1QB league vs 2QB league - LJ (1 Viewer)

[Escalade]

Situation: I have LJ as a keeper. The commissioner is trying to get the league to go to a 2 QB system. The commissioner is saying that LJ will still keep his great value. I disagree because RBs will be less valuable and the advantage of a superb RB keeper in a 1qb system is far more an advantage then in a 2qb system.

Will LJ lose the least amount of a value if switched from a 1QB to a 2QB or will LJ lose a great amount of value/advantage?

 

[jurb26]

Not sure why you are so concerned about it. Who are the other guys keeping? I would imagine they are mostly keeping RBs as well. So the decrease in value, if there is one, will be even across the board.

 

[Escalade]

There are a few who have RB keepers, none as good as LJ. We can only keep two players and they can't be players drafted in the top 3 rounds of the previous year. I see LJ having a greater value gap/advantage in a 1 qb system.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

There are a few who have RB keepers, none as good as LJ. We can only keep two players and they can't be players drafted in the top 3 rounds of the previous year. I see LJ having a greater value gap/advantage in a 1 qb system.

LJ would be drafted 1st overall in a 1 QB or 2 QB system.The mid range RBs would fall a round or even more.

I fail to see how LJ loses the most value.

I.E.

You keep LJ as an 8th round keeper. He would be drafted as the 1st pick reagrdless if its 1 or 2 QB league. Therefore you are getting 7 rounds of value.

Someone else keeps Rudi Johnson as an 8th round keeper. He would be drafted at the end of the 1st round in a 1 QB system, but would be a late 1st/early 2nd pick in a 2 QB league. Therefore he loses a round of value by going to a 2 QB league.

The lower the guy would be drafted in a 1 QB league, the more they are going to fall in a 2Qb league, so that means the later picks lose more value because their keeper value reamains constant. I.E. LJ gets 7 rounds of value, but due to the rule change Rudi only has 5 rounds of value, instead of 6 in a 1QB league.

I.E. An RB who would be drafted in the 3rd round in a 1 Qb system could potentially fall to the 6th round in a 2 QB system.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Situation: I have LJ as a keeper. The commissioner is trying to get the league to go to a 2 QB system. The commissioner is saying that LJ will still keep his great value. I disagree because RBs will be less valuable and the advantage of a superb RB keeper in a 1qb system is far more an advantage then in a 2qb system.

Will LJ lose the least amount of a value if switched from a 1QB to a 2QB or will LJ lose a great amount of value/advantage?

Explain to me HOW you see LJ's value decreasing moreso than Rudi Johnson?

 

[Sopranos]

Well it gives you the chance to get SA or LT2 as your 2nd RB.. Even in a 2 QB league the good RB's go first. The scoring for QB's is more important to your question..

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Well it gives you the chance to get SA or LT2 as your 2nd RB.. Even in a 2 QB league the good RB's go first. The scoring for QB's is more important to your question..

He has LJ as a keeper and will vote on the 2 QB situation depending on if it increases or decreases LJ's value as a keeper compared to everyone else's keepers. It is a very immature reason to vote for a rule.

 

[JohnnyTitan]

He has LJ as a keeper and will vote on the 2 QB situation depending on if it increases or decreases LJ's value as a keeper compared to everyone else's keepers. It is a very immature reason to vote for a rule.

I agree. I've always favoured 2QB leagues and you should vote on what you think will bring you the most FFL enjoyment over the next 10 seasons, not just this one. Have some vision and let your FFL knowledge win the league for you..not the rules you play by. 2 QBs is the way to go!

 

[fridayfrenzy]

He has LJ as a keeper and will vote on the 2 QB situation depending on if it increases or decreases LJ's value as a keeper compared to everyone else's keepers. It is a very immature reason to vote for a rule.

I agree. I've always favoured 2QB leagues and you should vote on what you think will bring you the most FFL enjoyment over the next 10 seasons, not just this one. Have some vision and let your FFL knowledge win the league for you..not the rules you play by. 2 QBs is the way to go!

The sad thing is that he has already said that he likes the rule and what it will bring to the league, but will vote on it later down the line when he doesn't have LJ as a keeper.I am the commish of the league is you hadn't noticed, and the poster is my brother.

 

[JohnnyTitan]

It's not just your brother, but it is annoying!

I'm commish of two long-standing leagues and people are always short sighted and vote on change whether-or-not it is "Good for them" rather than"Good for the game".

Even if that is reasonable, usually these same GMs can't determine the impact on them and therefore turndown the "League Improvement" just because they are afraid of change. (Keepers, Auction, TEs added as a separate position, changes to waiver system just a few items off the top of my head).

 

[code]

There are a few who have RB keepers, none as good as LJ. We can only keep two players and they can't be players drafted in the top 3 rounds of the previous year. I see LJ having a greater value gap/advantage in a 1 qb system.

This is the real fly in the ointment...because swapping to 2QB means that QBs drafted in the 4th round last year might be drafted in the 1st or 2nd this year...so, in effect, you are allowing teams to keep players whose value is now suddenly that of say a 2nd rounder when in fact they were drafted in the 5th last year...Can you then directly assess an overall decrease in LJ's value? I'm not so sure...but if I were the commish and proposed this rule change I think I would run a VBD analysis to determine which QBs would be drafted in the 4th round or later this year, then look at when they were drafted last year (probably 7th or 8th) and make that the cutoff for QB keepers in the first year of the rule change...

 

[fridayfrenzy]

There are a few who have RB keepers, none as good as LJ. We can only keep two players and they can't be players drafted in the top 3 rounds of the previous year. I see LJ having a greater value gap/advantage in a 1 qb system.

This is the real fly in the ointment...because swapping to 2QB means that QBs drafted in the 4th round last year might be drafted in the 1st or 2nd this year...so, in effect, you are allowing teams to keep players whose value is now suddenly that of say a 2nd rounder when in fact they were drafted in the 5th last year...Can you then directly assess an overall decrease in LJ's value? I'm not so sure...but if I were the commish and proposed this rule change I think I would run a VBD analysis to determine which QBs would be drafted in the 4th round or later this year, then look at when they were drafted last year (probably 7th or 8th) and make that the cutoff for QB keepers in the first year of the rule change...

We have that partly under control. If we change the rule, we would somehow penalize the QBs kept so thats its fair (i.e. All Qbs kept would move up two rounds from what they would have been kept at).As well, we are having a year form the rule chaneg to the inception of the rule so that everyone knows ahead of time, and can draft accordingly.

I agree though, we need something of aa cutoff so that we don't have 8 QBs being kep in the first year because of the large value it holds

 

[-OZ-]

If we change the rule, we would somehow penalize the QBs kept so thats its fair (i.e. All Qbs kept would move up two rounds from what they would have been kept at).

As well, we are having a year form the rule chaneg to the inception of the rule so that everyone knows ahead of time, and can draft accordingly.

I agree though, we need something of aa cutoff so that we don't have 8 QBs being kep in the first year because of the large value it holds

That is the pertinent issue in this change, I think you're handling it well.If owners don't like the 1 to 2 switch, would they be for the option of using the 2nd QB as flex? Some people prefer that, I ran a league the last few years that used it, and I liked it.

For the question posed, no, LJ doesn't lose much value. He's a top 2 no matter what. Other RBs lose more value, but where LJ would lose value is if his owner tried to trade him for QBs. In a 1 QB league, you'd probably be able to land Peyton Manning and a RB like McGahee/Rudi for LJ, in the 2 QB system, you'd be looking more at Peyton and a 5th round type player.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

If we change the rule, we would somehow penalize the QBs kept so thats its fair (i.e. All Qbs kept would move up two rounds from what they would have been kept at).

As well, we are having a year form the rule chaneg to the inception of the rule so that everyone knows ahead of time, and can draft accordingly.

I agree though, we need something of aa cutoff so that we don't have 8 QBs being kep in the first year because of the large value it holds

That is the pertinent issue in this change, I think you're handling it well.If owners don't like the 1 to 2 switch, would they be for the option of using the 2nd QB as flex? Some people prefer that, I ran a league the last few years that used it, and I liked it.

For the question posed, no, LJ doesn't lose much value. He's a top 2 no matter what. Other RBs lose more value, but where LJ would lose value is if his owner tried to trade him for QBs. In a 1 QB league, you'd probably be able to land Peyton Manning and a RB like McGahee/Rudi for LJ, in the 2 QB system, you'd be looking more at Peyton and a 5th round type player.

The new position will be a flex position. By adding a FLEX position, it really takes the only drawback out of the equation...the scarcity of starting QBs. With how scoring is setup a QB would score more points than the other positions, so it would be advantageous to have a QB starting, but it means that you do not have your hands tied on bye weeks or injuries.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

The new position will be a flex position. By adding a FLEX position, it really takes the only drawback out of the equation...the scarcity of starting QBs. With how scoring is setup a QB would score more points than the other positions, so it would be advantageous to have a QB starting, but it means that you do not have your hands tied on bye weeks or injuries.

Why not ease up on the QB scoring a little so that flex spot isn't a de facto 2nd QB? That's what my redraft league did a few years ago when we added the "super-flex" spot. We give 1 pt per 30 yards passing instead of the usual 1/20 or 1/25.

 

[Iceman66]

What a whiner !!!!

2 qb is the only way to go. LJ is still #1 overall. nice value. This season QB is a crap shoot, so unless manning was drafted after round #3 (not likely) then who cares.

Do what is best for the league, not yourself, the league will last longer and be more fun and competitive

 

[BlueOnion]

2QB leagues is sharky, 1 QB leagues are for guppies.

Regardless of how the rule impacts your team, stop trying to be a guppy.

 

[-OZ-]

The new position will be a flex position. By adding a FLEX position, it really takes the only drawback out of the equation...the scarcity of starting QBs. With how scoring is setup a QB would score more points than the other positions, so it would be advantageous to have a QB starting, but it means that you do not have your hands tied on bye weeks or injuries.

Why not ease up on the QB scoring a little so that flex spot isn't a de facto 2nd QB? That's what my redraft league did a few years ago when we added the "super-flex" spot. We give 1 pt per 30 yards passing instead of the usual 1/20 or 1/25.

Maybe it's me, but I like the idea that the scoring makes it essentially a 2 QB league, flex really just for bye weeks and injuries. Kind of like some leagues that allow you to start 1-3 TEs or 1-2 PKs. Rarely will a top team start more than one at either, but it provides options in case of emergency.

2QB leagues is sharky, 1 QB leagues are for guppies.

Regardless of how the rule impacts your team, stop trying to be a guppy.

I like 2 QB leagues (although none of mine are right now), but I'd put the "sharkiness" of Gamebreakers overall up there with the top leagues.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

The new position will be a flex position.  By adding a FLEX position, it really takes the only drawback out of the equation...the scarcity of starting QBs.  With how scoring is setup a QB would score more points than the other positions, so it would be advantageous to have a QB starting, but it means that you do not have your hands tied on bye weeks or injuries.

Why not ease up on the QB scoring a little so that flex spot isn't a de facto 2nd QB? That's what my redraft league did a few years ago when we added the "super-flex" spot. We give 1 pt per 30 yards passing instead of the usual 1/20 or 1/25.

Maybe it's me, but I like the idea that the scoring makes it essentially a 2 QB league, flex really just for bye weeks and injuries. Kind of like some leagues that allow you to start 1-3 TEs or 1-2 PKs. Rarely will a top team start more than one at either, but it provides options in case of emergency.

2QB leagues is sharky, 1 QB leagues are for guppies. 

Regardless of how the rule impacts your team, stop trying to be a guppy.

I like 2 QB leagues (although none of mine are right now), but I'd put the "sharkiness" of Gamebreakers overall up there with the top leagues.

It's all good, OZ. I should have stated that we mandate 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WRs with two flex spots (but no more than two at QB & RB).If it were a 1-2-3(or 2) league, then I'd have no problem with the QB scoring more - just to get him "even" with the RBs. In most leagues like this, the # of QB spots are playing catch up to RBs.

 

[inca911]

2QB is best for the league. You'll be fine with LJ and don't need any additional advantages. Just make sure you clarify the keeper info so that everyone understands the keeper rules. Perhaps as part of the switch there is a 1-2 year moratorium on QB keepers.