Manning #1 pick article...

[Ruffian]

Personally, I prefer to draft mid to late.  I have in my head certain players I want and I like to kind of let the draft dictate where I'm going.  If you take Manning #1 overall, you HAVE to go RB at 2.12 and 3.01.

 

Don't you?

 

877335[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I would. A good point about depth at RB--after the second group of backs, it becomes pretty dicey. I'm keeping Manning in one of my dynasty leagues this season (two years now--he's been good as advertised). Rounds one and two will be RBs for me.

[Clubfoothead]

And I don't know about your leagues, but in most of mine QB12 is gone by round 5-6.

877692[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

We in any leagues together this year? Generally I'm not even looking at a QB that early. Of course I like Collins and Boller this year so what do I know.

[yo mama]

We in any leagues together this year?  Generally I'm not even looking at a QB that early.  Of course I like Collins and Boller this year so what do I know.

878555[/snapback]

 

Collins will probably be gone in the mid to late 4th round in my local. I can't explain why. But usually the top 10 or 11 QBs are gone by the 5th round, then I pick up the best of the leftovers in the 6th. Happens every year.

[soopanuts]

To me, the decision about taking Manning at 1.1 should be based on how many teams there are and what the scoring system is. I think he looks real good in a 10 team league that rewards 6 points per TD and distance bonuses.

[Rovers]

We could go in circles for weeks with this debating who'd be drafted where and nitpicking everyone's choices so I'm just going to get down to the nuts and bolts of my argument against drafting Manning at #1 versus LT.

 

In my main redraft, one that favors QB scoring by the way,  for the 2002 and 2003 seasons Manning averaged 5 pts more per game than the #12 QB .  He then had one monster year in 2004 and averaged 13 pts more per game than the #12 QB.  LT on the other hand averaged 7.5 pts per game more than the #12 RB over that same two year span and in 2004 averaged 7 more.  Lt has done basically the same thing for three years in a row.  Manning had arguably the single best season ever for a QB and people expect him to duplicate it.  I don't see it happening.

 

878174[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

While I agree that Manning won't duplicate his numbers from last year, neither will Culpepper or McNabb. The reason I think Manning is a viable early first rounder is because his drop off in numbers won't be as dramatic as the others. I have him for 12 TD's more than the next best QB. That margin is hard to ignore. Bottom line, it depends on your individual projections for QB's and your scoring system. The fact that the RB pool is deeper than in the past is another reason Manning may be a winning selection. BS M, while it's fine to look at past stats, those are great, it really depends on your crystal ball accumen, not last year's numbers.

 

You also ingore the outside chance that with an intact offense, there is a chance Manning breaks his own record this year. Then what? I don't expect that, but I surely would not rule it out either.

[BS Miscreant]

While I agree that Manning won't duplicate his numbers from last year, neither will Culpepper or McNabb. The reason I think Manning is a viable early first rounder is because his drop off in numbers won't be as dramatic as the others. I have him for 12 TD's more than the next best QB. That margin is hard to ignore. Bottom line, it depends on your individual projections for QB's and your scoring system. The fact that the RB pool is deeper than in the past is another reason Manning may be a winning selection. BS M, while it's fine to look at past stats, those are great, it really depends on your crystal ball accumen, not last year's numbers.

 

You also ingore the outside chance that with an intact offense, there is a chance Manning breaks his own record this year. Then what? I don't expect that, but I surely would not rule it out either.

 

879331[/snapback]

 

 

 

I'm glad you mentioned individual scoring systems. Excellent point that needs to made about 100 times more. As for last year's stats... I only mentioned those to compare them to his previous years stats. Just about every argument I read with regard to justifying Manning as the #1 pick is supported by his numbers from last year. Talk about vision that is severely limited in scope. As of right now, Manning's 2004 season is a statistical anomaly. There is a popular saying in statistical analysis that goes, "Once is a fluke, twice is a coincidence and three times is a trend". If you don't look for trends when doing projections, then you are truly utilizing a "crystal ball acumen". Which, by the way, is a bit of an oxymoron.

 

And no, I'm not ignoring the possibility or as you said "outside chance" of Manning breaking his own record. Anything can happen in FF in any given week or year. That's what makes it challenging. I just see it as highly unlikely, statistically speaking of course.

Edited July 14, 2005 by BS Miscreant

[Ruffian]

To me, the decision about taking Manning at 1.1 should be based on how many teams there are and what the scoring system is.  I think he looks real good in a 10 team league that rewards 6 points per TD and distance bonuses.

 

879293[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That's me.

[keggerz]

We in any leagues together this year?  Generally I'm not even looking at a QB that early.  Of course I like Collins and Boller this year so what do I know.

 

878555[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

i in the PAST have not drafted QBs early emphasis on PAST

[Seahawks21]

I am so sick of people saying they wouldn't take Manning because there wouldn't be RBs left. -----Do some homework and pick the RIGHT RB's, and you'll win your league by picking Manning 1st. I would rather have Manning/Cadillac/R. Brown than say LT/Bulger/KJones. So ya draft an extra RB (W. Dunn type) a little early and it costs you taking Steve Smith. So freakin draft an extra WR or two later and you'll be fine!!!! In every draft I'm in, my team comes out better than I think it was going to. Have some freakin confidence in your drafting ability and take the best player available with no conscience for what could lie ahead.

[Caveman_Nick]

I am so sick of people saying they wouldn't take Manning because there wouldn't be RBs left. -----Do some homework and pick the RIGHT RB's, and you'll win your league by picking Manning 1st.  I would rather have Manning/Cadillac/R. Brown than say LT/Bulger/KJones.  So ya draft an extra RB (W. Dunn type) a little early and it costs you taking Steve Smith.  So freakin draft an extra WR or two later and you'll be fine!!!!  In every draft I'm in, my team comes out better than I think it was going to.  Have some freakin confidence in your drafting ability and take the best player available with no conscience for what could lie ahead.

879829[/snapback]

 

Well, what can I say other than I am not sure it's smart of you to not listen to the other side of the arguement.

 

The Case Against Manning is more than what picking him at 1.1 will do to your RBs, it's what he will do to your whole team.

 

Picking Manning first almost certainly pigeonholes your draft strategy into something like this:

1) QB (top tier)

2) RB (third tier)

3) RB (third tier)

4) WR (second or third tier, depending on draft)

5) RB (fourth tier)

6) WR (third tier)

7) TE (second of third tier, depending on draft)

8) WR (third, or more likely fourth tier)

 

Which is fine if you think you are so much better at analyzing FF numbers than anyone else in your league and think you can steal all the sleepers. But, there is a really good chance that it will cause you some problems.

 

I have toyed around with the idea of

1) QB (top tier)

2) WR (top tier)

3) WR (top tier)

4) RB (possibly third, but almost certainly fourth tier)

5) RB (fourth tier)

6) RB (fifth tier)

7) TE (second or third tier)

8) WR (third tier)

 

or

 

1) QB (top tier)

2) WR (top tier)

3) TE (top tier)

4) RB (possibly third, but almost certainly fourth tier)

5) RB (fourth tier)

6) RB (fifth tier)

7) WR (third tier)

8) WR (third tier)

 

Now, I am not suggesting that these strategies will not work. They might work. The problem is that, as we all know, RBs are much more reliable at scoring than are WRs and TEs.

 

Just as a comparison, drafting LT first probably looks like this:

1) RB (top tier)

2) RB (second, or more likely third tier)

3) WR (top tier)

4) RB (possibly third, but almost certainly fourth tier)

5) WR (second tier)

6) QB (second tier)

7) TE ((second or third tier)

8) WR (third tier)

 

And by filling that RB void early, you have shifted your players at each position upwards on yout tier chart.

 

Now, if you don't believe in tiers, player rankings, and all that, this is bunk. But if you do, the ripple effects of early Manning are obvious.

[BS Miscreant]

Do some homework and pick the RIGHT RB's, and you'll win your league by picking Manning 1st.  I would rather have Manning/Cadillac/R. Brown than say LT/Bulger/KJones.  So ya draft an extra RB (W. Dunn type) a little early and it costs you taking Steve Smith.  Have some freakin confidence in your drafting ability and take the best player available with no conscience for what could lie ahead.

 

879829[/snapback]

 

 

 

You're gonna have to help me out here. How much homework is there to do when evaluating rookie RBs, guys who've never played a down in the NFL? All we have to go on is how good they were in college and how good they look in practice. That's not enough for me to make one my RB1 or RB2. Hell, it shouldn't be for anybody. And as for taking the best player available, I'll take Manning #1 overall if someone can assure me that he'll put up similar numbers to what he put up last year, a year in which his production completely blew away anything he'd done in any year of his career before that.

[Dawg Pound]

Caveman Nick good point.

 

Not drafting a RB with the 1st pick you will be chasing RB’s the whole draft.

[Hop Devil]

I can't believe anyone would consider taking Manning 1st or 2nd (or 3rd...) overall. Here is a copy of an email I sent to a friend of mine to talk him down off this ledge:

 

(10 teamer. We give 6 pts for TD passes & 1 pt for every 25 yards passing)

 

Pretend you drafted Manning this year with the 1st or 2nd overall pick and let's say this was your squad's output using ESPN's total points from last season (TD pass were 4 in their totals, but I added 98 points to Manning and adjusted the others to make TD's worth 6 points):

 

1st Manning - 470 points

2nd A. Green - 183 points (or C. Martin or J. Jones)

3rd Chris Brown (or someone of his point out put level based on last year's actuals around this spot. This year L. Jordan/Westbrook would fit the mold) - 149 points

TOTAL: 802 points

 

Now I draft the following (assume I have the third pick):

 

1st Alexander - 297 (Manning & LT go ahead of him, realistic)

2nd Rudi Johnson - 214 (should be there coming back up in our league)

3rd Terrell Owens - 198 (he'll fall because of the hold out, and this only the 23rd overall pick.  If he's not there Chad Johnson 178 pts or Javon Walker 203 pts will be)

TOTAL: 709 points

 

93 points difference in your favor, but....

 

The next round (4th) I'd take a QB (even though I could easily wait another three-four rounds) let's say Trent Green (342 pts) or Bulger (301 pts).  You take another RB who's going to produce 150 points.  If I took Trent Green I'm up on you by 183 points after just 4 rounds.  What I would do is wait even longer and pick up some more WR/RB's and in about the 6th round take Tom Brady (still a reach at that spot, he went in the 7th last year for us, and he produced 309 points) and the gap's going to be even bigger because your 6th round RB/WR will be lucky to hit 100 - 125 points.  Then the gap is 200 after 6 rounds.  And remember.........

 

....this is all with Manning throwing another 49 TD's and almost 5,000 yards.  Say he throws 35 (slightly above his career average of 28 before last year).  That's another 84 points added to the 200 for 284 points.  That's almost 20 points a week and I didn't even reduce his yardage or factor in the quailty WR/RB I took in rounds 4 & 5 (or even 6). 

 

 

His career average before last year was 28 TD's (167 in 6 years). Don't be a sucker!!!

Edited July 16, 2005 by Hop Devil