Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Faust

2012 Rookie 1.01

Poll: Who is your choice for rookie pick 1.01?  

218 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I am going to try to keep these going for as long as there is solid interest and voting in these polls. Good luck to everyone in your rookie drafts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice! Glad to see these back again this year. Thanks, Faust. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 QB drafts will be interesting. You could take any of the big 3 and be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richardson is the guy in all formats except for 2 QB IMO. In 2 QB leagues I'd go Luck (personally) or RG3 if he is your guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this poll format. One suggestion would be to add a "Don't Play" option for each poll. That way, my picks (and others) who don't play in a 2 QB or TE heavy league won't skew the results with our answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even in 2 QB scoring, passing on a stud like Richardson is a mistake.

I think so too. Give me Trent across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never or would ever play in a 2 Qb system but I can't imagine any system where I woudlnt take Richardson number 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2 QB scoring leagues it is imperative to have quality starters and decent depth, otherwise you are sunk.

In a 12 team league you are starting 24 quarterbacks each week, so with injuries and bye weeks you need to secure quality QBs to be able to compete.

I am guessing that if you have the 1.01 rookie pick in a 2 QB league it is because you were weak at the QB position, so grabbing Luck or RG III over Richardson would be the right strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this poll format. One suggestion would be to add a "Don't Play" option for each poll. That way, my picks (and others) who don't play in a 2 QB or TE heavy league won't skew the results with our answers.

It is a good suggestion, but last year when we got to the rookie 2.12 poll there was just over 60 votes. If a significant number of those votes are "Don't Play" then it becomes too challenging to create separation between the poll choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug Martin is my 1.02 for most of these questions (Besides 2-QB)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True stud RB are so rare, especially that arent giving way to a RBBC. I will take Richardson for the win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How fast are you planning on moving from one poll to the next typically?

I try to get at least 100+ votes for as many of the polls as I can, and it also depends on how quickly a consensus winner emerges. The other factor is how busy I am on a day to day basis - these polls are a little bit of work to publish and stay on top of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that two people voted for Fleener in TE shows that not everyone takes these polls serious. There's no point in having the TEs as options until at least 1.5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that two people voted for Fleener in TE shows that not everyone takes these polls serious. There's no point in having the TEs as options until at least 1.5

I think it shows that there's no point in having people vote in polls for league types that they have no familiarity with. I'm sure those were people who have never played in TE heavy scoring leagues but just saw "TE Heavy" and assumed that TEs should go first.I'd much rather have slower polls at the back half of round 2 then have the entire data set corrupted by forcing people to vote on things they aren't familiar with and have no desire to vote on.If I played in a start 2 QB or heavy TE league I'd much rather have data from 30 people that have played in those leagues than from 100 people that haven't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this poll format. One suggestion would be to add a "Don't Play" option for each poll. That way, my picks (and others) who don't play in a 2 QB or TE heavy league won't skew the results with our answers.

It is a good suggestion, but last year when we got to the rookie 2.12 poll there was just over 60 votes. If a significant number of those votes are "Don't Play" then it becomes too challenging to create separation between the poll choices.
I can see that but I guarantee my choice at 2.12 for the 2 QB and TE heavy will be meaningless. It would be better to have a meaningful answer with fewer votes than a meaningless answer with separation. I.01 and 1.02 are pretty easy, but you can already see some signs of this in the voting and comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this poll format. One suggestion would be to add a "Don't Play" option for each poll. That way, my picks (and others) who don't play in a 2 QB or TE heavy league won't skew the results with our answers.

It is a good suggestion, but last year when we got to the rookie 2.12 poll there was just over 60 votes. If a significant number of those votes are "Don't Play" then it becomes too challenging to create separation between the poll choices.
I can see that but I guarantee my choice at 2.12 for the 2 QB and TE heavy will be meaningless. It would be better to have a meaningful answer with fewer votes than a meaningless answer with separation. I.01 and 1.02 are pretty easy, but you can already see some signs of this in the voting and comments.
I may look at a null option for those who wish to vote that option, but if you look back at last year for the second round picks where we had very few votes (I think the 2.11 poll had just over 40 votes) it just becomes too hard to create separation.Ultimately I am not too worried about 2 votes for Fleener from almost 150 total votes skewing the results too much as those outliers don't wreck too much havoc on the results. I also appreciated the views of those who are in the minority (or those who feel that somebody has been overlooked) on later players and want to encourage them to vote and share some of their views on those players, as I find it helpful to hear other people's observations on why they support them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may look at a null option for those who wish to vote that option, but if you look back at last year for the second round picks where we had very few votes (I think the 2.11 poll had just over 40 votes) it just becomes too hard to create separation.

I think people would much rather have 40 relevant votes than 300 of them where half the people are just guessing, especially when we're talking about way down at the end of the 2nd round. I could walk down the street and either ask 100 random people who the 1.02 rookie should be or I could just ask the 8 people in that sample that actually play fantasy football. I'd much rather have the opinion of the 8 folks with less separation than 100 less accurate votes.

I know you said you're not going to worry about a couple of random people clicking Fleener but as we get further away from the obvious 1.01 picks it's only going to get worse. I don't play in any TE heavy leagues so I have no idea where the TEs fit into those drafts. Likewise, I haven't played in any 2 QB leagues so while it's easy to say "ok yea Luck and RG3 should probably be #1/#2 in 2 QB leagues" I have no idea where guys like Tannehill, Wheedon, Wilson, etc should fit in and any vote. My vote in that poll is bad intel.

So once we get to 2.11 we may have less "separation" (not sure why that's so important to you) doing it this way, but the alternative is that we have a bunch of junk mixed in there. I'd rather have an accurate poll with less separation than an inaccurate poll with separation skewed towards the wrong players. If I played in a 2qb or TE heavy scoring league these polls would be useless to me.

Just my $.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may look at a null option for those who wish to vote that option, but if you look back at last year for the second round picks where we had very few votes (I think the 2.11 poll had just over 40 votes) it just becomes too hard to create separation.

I think people would much rather have 40 relevant votes than 300 of them where half the people are just guessing, especially when we're talking about way down at the end of the 2nd round. I could walk down the street and either ask 100 random people who the 1.02 rookie should be or I could just ask the 8 people in that sample that actually play fantasy football. I'd much rather have the opinion of the 8 folks with less separation than 100 less accurate votes.

I know you said you're not going to worry about a couple of random people clicking Fleener but as we get further away from the obvious 1.01 picks it's only going to get worse. I don't play in any TE heavy leagues so I have no idea where the TEs fit into those drafts. Likewise, I haven't played in any 2 QB leagues so while it's easy to say "ok yea Luck and RG3 should probably be #1/#2 in 2 QB leagues" I have no idea where guys like Tannehill, Wheedon, Wilson, etc should fit in and any vote. My vote in that poll is bad intel.

So once we get to 2.11 we may have less "separation" (not sure why that's so important to you) doing it this way, but the alternative is that we have a bunch of junk mixed in there. I'd rather have an accurate poll with less separation than an inaccurate poll with separation skewed towards the wrong players. If I played in a 2qb or TE heavy scoring league these polls would be useless to me.

Just my $.02.

I very much appreciate your thoughts on the subject, and there is a lot of validity to what you are suggesting.

I need separation in later polls to be able to move the polls forward in a timely fashion. The problem last year is that with the later polls, the interest levels drop off dramatically. With just over 40 votes in the 2.11 poll last year, it took a lot of time to establish a clear cut "consensus" winner. With a null vote or "don't play" option, we might not be able to create enough separation (if we have only 40 votes and half or more were "don't play" options then we could have several days where there are two (or more) players tied or within 1 vote of each other).

Cheers,

Faust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.