 35 TDs, and then a guy like Palmer threw 30 TDs...sure at the end of the year the stats arent to far apart, but its a matter of when and how they execute that can make the guy valuable. The reason i think i and many others are starting to put high value on an early QB pick, is because a guy like Rodgers will be steadily consistent almost from week 1 onward. So each week you can count on a handful of points.

 

Whereas sure you get a guy that maybe at the end of the season has 5 tds less than rodgers, or 8, well the question is when did they throw those TDs? Did they start rolling mid season? Because if thats the case you have an unproductive QB the first half of the season that wont help scores at all. Were they late season mop up points but by then, youre already screwed because you grabbed lets say a Stafford and he was hit or miss, 2 or 3 TDs one week...but silent the 2nd two weeks, rinse and repeat?

 

I think thats the point thats overlooked personally, with QBs and their value. End of season stats all look good in comparison, but the question is who was consistent week in and week out, and the answer generally is your Rodgers, Manning, Brees, Brady.

 

Not sure if i explained it right, but im just saying that final season stats to me doesnt devalue QBs, at least i wouldnt think so...that just makes sense to me.

 

But i know the other side of the story in getting a QB later on, its just will they produce week in and week out for you, like the top tier names.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Metalhead316

[SLGRAF]

My only thoughts on QBs is this...its when and how they build their stats. Just throwing out some random numbers to hopefully make the point.

 

If Rodgers threw 35 TDs, and then a guy like Palmer threw 30 TDs...sure at the end of the year the stats arent to far apart, but its a matter of when and how they execute that can make the guy valuable. The reason i think i and many others are starting to put high value on an early QB pick, is because a guy like Rodgers will be steadily consistent almost from week 1 onward. So each week you can count on a handful of points.

 

Whereas sure you get a guy that maybe at the end of the season has 5 tds less than rodgers, or 8, well the question is when did they throw those TDs? Did they start rolling mid season? Because if thats the case you have an unproductive QB the first half of the season that wont help scores at all. Were they late season mop up points but by then, youre already screwed because you grabbed lets say a Stafford and he was hit or miss, 2 or 3 TDs one week...but silent the 2nd two weeks, rinse and repeat?

 

I think thats the point thats overlooked personally, with QBs and their value. End of season stats all look good in comparison, but the question is who was consistent week in and week out, and the answer generally is your Rodgers, Manning, Brees, Brady.

 

Not sure if i explained it right, but im just saying that final season stats to me doesnt devalue QBs, at least i wouldnt think so...that just makes sense to me.

 

But i know the other side of the story in getting a QB later on, its just will they produce week in and week out for you, like the top tier names.

 

 

 

Isn't week to week consistency a hallmark of the top players at all positions, not just QB?

[Metalhead316]

Isn't week to week consistency a hallmark of the top players at all positions, not just QB?

 

Definitly. But my point is that getting a QB in the 5th or 6th round, to me, isnt always the best choice since you may really get some inconsistent players filling your QB slot. Whereas i think a top tier QB, offers a week to week, solid performance most of the time that you can pretty much count on.

 

Even if persay Manning has a bad start of a game, the dude somehow ends up still netting people 30 to 40 points on just mop up, whereas if you go with later round QB picks...you dont generally get QBs that put up that kind of performance week in and week out.

[RJV]

I have the 5th pick in a 10 teamer PPR league. 6pts per TD rushing, passing and receiving. I am torn with taking Gore or AJ

[Big Country]

My only thoughts on QBs is this...its when and how they build their stats. Just throwing out some random numbers to hopefully make the point.

 

 

This part intrigued me so I did some research on it. I think we can agree that the 4 vs 6 point TDs is not a value adder. Consistency, however, is a value adder.

 

Pulling stats from a relatively standard scoring league I am a part of (1 per 20 yard passing, 3 point passing TDs), I pulled the percentage of games a QB was a top 5 QB for a week, a top 12 QB for a week (ie, a starter) and then also the percentages for 13-24 performances and 24+ performances. I accounted for the bye week, which I had converted to 0 points to make the formulas work, by removing one game from the calculation at the 24+ category.

 

Interesting stuff.

 

No QB was a top 5 QB more than 50% of the time (Rodgers was top 5 50% of the weeks, not really a surprise given the year he had). Of those that finished top 12 last season, the lowest %age for top 5 was David Garrard at 6% (though, the #13 QB, McNabb, was top 5 38% of weeks, tied for 3rd best percentage, and only 4 points behind Garrard on the year)

 

The top 10 QBs last year all had top 12 weeks of 50% or greater. Again, Rodgers was #1 with 81%, but oddly, Rivers, the #9 QB was 2nd with 75%.

 

One stat that jumped out at me was weeks ranked in the 25+ category.. basically, non starter and even non-starter in a 12 team start 2 QB league. Brees, the #2 overall QB, led the pack with 19% of games in the 25+ range (yes, this includes week 17 when he sat), tied with Cutler and Garrard. Again, Rodgers was the ONLY QB with no games in this range.

 

Metal - I went into this thinking that your theory was likely correct in terms of consistency, but really other than Rodgers and the great season he had, it just didn't hold true. Every single one of the top 10 QBs scored in the top 12 over 50% of the time (and the 13th and 14th ranked QBs, McNabb and Warner were that high as well, with the games missed costing them in overall ranking and giving them higher 25+ games rankings).

 

So, in addition to showing that consistency is pretty much there for all of the top 12 QBs, in this particular league which has fairly "standard scoring" (the rush/rec is 1 per 10 yards and 6 per TD, 1 PPR), the difference from the #1 to #12 QB was 98 points over the season. To compare, assuming a start 2 RB and 3 WR 12 team league, the gap from the #1 to #24 RB was 220 points (and if we exclude the hugh year CJ had, it was still a 150 point gap) and the gap for the 1-36 WR is 160 points (120 if you only start 2 WRs)

[Metalhead316]

Big Country, excellent work my friend. Well that definitly helps me with that then, its only what i assumed would be correct but with your information there that totally does show that one can get by with a QB of lower tier and that the dropoff of RB scores and WR scores are alot more detrimental leaving them too weak.

 

So would you say personally, going with RB RB WR QB is a safe bet for a solid "core" of a team? Or perhaps a RB,WR,RB,QB ? Which system would you follow suit with in a man league, taking into consideration they are pretty good drafters.

 

Btw, if you want to answer this is the thread i started you can....i dont want to derail this thread or anything.

[buddahj]

I'd look at Gore there. You can get a QB much later that will give you decent value.

+1

[She-Rocks]

Had the 5th pick also....just finished draft...went with andre first round and then by some freak miracle aaron rodgers landed to me in the second...came back with shonn green and vernon davis 3rd and 4th....

 

couldnt believe that rodgers was there in the 2nd!!!

[Chief Dick]

I'd look at Gore there. You can get a QB much later that will give you decent value.

 

 

This is what I meant to say.

 

 

This part intrigued me so I did some research on it. I think we can agree that the 4 vs 6 point TDs is not a value adder. Consistency, however, is a value adder.

 

Pulling stats from a relatively standard scoring league I am a part of (1 per 20 yard passing, 3 point passing TDs), I pulled the percentage of games a QB was a top 5 QB for a week, a top 12 QB for a week (ie, a starter) and then also the percentages for 13-24 performances and 24+ performances. I accounted for the bye week, which I had converted to 0 points to make the formulas work, by removing one game from the calculation at the 24+ category.

 

Interesting stuff.

 

No QB was a top 5 QB more than 50% of the time (Rodgers was top 5 50% of the weeks, not really a surprise given the year he had). Of those that finished top 12 last season, the lowest %age for top 5 was David Garrard at 6% (though, the #13 QB, McNabb, was top 5 38% of weeks, tied for 3rd best percentage, and only 4 points behind Garrard on the year)

 

The top 10 QBs last year all had top 12 weeks of 50% or greater. Again, Rodgers was #1 with 81%, but oddly, Rivers, the #9 QB was 2nd with 75%.

 

One stat that jumped out at me was weeks ranked in the 25+ category.. basically, non starter and even non-starter in a 12 team start 2 QB league. Brees, the #2 overall QB, led the pack with 19% of games in the 25+ range (yes, this includes week 17 when he sat), tied with Cutler and Garrard. Again, Rodgers was the ONLY QB with no games in this range.

 

Metal - I went into this thinking that your theory was likely correct in terms of consistency, but really other than Rodgers and the great season he had, it just didn't hold true. Every single one of the top 10 QBs scored in the top 12 over 50% of the time (and the 13th and 14th ranked QBs, McNabb and Warner were that high as well, with the games missed costing them in overall ranking and giving them higher 25+ games rankings).

 

So, in addition to showing that consistency is pretty much there for all of the top 12 QBs, in this particular league which has fairly "standard scoring" (the rush/rec is 1 per 10 yards and 6 per TD, 1 PPR), the difference from the #1 to #12 QB was 98 points over the season. To compare, assuming a start 2 RB and 3 WR 12 team league, the gap from the #1 to #24 RB was 220 points (and if we exclude the hugh year CJ had, it was still a 150 point gap) and the gap for the 1-36 WR is 160 points (120 if you only start 2 WRs)

 

Great analysis BC.

Edited August 29, 2010 by Chief Dick

[Big Country]

So would you say personally, going with RB RB WR QB is a safe bet for a solid "core" of a team? Or perhaps a RB,WR,RB,QB ? Which system would you follow suit with in a man league, taking into consideration they are pretty good drafters.

 

 

Honestly, the only safe bet is getting lucky enough to get the players that don't happen to get hurt.

 

I think a successful team can be had by going either route. Also, I think a successful team can be had by going with AJ with the #5 pick, if you are comfortable with a Charles/Thomas/Mathews type RB as your RB1 if you go RB in the second.

 

In prepping for WCOFF, we've looked at ADP data encompassing almost 200 WCOFF based mock drafts (for the 2 weeks ending 8/20, will redo analysis closer to WCOFF draft) and quite frankly the 1st round decision of AJ vs. Gore (assuming top 4 are the usual suspects) really is a factor of how comfortable you are with your options in the 2nd/3rd round. Players with greater than 66.7% availability for the 2nd round pick that would usually be considered are (in order of increasing availability) - for RB - Greene, Mathews, Thomas, Grant (Charles, whom I recently got talked into liking even more, is only available 48% of the time) with the WRs being Jennings, Jackson, Colston, Boldin. I don't consider any of the likely QBs a value there (only Brees and Rodgers generally gone). For the 3rd round, RBs with greater than 66.7% availability and likely candidates are - Wells, McCoy, Brown and Stewart and the WRs are Colston again (62% of time) Boldin, Smith (NYG), Smith (CAR) and Crabtree. Again,k I don't see the QBs as values here (Brady - 56% of time, Rivers, Romo and Schaub)

 

Looking at that, I see myself most likely going RB in the 2nd and WR in the 3rd.

 

Jump to the 4th round, and likely options are - RB - Addai, FJones, Harrison (Moreono, Forte and Best all above 50% though), and WRs are Welker, Nicks, Bowe, VJax, Ochocinco and Hines Ward. TE has Davis, Finley and Witten, but with Finley and Witten both available over 83% in the 5th round, I'd pass and wait for the better value. Also, we most likely miss on Rivers, Romo and Schaub as all are now below 50% available, with Schaub the most likely to be available, but still, I don't see it as a great value pick. In this round, I much prefer the WR options.

 

5th round has Addai and Harrison still at just over 50%, with FJones, Spiller and Bush the next based on ADP (though I expect the numbers for Arian Foster to go up and put him in this group or even the round before) and WRs available to be Welker (he has a wide range of availability, should be more solid as regular season gets closer), Bowe, Sims-Walker, Ochocinco, Garcon, Ward, Wallace, Maclin, TEs as noted above include Witten and Finley and QBs are anyone but the 7 already mentioned. Another round where I prefer the WRs or possibly TE.

 

Quick look at the 6th and I think this is where the 5th spot has to go QB (Palmer, Cutler, Kolb, Flacco and Ryan all go from 60%+ available to under 50% in the 7th), and the TE options in the 7th appear rather strong (Daniels, Cooley, Miller, Shiancoe)

 

So, with it looking like I am most likely to go RB/WR/WR in the 2nd-4th rounds, with two required RBs and 3 required WRs plus a flex, and no real RB desirable round after that, I am now even more leaning towards RB/RB to open from the 5th slot (adjusting of course on actual draft results)