What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Dynasty start-up mock draft (1 Viewer)

Instinctive said:
Aaron Rodgers was top 10 his first season of 14+ games. Isn't he top 10? You can disagree with it, but it's a true statement. Not about "first two seasons" but rather first two seasons of 14+ games.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Flacco and Ryan didnt have the luxury of sitting for a year or two before playing their first full season. I think it is a huge advatage for a rookie QB to be with the team for a year or two before becoming a starter. Thats the only thing that stat tells me. ETA, Not that starting right away is a disadvantage, i just think it will take an extra year or two before i expect top 10 QB numbers. ETA again, What happened with that stat and Roethlisberger? Who i might add also started the majority of the games in his rookie season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Go deep said:
Instinctive said:
Aaron Rodgers was top 10 his first season of 14+ games. Isn't he top 10? You can disagree with it, but it's a true statement. Not about "first two seasons" but rather first two seasons of 14+ games.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Flacco and Ryan didnt have the luxury of sitting for a year or two before playing their first full season. I think it is a huge advatage for a rookie QB to be with the team for a year or two before becoming a starter. Thats the only thing that stat tells me. ETA, Not that starting right away is a disadvantage, i just think it will take an extra year or two before i expect top 10 QB numbers. ETA again, What happened with that stat and Roethlisberger? Who i might add also started the majority of the games in his rookie season.
Click to expand...
The stat is true for Ben as well. His 2nd season starting 14+ games was 2007 when he finished #5. The stat is true for every QB in the last decade.
 
Roth never started 14 games until his 3rd season. He started 12 and 13 his first two. Nitpicky, but still true.

And you make a good point, I just think it's interesting that if Ryan or Flacco can do it, they'd be the first ones to do so

 
jeter23 said:
Go deep said:
Instinctive said:
Aaron Rodgers was top 10 his first season of 14+ games. Isn't he top 10? You can disagree with it, but it's a true statement. Not about "first two seasons" but rather first two seasons of 14+ games.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Flacco and Ryan didnt have the luxury of sitting for a year or two before playing their first full season. I think it is a huge advatage for a rookie QB to be with the team for a year or two before becoming a starter. Thats the only thing that stat tells me. ETA, Not that starting right away is a disadvantage, i just think it will take an extra year or two before i expect top 10 QB numbers. ETA again, What happened with that stat and Roethlisberger? Who i might add also started the majority of the games in his rookie season.
Click to expand...
The stat is true for Ben as well. His 2nd season starting 14+ games was 2007 when he finished #5. The stat is true for every QB in the last decade.
Click to expand...
He played in 14 games his rookie season. Im not sure if he technically started all 14, but he played the majority of all 14. Either way, it is such a meanlingless stat, it wouldnt affect my decision .0000001%.
 
Go deep said:
jeter23 said:
Go deep said:
Instinctive said:
Aaron Rodgers was top 10 his first season of 14+ games. Isn't he top 10? You can disagree with it, but it's a true statement. Not about "first two seasons" but rather first two seasons of 14+ games.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Flacco and Ryan didnt have the luxury of sitting for a year or two before playing their first full season. I think it is a huge advatage for a rookie QB to be with the team for a year or two before becoming a starter. Thats the only thing that stat tells me. ETA, Not that starting right away is a disadvantage, i just think it will take an extra year or two before i expect top 10 QB numbers. ETA again, What happened with that stat and Roethlisberger? Who i might add also started the majority of the games in his rookie season.
Click to expand...
The stat is true for Ben as well. His 2nd season starting 14+ games was 2007 when he finished #5. The stat is true for every QB in the last decade.
Click to expand...
He played in 14 games his rookie season. Im not sure if he technically started all 14, but he played the majority of all 14. Either way, it is such a meanlingless stat, it wouldnt affect my decision .0000001%.
Click to expand...
I am not a huge believer in this stat, so I will stay out of the argument, but he only started 13 his rookie year, but I think you are correct that he played in the majority of 14 games.
 
The problem with SSOG's study and the argument is that using a QBs first two years of 14+ games leads to lumping apples with oranges. Some guy like Rodgers practices and watches a stud QB and how its done for 3 years and then starts 14. He is no way the same creature as Stafford walking out of college and having to hide behind the shreds of a DET OL with little idea of what he is even supposed to be doing out there. As SSOG himself correctly stated, this is a statistical anomaly and relying on it is foolish. It does show a trend that guys who are going to be good typically are at least average fairly soon after they become regular starters, Nothing more. Whether Ryan and Flacco become top notch will depend on what they are made of and their team situations, not their year 1 and 2 overall QB ranking.

What matters for our science experiment, though, is that while the difference between the average QBs taken in rounds 1 and 2 and the average QBs taken in rounds 7 and 8 is going to be a couple or 3 points per game. The difference in average RB points for those taken in the first two rounds and those taken in the 7th and 8th will be more than a dozen. Assumming you take the same other 6 guys in your first eight rounds, that's a 10 point per game advantage for the take an RB and wait for your QB crowd. It isn't that the top QBs aren't great, its that the capable RBs are far scarcer. As someone said earlier (Maybe Go Deep) its simple supply and demand.

 
Also though, the dynasty element is what, IMO, gives QBs and WRs both a large edge over RBs. RBs change year to year. Middle rookie round RBs like Tate and Hardesty are available each year if you didn't make the playoffs, and guys like Mathews/Best are available if your team sucked so badly at RB that you couldn't win.

Having the top QB and top receivers generally puts you in the playoffs every year. Any given 2 games of a season are often heavily based on chance anyway.

 
Instinctive said:
Also though, the dynasty element is what, IMO, gives QBs and WRs both a large edge over RBs. RBs change year to year. Middle rookie round RBs like Tate and Hardesty are available each year if you didn't make the playoffs, and guys like Mathews/Best are available if your team sucked so badly at RB that you couldn't win.Having the top QB and top receivers generally puts you in the playoffs every year. Any given 2 games of a season are often heavily based on chance anyway.
Click to expand...
Don't change the argument on us now. You don't get any better WRs picking a QB in the first round than a RB. The only difference we are discussing is the QBs and RBs you got in the 1st and 7th rounds. Either way you can be WR rich ot WR poor.I completely agree that a solid young WR is a pleasure to grow old with (which is why I picked Calvin with the first rounder I didn't have to spend on a QB).
 
Heh, what about me? I ended up with 2 top-10 WRs (almost definitely), and 2 top-10 QBs (assuming Kolb can fill the shoes in Philly). But my RBs are ....lacking... to say the least. I have questions about both Pierre Thomas and Jamaal Charles - if they can both finish top-15 or even top-20, I feel I have a shot. If not, then I may be hurting...

 
gandalas said:
Heh, what about me? I ended up with 2 top-10 WRs (almost definitely), and 2 top-10 QBs (assuming Kolb can fill the shoes in Philly). But my RBs are ....lacking... to say the least. I have questions about both Pierre Thomas and Jamaal Charles - if they can both finish top-15 or even top-20, I feel I have a shot. If not, then I may be hurting...
Click to expand...
While i dont think you have two top 10 QB's, i do like your team. Your RB's do have question marks, but so does everyone elses. I agree with Catbird, dynasty leagues really boil down to WR corps. A good young WR corps can carry your team for years. Im all about the top 12-15 WR's, if you can get your hands on 2-3 of them, you should compete year in and year out.
 
Catbird said:
Instinctive said:
Also though, the dynasty element is what, IMO, gives QBs and WRs both a large edge over RBs. RBs change year to year. Middle rookie round RBs like Tate and Hardesty are available each year if you didn't make the playoffs, and guys like Mathews/Best are available if your team sucked so badly at RB that you couldn't win.Having the top QB and top receivers generally puts you in the playoffs every year. Any given 2 games of a season are often heavily based on chance anyway.
Click to expand...
Don't change the argument on us now. You don't get any better WRs picking a QB in the first round than a RB. The only difference we are discussing is the QBs and RBs you got in the 1st and 7th rounds. Either way you can be WR rich ot WR poor.I completely agree that a solid young WR is a pleasure to grow old with (which is why I picked Calvin with the first rounder I didn't have to spend on a QB).
Click to expand...
If anything, taking a QB in the first can hurt your WR's too. There are 4, maybe 5 rounds to get good RB's and WR's, if you spend one of those picks on a QB, you have to spend more of the next 4 picks on RB's. The guy who takes a RB in the first can afford to take more WR's in the next few rounds because he only needs one more RB.
 
Whoever is commish of the MFL site needs to set the draft timer to 8 hours per pick. It should have expired by now. There is an option to make it stop counting overnight as well, so no need to worry about that.

 
I got email saying I am up now, T Choice was the last pick. Is that all correct?

I cannot get to MFL site from work.

I have my pick ready.

 
gandalas said:
Whoever is commish of the MFL site needs to set the draft timer to 8 hours per pick. It should have expired by now. There is an option to make it stop counting overnight as well, so no need to worry about that.
Click to expand...
The clock is set up correctly. MFL works in 15 minute segments. So, depending on when the last pick was made, a team could get as much as 8 hours and 14 minutes.
 
steelcityman said:
jeter23 said:
steelcityman said:
I got email saying I am up now, T Choice was the last pick. Is that all correct?I cannot get to MFL site from work.I have my pick ready.
Click to expand...
Yes, who do you want and I will make the pick for you.
Click to expand...
Big Ben, QB, Pit. Save the jokes! :goodposting:
Click to expand...
And I think that's a great pick for someone that doesn't have a QB yet. He has slid past some people that he is much better than all because of a couple games. This is a dynasty after all...
 
jeter23 said:
gandalas said:
Whoever is commish of the MFL site needs to set the draft timer to 8 hours per pick. It should have expired by now. There is an option to make it stop counting overnight as well, so no need to worry about that.
Click to expand...
The clock is set up correctly. MFL works in 15 minute segments. So, depending on when the last pick was made, a team could get as much as 8 hours and 14 minutes.
Click to expand...
Gotcha - I saw that he got skipped right after I wrote that, sorry! :kicksrock:
 
I am going purely future with this one,

9.02 - Matt Stafford, QB, DET. I think he can be great soon, weapons all around him now. And I couldnt decide on another WR or RB. I think I am done at QB now.

 
After 8 full rounds, my team scores look like this:

Team10 - 374

Team7 - 361

Team8 - 352

Team1 - 348

Team3 - 344

Team6 - 342

Team2 - 335

Team9 - 325

Team5 - 322

Team11 - 284

Team4 - 283

Team12 - 282

Again, im not sure whose team is whose, but it is in draft order.

 
I will once again be away for the weekend with no internet service......leaving Friday night and returning sometime Sunday night. I will pre-draft over at MFL on Friday afternoon and we'll see how far you guys get over the weekend.

Rody

 
I must have predrafted wrong...but I got who I wanted still lol.

I had Brandon Jacobs and Bush ready to go, Jacobs went...and then it didn't pick.

So, sorry guys, I must not have saved after adding Bush to my list. Happened to me once in Zealots this year too. Glad Reggie was MFL's next also.

 
Also, write up for Mike Williams:

I think he was the best guy in the draft after the 1st round receivers, and his camp reports have been glowing time after time. He was downgraded for being a 20 year old college kid, and the Bucs took huge advantage. I think he's a rare day one starter at WR who can certainly impress.

 
Go deep said:
After 8 full rounds, my team scores look like this:Team10 - 374Team7 - 361Team8 - 352Team1 - 348Team3 - 344Team6 - 342Team2 - 335Team9 - 325Team5 - 322Team11 - 284Team4 - 283Team12 - 282Again, im not sure whose team is whose, but it is in draft order.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what this means? I get a good rating, but don't even have a full starting lineup yet. I guess better a good rating than bad?SteelCity, my next two picks were Ben and Matthew. Thanks a lot! IMO having those two guys to pick defenses against over the next decade are just as good as having Rodgers or Brees. GREAT 8-9 combo. Sure screwed up my plans, Rat *******!
 
Catbird said:
Go deep said:
After 8 full rounds, my team scores look like this:Team10 - 374Team7 - 361Team8 - 352Team1 - 348Team3 - 344Team6 - 342Team2 - 335Team9 - 325Team5 - 322Team11 - 284Team4 - 283Team12 - 282Again, im not sure whose team is whose, but it is in draft order.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what this means? I get a good rating, but don't even have a full starting lineup yet. I guess better a good rating than bad?SteelCity, my next two picks were Ben and Matthew. Thanks a lot! IMO having those two guys to pick defenses against over the next decade are just as good as having Rodgers or Brees. GREAT 8-9 combo. Sure screwed up my plans, Rat *******!
Click to expand...
I have a dynasty rankings system that i use for everything from trading to drafting etc. I based the players scores based mostly on perceived value, with a bit of my own thoughts mixed in. These numbers are just the total players scores. Your score is high based on getting players like Felix jones in the 4th and Cutler in the 7th. There were both the best players selected in the rounds you got them.
 
Sorry Catbird. No one else was jumping off the page, and I kind of knew had I not got 2 decent QBs now, I might not get any at all.

 
I'm just kidding you. Very good picks - from the take a QB way late camp. I can live with Cutler (if he isn't killed in the wait without blockers until you are almost hit to pass) Martz system and whatever backup QB trash I find down the road.

 
Donsmith swiped McCluster right out from under me........damnit!

One other note: When I leave my pre-drafts on Friday, I'll also leave a phone number where I can be reached should the lists fail.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catbird said:
I'm just kidding you. Very good picks - from the take a QB way late camp. I can live with Cutler (if he isn't killed in the wait without blockers until you are almost hit to pass) Martz system and whatever backup QB trash I find down the road.
Click to expand...
if it makes you feel any better, I was hoping to get Golden Tate next rounds, he's gone now :goodposting:
 
Anyone else notice how particularly unhealthy "Waiting for Creeping Death" reads on the draft in progress chart.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL! Awesome.

Sorry to hold things up guys, I didn't expect the draft to get back to me so quickly. That was a tough selection to make, I contemplated going a few different directions with it but eventually decided on taking Lee Evans at 10.08

 
J-Dawg said:
LOL! Awesome.Sorry to hold things up guys, I didn't expect the draft to get back to me so quickly. That was a tough selection to make, I contemplated going a few different directions with it but eventually decided on taking Lee Evans at 10.08
Click to expand...
Good pick, i was kind of hoping he would make it to my next pick. I still need a #3 WR. :pickle:
 
Guys, is everyone jumping ship that quickly on Slaton? Got him and DHB at the 10-11 turn. Remember that Tiki had fumbling issues and once he solved them, turned into a top-5 back for the rest of his career. Anyway, Steelcity is up.

 
sholditch said:
Guys, is everyone jumping ship that quickly on Slaton? Got him and DHB at the 10-11 turn. Remember that Tiki had fumbling issues and once he solved them, turned into a top-5 back for the rest of his career. Anyway, Steelcity is up.
Click to expand...
Not me, he was easily the best RB left. I would have drafted him with my last pick had Lynch not been available. I will be alot more confident if it wasnt for the neck injury. Im afraid it will cost him his career, i think it pretty much insures he will never be a featured back again. As a Ben Tate owner i would have taken him over Foster for a Tate handcuff.
 
Didn't really consider that when I drafted him, reports from OTAs have been so glowing. Interesting point.

My rb stable is weak no doubt. At least for year 1 the RB camp is winning IMO. Seeing Brady taken only two rounds later to me confirms the wisdom of simply obeying the laws of supply and demand in the RB market.

However, we do have a draft in year two.

 
Same here.

Write-up for Freeman:

I'd been looking at Stafford, Henne, Kolb, Maning recently, but I just didn't see taking them unless they slid to me because I have Rodgers. Freeman is a guy who I think goes big this year or next, or I can cut bait and move on. IMO, myhighest risk/reward pick in the draft, because if he booms, he'll really boom. He has a great up and coming offense, especially if they piece together a running attack this year and then grab a playmaker RB next year.

 
Bernard Scott

I think that if Benson goes down or drops off, Scott will produce. He absolutely dominated at a lower level college, but showed talent when he got the chance last year. I think that the late late shotgun RB method could actually put me in contention, although I'd rather have the #1 pick next year.

 
Also, I kinda hate that someone took Bradford. Wanted to get a guy from my school, especially since he just came out and I'm still there. Although I think he went too high, he probably won't be a great, or good, fantasy contributor til year 3 or 4. In my opinion, of course.

Too bad I can't draft McCoy!!! Although I suppose Gresham is out there. But Vernon has me set there for a loooooong time to come.

 
Instinctive said:
Write-up for Freeman:I'd been looking at Stafford, Henne, Kolb, Maning recently, but I just didn't see taking them unless they slid to me because I have Rodgers. Freeman is a guy who I think goes big this year or next, or I can cut bait and move on. IMO, myhighest risk/reward pick in the draft, because if he booms, he'll really boom. He has a great up and coming offense, especially if they piece together a running attack this year and then grab a playmaker RB next year.
Click to expand...
I was looking at Freeman at 10.01 but decided to take a gamble that he'd make it back to me. I like the pick a lot Instinctive. Most of my gambles of hoping a player slides back to me have not payed off at all. I just don't really like reaching too far for players, which is what you have to do on the tail ends if you really want someone. So far though, I'm very happy with my draft and how it has unfolded. We are about halfway done now, so we are definitely moving at a really good pace right now. I hope it continues.Rody
 
i think at this point you have to reach and not worry about it. IN this range of the draft its all speculation and if you have a good feeling about a player you have to take them as you see fit.

 
sholditch said:
i think at this point you have to reach and not worry about it. IN this range of the draft its all speculation and if you have a good feeling about a player you have to take them as you see fit.
Click to expand...
I agree to some extent, but I didn't feel the need to do it with Freeman. I really felt he would slide back to me. Others I've been really close to being right about...McCluster being one of them. I took a good hard look at him at 7.12/8.01 and thought he'd make it back.......he nearly did, but Donsmith took him one pick before I would have grabbed him. Your are right, it's a crapshoot at this point. I'll be taking another gamble here in the 11th that a player I am targeting will make it back for my 13th. Maybe I'll get lucky. :unsure: Rody
 
Instinctive said:
Also, I kinda hate that someone took Bradford. Wanted to get a guy from my school, especially since he just came out and I'm still there. Although I think he went too high, he probably won't be a great, or good, fantasy contributor til year 3 or 4. In my opinion, of course.Too bad I can't draft McCoy!!! Although I suppose Gresham is out there. But Vernon has me set there for a loooooong time to come.
Click to expand...
He was going 1.7, 1.8 in rookie drafts last month, he was the 10th rookie drafted here. I would have drafted him a round earlier if i had too. I havnt liked a rookie QB this much in a long time. He is my 13th ranked QB overall, so he was great value for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Is Draft Dominator broke?
Replies
0
Views
337
hit4dough
H
ZWK
2023 Anarchy League 1 Thread
Replies
9
Views
568
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
2023-24 Playoff Survivor
4 5 6
Replies
282
Views
5K
bro1ncos
bro1ncos

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top