The reason I go back 3 seasons is that Rodgers has 3 full seasons under his belt as the starter in GB. It fills out an accurate picture of what we're looking at, the larger the sample set, the more clear of an idea we have of what we're really looking at. Going back only two seasons however, eliminates Brees' ridiculous '08 campaign in which he threw for 5k+ yards and 30+ TDs. So although Rodgers has a clear edge over the last two seasons, there's no reason to eliminate the '08 season, unless you can say that it was a total statistical anomaly on Brees' part and can be disqualified. That being said, I realize that FF is more about "what have you done for me lately" and players do indeed have "windows" and "primes" and things of this nature, a point that we've both agreed upon in our endless debating in another thread. It poses the question, is Brees incapable of replicating his '08 season? Is he past that part of his career where he's the clear dominant force throwing the ball in the league? It's hard to say. I have no data to prove it either way. We know the Saints running game was badly handicapped all season. We also know that Brees played with an injured knee for at least 1/3 of it. Do these contributors factor in to Brees having an "ordinary" season of 4700 yards and 33 TDs? He did set a career high for interceptions. I think this is a symptom of more personnel being back in coverage because of a lack of a credible running threat, and a possible physical ailment that befouled his mechanics. Of course when it comes down to it, I'm really just a "football guy" and not an expert. This seems like the most likely scenario. That's all I have to go on. But an "ordinary" season of 4700/33 is absolutely nuts.
Looking at your numbers, based on your league scoring (you must concede that having a strong QB is a bit more important in a 12 teamer than a 10) that Rodgers has about a 7.6% edge over Brees per game. I think I conceded that Rodgers gives a slight edge in points, but it's close. I think that 7.6% describes a slight advantage.
From this point I think it really does come down to approach. As I've stated before, in most of my leagues, both of these guys went in the top 12 picks. Most of my leagues are 10 team redrafts. (Alas I'm not as hardcore as I appear :/ ) The top 12 players in any draft are the guys that you expect that most significant contribution on your roster from. (Many teams were just dead after Gore went down 2/3 of the way through the season.) Now I'm not ready to slap the "injury prone" label on Rodgers, because that's virtually no evidence to support such a claim. But what I'm saying is, he finds himself in situations with much more frequency, that could very well get him injured. And that the league is just crazy about concussions now. So to me a 7.6%, or just over 1.5 ppg differential isn't really worth it. But as you stated above. your league seems to be pretty competitive, if total points at the end of the league wind up being less than 50pts in separation per team. I don't believe this is the usual circumstance in many cases. (If your league mates are as good at this as you are, you're probably working too hard at this. There are easier leagues to be had, and your edge would be significantly higher.)
So if I'm going to spend a pick in my top 10, and I realize that no player is "safe" from injury under any circumstance, I want him to have the best chance possible to contribute at a high level on a game by game basis, while eliminating as much risk as possible. I believe that Brees, given his current circumstances, could outscore Rodgers in a given season. I don't find this to be a huge stretch. He's outscored everyone before, and really not a lot of his circumstances have changed. If we were talking about the difference between Flacco and Ryan, then it really wouldn't matter, because you're snapping those guys up in the 8th-9th-10th round. If the rest of your team is comprised of elite position players, producing on an elite level, then any more than an above average QB is just a boon (the wait on QB theory.) What makes this matter is where you have to draft Brees and Rodgers.
Some people last summer were drafting AP ahead of CJ2k. Mostly because of risk vs baseline. There was a limited sample set out on CJ and no one really knew what to expect, whereas ADP has already established a solid baseline, with a couple seasons sample set.
So then it becomes about draft strategy. I'm thinking by now that you know that I am of the school that wants solid, smart picks early on in the draft, then taking extreme high upside players in the mid and late rounds. All upside at that point. For example, in round 10, taking Mike Wallace instead of Santonio Holmes. They were probably projected about the same, where Wallace had huge upside to outperform his draft position.
Perhaps you like to make bold and gambly moves early on in the draft. The leagues I play in are all decent sized buy ins, and I'm comfortable with my overall strategy. I'm not a totally "safe" drafter, but I am early on. If im in a "toss up" I'll always take a RB1 who gets 20+ touches per game over a WR1 who only may get 12, at least early on (standard scoring). If its the last round and I have the choice between a Caddillac or a Mike Williams (TB), I go Williams for the upside. (please excuse all my 2010 draft strategy citings. I know they'll be totally different guys in 6 months, I'm just trying to illustrate points. And I did over 120 mock drafts last spring and summer before the '10 season, so I'm still hung up on the ADPs of certain players.)
So it looks like at the end of the day, it comes down to a difference in philosophy and approach to how you "play" fantasy football. Are you correct in your assessment and methodology? Yes, I believe you are. Am I correct in mine? Yes, I believe I am as well.
"Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." - Obi Wan Kenobi
Edited by CompetitiveEdgeFootball, 06 January 2011 - 03:44 PM.