Aaron Brooks will be the #1 fantasy QB this year (1 Viewer)

[BigRed]

First, as you either intentionally leave out (or fail to realize) that Brooks can be had much later than the #5 QB in the draft.

No, you're not getting that I was talking to the person who pointed out his roughly QB6-8 ranking in past years as some kind of proof of him being much more than a marginal QB1.

Regarding him being "erratic as hell", I would imagine he is no more erratic than most QBs.

I would imagine lol.

 

[Tau837]

Kerry Collins was my #2 QB last year, and for the first 4 games before Moss got hurt, I was right.

linki guess we're talking about a different scoring system?

Actually, Collins performed surprisingly well for the first 12 games last season. From the Brooks Spotlight thread:

Here's Collins' game logs for last year. Which four weeks are you referring to?

After week 4, Collins was QB7.After week 9 (8 games for Collins), he was QB7.

After week 13 (12 games for Collins), he was QB4.

Then the team fell apart, losing its last four (actually its last six), with Jordan missing two games and Collins missing one. And Collins still finished as QB9.

All data here from the Data Dominator and ranking by total fantasy points (sometimes I wish the DD would allow ranking by ppg).

EDIT: Since I consider Brooks a better QB than Collins, I think this performance by Collins illustrates just how much potential Brooks has with this supporting cast, though granted it could be tempered a bit if Shell features a conservative game plan.

 

[Tau837]

Thank you.  Glad someone else sees this.  The only reasons IMO to not consider Brooks a solid QB1 are (1) you play in 6 team leagues or (2) you are predicting that he will get benched.

Well, if you don't feel that he will get benched, he's a great value.

Exactly. And I don't feel he will be benched. Hence, our disagreement.

 

[Sidewinder]

This is probably the most important point. His high-lows are amazingly bad. I'm guessing most of the Brooks supporters in here would be first-time owners. If you graph out his per-game production over the past few years, what you end up with is a scatter-plot rather than a progression or some tangible reliability.

Why don't you do this and compare it to the other top 15-20 QBs and tell me how it turns out.I think I already know...

I did just that last summer (on a different site). Only looked at the 2004 season though. Here's my post:

I guess I'm confused as to where Brooks is any more or any less inconsistent than other comparable QBs. For sake of discussion, let's throw out P Manning, Culpepper, and Favre, as most would agree these guys are a tier or 2 higher. Here is a 2004 comparison with Brady, Brees, Delhomme, T Green, Hasselbeck, McNabb, and Plummer, 6 QBs that are fairly closely tiered with Brooks.

(Note 1: didn't use Bulger because he missed 3 games due to injury)

(Note 2: Brees, Hasselbeck and McNabb missed 2 games each - Brees sat out game 16 and I threw out the blizzard game at Clev; Hasselbeck both due to injury, and McNabb essentially didn't play Philly's last 2 games). Apologies for the crappy formatting.

TDs - 3+ / 2 / 1 / 0 (run and pass combined)

Brooks - 2 / 6 / 7 / 1

Brady - 2 / 9 / 5 / 0

Brees - 5 / 4 / 3 / 2

Delhomme - 4 / 7 / 3 / 2

T Green - 6 / 3 / 3 / 4

Plummer - 4 / 5 / 4 / 3

McNabb - 7 / 1 / 4 / 2

Hasselbeck - 4 / 3 / 5 / 2

Passing yds - 300+ / 200-299 / 199 or less

Brooks - 2 / 10 /4

Brady - 2 / 9 / 5

Brees - 1 / 9 / 4

Delhomme - 4 / 8 /4

T Green - 8 / 6 / 2

Plummer - 2 /12 / 2

McNabb- 5 / 8 / 2

Hasselbeck - 3 / 6 / 5

Guess I just don't see the inconsistency argument, unless one says that, in essence, all comparable QBs are inconsistent.

 

[joffer]

Kerry Collins was my #2 QB last year, and for the first 4 games before Moss got hurt, I was right.

linki guess we're talking about a different scoring system?

Actually, Collins performed surprisingly well for the first 12 games last season. From the Brooks Spotlight thread:

Here's Collins' game logs for last year.  Which four weeks are you referring to?

After week 4, Collins was QB7.After week 9 (8 games for Collins), he was QB7.

After week 13 (12 games for Collins), he was QB4.

Then the team fell apart, losing its last four (actually its last six), with Jordan missing two games and Collins missing one. And Collins still finished as QB9.

All data here from the Data Dominator and ranking by total fantasy points (sometimes I wish the DD would allow ranking by ppg).

EDIT: Since I consider Brooks a better QB than Collins, I think this performance by Collins illustrates just how much potential Brooks has with this supporting cast, though granted it could be tempered a bit if Shell features a conservative game plan.

definitely not arguing with you, i'm just wondering where jvdwcdcdvdcdw got his #2 ranking from.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

This is something I did on Brooks from quite awhile back in a similar sort of discussion.

Brooks is underrated in my books.

Has he made some ridiculously dumb QB decisions in the NFL? Yes. But he is capable of being a good starting QB in the NFL and at this point in his career he is by far just as good if not better than the average NFL QB.

Ok, I know stats are not everything but from 2001-2004 before this past season Brooks was well above the average NFL QB and here are some stats to defend him; remember this is a 4 year average........

-14, 760 passing yards which works out to 3690 passing yards a season for those 4 years.

* this year only 7 QB's threw for more then 3690 yards. P. Manning had 3747 yards this season being the 7th guy. Remember 3690 was the 4 year average for Brooks. *

-threw for 98 TD's: works out to 24.5 TD's a season in those 4 years.

*only 3 QB's threw for more then 24 TD's this season: Manning, Palmer and Brady and Brooks averaged over 24 a game for those 4 years and it was not because he had one big year his highest output was 27 and his low was 21, therefore showing consistency*

-he had 1210 completions for an average of 302.5 completions per year in those 4 years

* only 6 Qb's this year had over 302 completions and remember this was a 4 year average for Brooks.*

-he ran for 959 yards for an average of 239.75 yards per season and had

9 rushing TD's in those years which is just over 2 per season.

*only 2 QB's ran for over 200 yards this season with Vick being one of them.

In 2001 through to 2004 Brooks did not miss a start. He was part of a good offensive team. He lead his team to a 32 and 32 record over those 4 years. That is not great but that definitely shows productivity. It's not as if NO had an ubeliveable amount of talent in those 4 years. Brooks is so underrated. Although inconsisitent at times I can't think of a player more hated. He has been the scape goat for far a sub par team and may flourish in another situation. He has a big arm and is mobile. For someone who just left his 20's this past month as he turned 30 I can't think of someone more hated for actually not being that bad. Many teams would love a QB with the numbers Brook put up over that 4 year span to go along with a .500 record as the teams starting qb.

 

[joffer]

The Raiders offensive numbers under Shell

CMP  ATT   YD    YPA   TD INT  ATT   YD    YPA  TD     YD   90           183  336  2885   8.59  19  10  496  2028  4.09  20   491391           220  414  2977   7.19  20  18  446  1706  3.83   8   468392           233  471  2950   6.26  20  23  434  1794  4.13   7   474493           281  495  3882   7.84  17  14  433  1425  3.29  10   530794           281  488  3556   7.29  22  16  428  1512  3.53   7   5068

The Raiders had 581 and 591 attempts the last two years. I'm having trouble seeing where these two things are going to merge.

 

[Tau837]

Game to game he is erratic as hell and just as likely to lead you to a loss as help you win.  I don't know about your league(s),but that won't cut it in ours most times.

This is probably the most important point. His high-lows are amazingly bad. I'm guessing most of the Brooks supporters in here would be first-time owners. If you graph out his per-game production over the past few years, what you end up with is a scatter-plot rather than a progression or some tangible reliability.

Interesting hypothesis. MLBrandow & BigRed, what exactly constitutes a low for a QB in your scoring systems?Let's look at a 15 point cutoff. How many times did Brooks and the other top QBs score less than 15 fantasy points? Let's use the top 15 QBs in FBG's current consensus rankings and the past 3 seasons (situations changed too much if we go further back, but sample set too small with fewer seasons) and FBG scoring:

Bulger - 6/37 = 16.2% (most encouraging stat I have seen yet for Kitna)

Peyton Manning - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Brady - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Hasselbeck - 13/46 = 28.3%

Brooks - 13/45 = 28.9%

Palmer - 9/30 = 30% (only 2 last year, so he is better than his ranking here)

McNabb - 12/40 = 30% (only 3 in 2 seasons with TO... will likely get worse)

Green - 15/48 = 31.3%

Plummer - 15/48 = 31.3%

Delhomme - 19/48 = 39.6%

Favre - 19/48 = 39.6%

Brees - 19/42 = 45.2%

Vick - 16/35 = 45.7%

Eli Manning - 13/25 = 52%

Bledsoe - 32/48 = 66.77%

Huh. Brooks certainly doesn't look like a guy with extraordinary lows there. How about games with less than 10 points? Those are certainly killers.

Brooks - 3/45 = 6.7%

Bulger - 3/37 = 8.1%

Plummer - 4/48 = 8.3% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Hasselbeck - 4/46 = 8.7% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Palmer - 3/30 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

McNabb - 4/40 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Brady - 5/48 = 10.4% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Peyton Manning - 6/48 = 12.5% (4 possibly due to end of season cameos)

Delhomme - 7/48 = 14.6%

Green - 7/48 = 14.6%

Vick - 6/35 = 17.1% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Favre - 9/48 = 18.8%

Eli Manning - 6/25 = 24%

Brees - 12/42 = 28.6% (1 due to injury)

Bledsoe - 16/48 = 33.3%

Wow, now I'm really not getting your point. Where is the evidence of these super low scores that Brooks regularly throws up to kill his fantasy teams?

How about the extraordinary highs you mentioned? Games with 20+ points:

Peyton Manning - 28/48 = 58.3%

Palmer - 15/30 = 50%

McNabb - 18/40 = 45% (12 with TO)

Green - 19/48 = 39.6%

Hasselbeck - 18/46 = 39.1%

Favre - 18/48 = 37.5%

Vick - 13/35 = 37.1%

Brooks - 16/45 = 35.6%

Brady - 17/48 = 35.4%

Brees - 14/42 = 33.3%

Bulger - 11/37 = 29.7%

Plummer - 14/48 = 29.2%

Delhomme - 13/48 = 27.1%

Bledsoe - 10/48 = 20.8%

Eli Manning - 5/25 = 20%

Games with 30+ points:

Peyton Manning - 9/48 = 18.8%

McNabb - 7/40 = 17.5% (all but 1 with TO)

Vick - 3/35 = 8.6%

Green - 4/48 - 8.3%

Favre - 3/48 = 6.3%

Bulger - 2/37 = 5.4%

Brees - 2/42 = 4.8%

Brooks - 2/45 = 4.4%

Hasselbeck - 2/46 = 4.3%

Plummer - 2/48 = 4.2%

Bledsoe - 2/48 = 4.2%

Eli Manning - 1/25 = 4%

Palmer - 1/30 = 3.3%

Brady - 1/48 = 2.1%

Delhomme - 0/48 = 0%

Looks like Brooks is middle of the road on high games. I really don't think your claim holds water. Unless you use a different scoring system. But even then, I doubt your claim really holds up, it just might mean Brooks looks like an average top 15 QB instead of an above average top 15 QB.

From 2002 to 2005, Brooks was #5 in fantasy points among QBs. Using 2003 to 2005, as above, he was #8. In 2003 & 2004 combined, he was #5, which eliminates 2005, which I have explained earlier is IMO a bad season to use as a predictor for Brooks.

Again, #1 fantasy QB? No. But a very good fantasy QB? Yes, if he stays in the lineup, and particularly with a healthy Moss, Porter, Curry, and Jordan.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Game to game he is erratic as hell and just as likely to lead you to a loss as help you win. I don't know about your league(s),but that won't cut it in ours most times.

This is probably the most important point. His high-lows are amazingly bad. I'm guessing most of the Brooks supporters in here would be first-time owners. If you graph out his per-game production over the past few years, what you end up with is a scatter-plot rather than a progression or some tangible reliability.

Interesting hypothesis. MLBrandow & BigRed, what exactly constitutes a low for a QB in your scoring systems?Let's look at a 15 point cutoff. How many times did Brooks and the other top QBs score less than 15 fantasy points? Let's use the top 15 QBs in FBG's current consensus rankings and the past 3 seasons (situations changed too much if we go further back, but sample set too small with fewer seasons) and FBG scoring:

Bulger - 6/37 = 16.2% (most encouraging stat I have seen yet for Kitna)

Peyton Manning - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Brady - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Hasselbeck - 13/46 = 28.3%

Brooks - 13/45 = 28.9%

Palmer - 9/30 = 30% (only 2 last year, so he is better than his ranking here)

McNabb - 12/40 = 30% (only 3 in 2 seasons with TO... will likely get worse)

Green - 15/48 = 31.3%

Plummer - 15/48 = 31.3%

Delhomme - 19/48 = 39.6%

Favre - 19/48 = 39.6%

Brees - 19/42 = 45.2%

Vick - 16/35 = 45.7%

Eli Manning - 13/25 = 52%

Bledsoe - 32/48 = 66.77%

Huh. Brooks certainly doesn't look like a guy with extraordinary lows there. How about games with less than 10 points? Those are certainly killers.

Brooks - 3/45 = 6.7%

Bulger - 3/37 = 8.1%

Plummer - 4/48 = 8.3% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Hasselbeck - 4/46 = 8.7% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Palmer - 3/30 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

McNabb - 4/40 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Brady - 5/48 = 10.4% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Peyton Manning - 6/48 = 12.5% (4 possibly due to end of season cameos)

Delhomme - 7/48 = 14.6%

Green - 7/48 = 14.6%

Vick - 6/35 = 17.1% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Favre - 9/48 = 18.8%

Eli Manning - 6/25 = 24%

Brees - 12/42 = 28.6% (1 due to injury)

Bledsoe - 16/48 = 33.3%

Wow, now I'm really not getting your point. Where is the evidence of these super low scores that Brooks regularly throws up to kill his fantasy teams?

How about the extraordinary highs you mentioned? Games with 20+ points:

Peyton Manning - 28/48 = 58.3%

Palmer - 15/30 = 50%

McNabb - 18/40 = 45% (12 with TO)

Green - 19/48 = 39.6%

Hasselbeck - 18/46 = 39.1%

Favre - 18/48 = 37.5%

Vick - 13/35 = 37.1%

Brooks - 16/45 = 35.6%

Brady - 17/48 = 35.4%

Brees - 14/42 = 33.3%

Bulger - 11/37 = 29.7%

Plummer - 14/48 = 29.2%

Delhomme - 13/48 = 27.1%

Bledsoe - 10/48 = 20.8%

Eli Manning - 5/25 = 20%

Games with 30+ points:

Peyton Manning - 9/48 = 18.8%

McNabb - 7/40 = 17.5% (all but 1 with TO)

Vick - 3/35 = 8.6%

Green - 4/48 - 8.3%

Favre - 3/48 = 6.3%

Bulger - 2/37 = 5.4%

Brees - 2/42 = 4.8%

Brooks - 2/45 = 4.4%

Hasselbeck - 2/46 = 4.3%

Plummer - 2/48 = 4.2%

Bledsoe - 2/48 = 4.2%

Eli Manning - 1/25 = 4%

Palmer - 1/30 = 3.3%

Brady - 1/48 = 2.1%

Delhomme - 0/48 = 0%

Looks like Brooks is middle of the road on high games. I really don't think your claim holds water. Unless you use a different scoring system. But even then, I doubt your claim really holds up, it just might mean Brooks looks like an average top 15 QB instead of an above average top 15 QB.

From 2003 to 2005, Brooks was #8 in fantasy points among QBs. From 2002 to 2005, Brooks was #5 in fantasy points among QBs. Using 2003 to 2005, as above, he was #8. In 2003 & 2004 combined, he was #5, which eliminates 2005, which I have explained earlier is IMO a bad season to use as a predictor for Brooks.

Again, #1 fantasy QB? No. But a very good fantasy QB? Yes, if he stays in the lineup, and particularly with a healthy Moss, Porter, Curry, and Jordan.

Nice homework.

 

[Tau837]

The Raiders offensive numbers under Shell

             CMP  ATT   YD    YPA   TD INT  ATT   YD    YPA  TD     YD   90           183  336  2885   8.59  19  10  496  2028  4.09  20   491391           220  414  2977   7.19  20  18  446  1706  3.83   8   468392           233  471  2950   6.26  20  23  434  1794  4.13   7   474493           281  495  3882   7.84  17  14  433  1425  3.29  10   530794           281  488  3556   7.29  22  16  428  1512  3.53   7   5068The Raiders had 581 and 591 attempts the last two years. I'm having trouble seeing where these two things are going to merge.

Interestingly enough, we have discussed this. From the Brooks Spotlight thread:

The Oakland Raiders under Art Shell always ranked in the bottom half in pass attempts.

1990 - 496 rushes, 336 pass attempts 1991 - 446, 414

1992 - 434, 471

1993 - 433, 495

1994 - 428, 488

never over 500 attempts, but 3 out of 5 years, more passes than rushes. i'm not sure what to read into that.

Apples and oranges. They didn't have Moss then. And they did have:1990

Marcus Allen & Bo Jackson at RB

Jay Schroeder at QB

Mervyn Fernandez was the leading WR

Only ran 832 combined passing & running plays

#4 defense

1991

Gaggle of unimpressive RBs including Allen & Roger Craig

Scroeder at QB

Fernandez was the leading WR

860 combined passing & running plays

#23 defense

1992

Another gaggle of unimpressive RBs including Allen & Eric Dickerson

Schroeder & Marinovich at QB

Tim Brown finally emerged as the leading WR, but with only 49 catches

905 combined passing & running plays

#8 defense

1993

More unimpressive RBs, led by Greg Robinson

Hostetler at QB

Tim Brown was a Pro Bowler at WR

928 combined passing & running plays

#10 defense

1994

Another gaggle of RBs, this time led by Harvey Williams

Hostetler at QB

Tim Brown again a Pro Bowl WR

916 combined passing & running plays

#12 defense

So... what to conclude from this data?

1. Oakland in the past 3 years has averaged 935 combined running & passing plays, compared to an average of 888 from 1990-1994. That is a positive [EDIT: for Brooks] in this comparison.

2. Oakland's defense was much better in 1990-1994 than it is likely to be this year... presumably that enabled Shell to be more conservative, even in the years in which he had unimpressive RBs. [EDIT: positive for Brooks]

3. In both years that the team had more rushing attempts under Shell, the QB & WRs were unimpressive, and in one of those years the team had a Pro Bowl RB (Jackson) and a HOF RB (Allen). [EDIT: at worst a wash for Brooks]

4. In the two years in which Shell had a good QB, Hostetler was QB3 and QB10. [EDIT: positive for Brooks, who is better than Hostetler IMO]

5. In those two years with Hostetler, Tim Brown was a Pro Bowler... but they never had a WR as good as Moss (if healthy). Nor did they have #2 & #3 WRs as good as Porter & Curry. [EDIT: positive for Brooks]

I really don't see all the downside so many of you are talking about here.

Not sure if this fully addresses your point, but it certainly sheds a bit of light on why things might not be the same this time around with Shell.

 

[MLBrandow]

JWB, that was pretty nice. I suppose in having owned Brooks it's hard to convey the frustration with him.

I suppose the only thing left to debunk is that his high/lows are much more difficult to predict than others.

I'm not sure this is entirely provable/disprovable though.

FWIW, you've actually convinced me of his value, because I'll pair Brooks with a guy like Brunell/Carr/Favre and take my chances with late QBs.

I've found I have a studlier team if I wait on QBs not named Manning/Palmer/Bulger.

I concede defeat on the grounds that I don't care to look up any more Brooks stats, and am not sure what to look for anyway.

Now the question goes to, how about Moss losing a step + Porter being traded + the offense featuring Jordan more than it did last year?

I suppose those are marginal concerns as with any other QB.

Either way, I am now convinced that at QB16, it is worth the risk to have a semi-inconsistent QB who puts up QB5 numbers.

You also have to love the fact that Brooks is much more mobile than Collins, so that alone should improve on Collins' numbers.

 

[ShotGunStyle]

Game to game he is erratic as hell and just as likely to lead you to a loss as help you win. I don't know about your league(s),but that won't cut it in ours most times.

This is probably the most important point. His high-lows are amazingly bad. I'm guessing most of the Brooks supporters in here would be first-time owners. If you graph out his per-game production over the past few years, what you end up with is a scatter-plot rather than a progression or some tangible reliability.

Interesting hypothesis. MLBrandow & BigRed, what exactly constitutes a low for a QB in your scoring systems?Let's look at a 15 point cutoff. How many times did Brooks and the other top QBs score less than 15 fantasy points? Let's use the top 15 QBs in FBG's current consensus rankings and the past 3 seasons (situations changed too much if we go further back, but sample set too small with fewer seasons) and FBG scoring:

Bulger - 6/37 = 16.2% (most encouraging stat I have seen yet for Kitna)

Peyton Manning - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Brady - 12/48 = 25% (better than this due to end of season cameos)

Hasselbeck - 13/46 = 28.3%

Brooks - 13/45 = 28.9%

Palmer - 9/30 = 30% (only 2 last year, so he is better than his ranking here)

McNabb - 12/40 = 30% (only 3 in 2 seasons with TO... will likely get worse)

Green - 15/48 = 31.3%

Plummer - 15/48 = 31.3%

Delhomme - 19/48 = 39.6%

Favre - 19/48 = 39.6%

Brees - 19/42 = 45.2%

Vick - 16/35 = 45.7%

Eli Manning - 13/25 = 52%

Bledsoe - 32/48 = 66.77%

Huh. Brooks certainly doesn't look like a guy with extraordinary lows there. How about games with less than 10 points? Those are certainly killers.

Brooks - 3/45 = 6.7%

Bulger - 3/37 = 8.1%

Plummer - 4/48 = 8.3% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Hasselbeck - 4/46 = 8.7% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Palmer - 3/30 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

McNabb - 4/40 = 10% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Brady - 5/48 = 10.4% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Peyton Manning - 6/48 = 12.5% (4 possibly due to end of season cameos)

Delhomme - 7/48 = 14.6%

Green - 7/48 = 14.6%

Vick - 6/35 = 17.1% (1 possibly due to end of season cameo)

Favre - 9/48 = 18.8%

Eli Manning - 6/25 = 24%

Brees - 12/42 = 28.6% (1 due to injury)

Bledsoe - 16/48 = 33.3%

Wow, now I'm really not getting your point. Where is the evidence of these super low scores that Brooks regularly throws up to kill his fantasy teams?

How about the extraordinary highs you mentioned? Games with 20+ points:

Peyton Manning - 28/48 = 58.3%

Palmer - 15/30 = 50%

McNabb - 18/40 = 45% (12 with TO)

Green - 19/48 = 39.6%

Hasselbeck - 18/46 = 39.1%

Favre - 18/48 = 37.5%

Vick - 13/35 = 37.1%

Brooks - 16/45 = 35.6%

Brady - 17/48 = 35.4%

Brees - 14/42 = 33.3%

Bulger - 11/37 = 29.7%

Plummer - 14/48 = 29.2%

Delhomme - 13/48 = 27.1%

Bledsoe - 10/48 = 20.8%

Eli Manning - 5/25 = 20%

Games with 30+ points:

Peyton Manning - 9/48 = 18.8%

McNabb - 7/40 = 17.5% (all but 1 with TO)

Vick - 3/35 = 8.6%

Green - 4/48 - 8.3%

Favre - 3/48 = 6.3%

Bulger - 2/37 = 5.4%

Brees - 2/42 = 4.8%

Brooks - 2/45 = 4.4%

Hasselbeck - 2/46 = 4.3%

Plummer - 2/48 = 4.2%

Bledsoe - 2/48 = 4.2%

Eli Manning - 1/25 = 4%

Palmer - 1/30 = 3.3%

Brady - 1/48 = 2.1%

Delhomme - 0/48 = 0%

Looks like Brooks is middle of the road on high games. I really don't think your claim holds water. Unless you use a different scoring system. But even then, I doubt your claim really holds up, it just might mean Brooks looks like an average top 15 QB instead of an above average top 15 QB.

From 2002 to 2005, Brooks was #5 in fantasy points among QBs. Using 2003 to 2005, as above, he was #8. In 2003 & 2004 combined, he was #5, which eliminates 2005, which I have explained earlier is IMO a bad season to use as a predictor for Brooks.

Again, #1 fantasy QB? No. But a very good fantasy QB? Yes, if he stays in the lineup, and particularly with a healthy Moss, Porter, Curry, and Jordan.

That's a great post. The most important one I think was Brooks only having 3 games out of 45 with less than 10 fantasy points. Brooks really has a bad reputation for being inconsistent and turnover prone and it's simply not supported by stats, just people's opinion. I wonder what he did to get on so many people's bad side.

 

[BigRed]

That is nice work on Brooks' stats. Although I notice going back 3 yrs includes his best year ever by far, at least INT-wise. You could make a case either way, but I wouldn't bet he's about to do that again. Even just look at his career year-to-year: he's just as likely to put up nearly as many INTs as TDs as he is to have one of those 24/8 kinda years.

Generally speaking, again my point was just refuting someone who said he's not a marginal starting QB. I say he is, largely given his risk factor(s) and overall lack of reliability. Course if you want to take a flyer on him or wait too long to draft a QB or whatever, sure he's worth a shot (esp as a backup).

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS4Gs5USLtg...=aaron%20brooks

:X

 

[MLBrandow]

Generally speaking, again my point was just refuting someone who said he's not a marginal starting QB. I say he is, largely given his risk factor(s) and overall lack of reliability. Course if you want to take a flyer on him or wait too long to draft a QB or whatever, sure he's worth a shot (esp as a backup).

I don't think your (and my former) opinion holds water anymore.Clearly he is not more inconsistent than any other QB of relative fantasy production. Averaging QB5-6, with marginal risk factors and that behemoth post of JWB's also very clearly shows that he is just as reliable, and in some cases more reliable than other fantasy QBs.

It would be different if my claims (and a few others who shared my opinions) had been correct in our assumptions of his deviate high-lows, but unless he just made up all of that data, it's simply not true.

And he has one more important advantage going for him, and that's that Kerry Collins and the Raiders last year were overrated on the whole, so most people don't want to "fall for it again". This should keep his ADP around that QB16 area during most drafts.

This sure did become a great thread

 

[Tau837]

unless he just made up all of that data, it's simply not true.

Nope, I got the data by browsing game logs for those 15 QBs at FBG.As for BigRed's comment about my only going back three years, I started out going back to 2002, because that's how far back FBG game logs go. But I stopped because so many of the QB situations were so different (no Eli, no Palmer, no Bulger, no Delhomme, Plummer in Arizona).I can tell you that it didn't change Brooks' numbers much. He had 5 of 16 games below 15 fantasy points that season, including a 14.2 and 14.8. And he had 1 of 16 games below 10 fantasy points. Meanwhile, Brooks had 7 of 16 games with 20+ fantasy points, including 2 with 30+.The conclusions were essentially the same with that data. Only Bulger, Peyton Manning, and Brady have been better at avoiding low scoring games, and only McNabb (with TO), Palmer, and Manning have been significantly better at producing high scoring games.Note that Culpepper was ommitted from my post above because he isn't in the top 15 consensus rankings. I assume his numbers would be better than Brooks' as well.

 

[ShotGunStyle]

That is nice work on Brooks' stats. Although I notice going back 3 yrs includes his best year ever by far, at least INT-wise. You could make a case either way, but I wouldn't bet he's about to do that again. Even just look at his career year-to-year: he's just as likely to put up nearly as many INTs as TDs as he is to have one of those 24/8 kinda years.

Generally speaking, again my point was just refuting someone who said he's not a marginal starting QB. I say he is, largely given his risk factor(s) and overall lack of reliability. Course if you want to take a flyer on him or wait too long to draft a QB or whatever, sure he's worth a shot (esp as a backup).

Three years ago was his best season if you went by QB rating. But this is about fantasy, and Brooks best season was in 2002, when he had 29 total TDs. Hell, even 2001 could be his best when he had 27 TDs and 350 yards rushing. He had four seasons with TD outputs of 27, 29, 26, 25, and some pretty good yardage totals as well. In 2001 he had over 4100 total yards, a Saints record.

 

[BigRed]

I repeat:

just look at his career year-to-year: he's just as likely to put up nearly as many INTs as TDs as he is to have one of those 24/8 kinda years.

In fact a bit more likely IMO.Again I might take a flyer on him as QB2, but no way do I want him as QB1. I'm in a 10-team league and there are definitely 10 other QBs I'd rather have as my starter. (Not many more though)

 

[John Mamula]

you guys are starting to convince me. even if he gets benched in week 10 or so, getting production that's in the QB5-QB8 range for those first 9 weeks in the 9th round is not bad. i'm starting to like the Culpepper/Brooks combo.

it's the same argument to be made for warner (although he is going sooner than i'd like to pay for him).

you get top 5 PPG production until he gets hurt. it doesn't matter if he misses the last 6 games because you should have a contingency plan going in.

this is the same case i make for westbrook in PPR leagues.

people think he was a bust last year because he got hurt. he was the #12 RB at the end of the year only playing a partial season. he was awesome for my team when he wasn't hurt. when he was i got gado so what did i really lose?

with brooks you will get top 8 QB production on a PPG basis at a late price. i love that.

 

[John Mamula]

looks like BigRed will not admit when his perception is wrong when the facts are presented to him.

but that's what makes fantasy football so great...people will ignore facts and take guys based on perception and let the guys who's facts back up their production fall.

 

[joffer]

the offensive coordinator, Tom Walsh, was he the OC under Shell in the early 90s too?

 

[MLBrandow]

I repeat:

just look at his career year-to-year:  he's just as likely to put up nearly as many INTs as TDs as he is to have one of those 24/8 kinda years.

In fact a bit more likely IMO.Again I might take a flyer on him as QB2, but no way do I want him as QB1. I'm in a 10-team league and there are definitely 10 other QBs I'd rather have as my starter. (Not many more though)

Being that his INTs per year were 22, 15, 8, 16, 17(13g), I'd say is much more likely to throw 17INTs than 8.That said, how does 3700/25/17 & 250/2 not look good? I'd like you to find 11 QBs whose stats project better next season, and I'll paypal you $11.

 

[Banger]

Lots of good analysis on this thread.

As a Brooks owner multiple times over the years I think part of the frustration in owning him would be that for 1st half he'd have 5-40 and two picks and you're watching your week go up in smoke. Then comes the furious (and meaningless NFL wise) comeback where he gets 2 td's and 150 yards in the last 8 minutes. You look back at the day and he ends up with 325-2-2 and overall a nice day but he would keep you sweating until the final whistle.....

 

[Tau837]

Lots of good analysis on this thread.

As a Brooks owner multiple times over the years I think part of the frustration in owning him would be that for 1st half he'd have 5-40 and two picks and you're watching your week go up in smoke. Then comes the furious (and meaningless NFL wise) comeback where he gets 2 td's and 150 yards in the last 8 minutes. You look back at the day and he ends up with 325-2-2 and overall a nice day but he would keep you sweating until the final whistle.....

Interesting theory. Kind of supported by the Data Dominator, but perhaps not exactly as you described it. Fantasy points by quarter for Brooks from 2002-2005:1st quarter - 205.9 (QB13)

2nd quarter - 371.65 (QB2)

3rd quarter - 248.35 (QB6)

4th quarter - 317.75 (QB3)

He is definitely a bit of a slow starter, but after the first quarter he's great.

 

[Sidewinder]

Being that his INTs per year were 22, 15, 8, 16, 17(13g), I'd say is much more likely to throw 17INTs than 8.

...

One note on that 8 INT season -- he also lost a dozen fumbles that year as well.

 

[BigRed]

looks like BigRed will not admit when his perception is wrong when the facts are presented to him.

but that's what makes fantasy football so great...people will ignore facts and take guys based on perception and let the guys who's facts back up their production fall.

Looks like you resort to personal attacks when your ability for rational discussion evaporates." "

 

[JAA]

2006 Brooks ADP means only upside for him this season. He is tremendous value at this point.

 

[John Mamula]

looks like BigRed will not admit when his perception is wrong when the facts are presented to him.

but that's what makes fantasy football so great...people will ignore facts and take guys based on perception and let the guys who's facts back up their production fall.

Looks like you resort to personal attacks when your ability for rational discussion evaporates." "

not a personal attack, gb.

i apologize if you feel that it was.

 

[BigRed]

not a personal attack, gb.

i apologize if you feel that it was.

thx - that's how it came off but no big.Should be interesting to see what kind of connection he and Moss can make...

 

[ShotGunStyle]

I heard he's already developed a strong friendship with Jerry Porter and Ronald Curry. Here's this cool video from NFL Network about where Brooks and Curry grew up in Virginia and some highlights.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8nuAtOpFxQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqjSB6wxJ2E

 

[MLBrandow]

looks like BigRed will not admit when his perception is wrong when the facts are presented to him.

but that's what makes fantasy football so great...people will ignore facts and take guys based on perception and let the guys who's facts back up their production fall.

Looks like you resort to personal attacks when your ability for rational discussion evaporates." "

He's simply pointing out that despite having refuted every claim you've made about why Brooks is not any good (fantasy-wise), you continue to hold to your faulty premises, and that it's guys like you, who ignore facts, who help guys like us grab the #4QB in the middle of the 9th round.Maybe he was picking on you a bit, but I do believe he's right, and being that it directly relates to the subject, I fail to see how it can be classified simply as a personal attack.

 

[Tau837]

looks like BigRed will not admit when his perception is wrong when the facts are presented to him.

but that's what makes fantasy football so great...people will ignore facts and take guys based on perception and let the guys who's facts back up their production fall.

Looks like you resort to personal attacks when your ability for rational discussion evaporates." "

He's simply pointing out that despite having refuted every claim you've made about why Brooks is not any good (fantasy-wise), you continue to hold to your faulty premises, and that it's guys like you, who ignore facts, who help guys like us grab the #4QB in the middle of the 9th round.Maybe he was picking on you a bit, but I do believe he's right, and being that it directly relates to the subject, I fail to see how it can be classified simply as a personal attack.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

 

[BigRed]

He's simply pointing out that despite having refuted every claim you've made about why Brooks is not any good (fantasy-wise), you continue to hold to your faulty premises, and that it's guys like you, who ignore facts, who help guys like us grab the #4QB in the middle of the 9th round.

Reading comprehension down?I never said "he isn't any good" nor did I ignore facts.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Good Jeff.I like Brooks a bunch this year, but he's obviously a longshot to finishing number 1. I'd next expect any QB to be more likely than not to finish the year number 1, and Brooks falls below quite a few others.

But Brooks is largely undervalued and a top 5 performance would be more than rewarding to those who draft him in the later rounds.

On a personal note -- and I recognize that this is pretty unfair -- I think Brooks is a pretty decent QB. Brooks' best game last season happenned to be against the Jets (hence the unfair comment). It was also the best game by an opposing QB all season against the Jets. Brooks' stats really told the story: 17-23, 181, 3/0. He was dominant and in control, smart and accurate.

If that was the only Brooks game you saw all year, you'd think he was the best QB in the league. That was one of the few Brooks games I did see last year, but at least I recognize that the stats reflected his play. It's not hard to assume that when he goes 18/34, 0/4, that he didn't play too well. But I think he's capable of being an excellent NFL and fantasy QB. I'm definitely curious to see how he does this year.

 

[ShotGunStyle]

Does anyone know where Brooks was after 13 games last year? I think he was top 12, and if he could be top 12 on that team, playing all their games on the road, there's no way in hell he could finish outside the top 10.

 

[Tau837]

Does anyone know where Brooks was after 13 games last year? I think he was top 12, and if he could be top 12 on that team, playing all their games on the road, there's no way in hell he could finish outside the top 10.

Per the Data Dominator, he was QB10 for weeks 1-13 last season, less than 8 fantasy points behind QB6. With the Katrina disaster, Deuce lost in week 5, and Horn missing 3 games and playing at less than 100% in others.

 

[a_f13nd]

Does anyone know where Brooks was after 13 games last year? I think he was top 12, and if he could be top 12 on that team, playing all their games on the road, there's no way in hell he could finish outside the top 10.

Per the Data Dominator, he was QB10 for weeks 1-13 last season, less than 8 fantasy points behind QB6. With the Katrina disaster, Deuce lost in week 5, and Horn missing 3 games and playing at less than 100% in others.

He definitely resurrected his season midway through. Early on, it was a real mess.

 

[jogima]

As a football player, Brooks is like a stock that's company has a great idea, but bad business model. You think, "man, this guy can be something. he can lead a team because he's got all the talent in the world". So you buy into it, hold it for a while, and then it disappoints, so you sell....all to buy back in later waiting for the big run. Then he starts throwing off his back foot, into triple coverage, and laughs everything off as if there's no care in the world. He's the ultimate frustration.

Having said that, as a fantasy QB he's going to make just enough big plays and put up plenty of yards mixed in with the a few yards on the ground and the occasional rushing TD to make an owner forget the fact that he's just not that great of a leader. He's going to be in a similar offense in terms of talent, so I expect him to put up good enough numbers for everyone to be talking the same thing next year. Put him as your 6-8 fantasy QB.

 

[ChampBailey24]

People are calling Brooks a marginal QB1?

Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------2000 0 29 3362001 59 6 212002 44 6 362003 26 5 442004 32 8 462005 0 16 130--------------------------------------------------With the exception of his rookie year and last year, he is much more than that. There is a lot of perception not being backed up by facts in this thread.

In our 10-team league those rankings above mean the best he has EVER done was a middle-of-the-pack starting QB (only slightly better in a 12-team one). That's pretty much in the marginal area.

PS and oh btw most people play H2H and in such games just looking at final rankings/stats is misleading. Game to game he is erratic as hell and just as likely to lead you to a loss as help you win. I don't know about your league(s),but that won't cut it in ours most times.

What the hell...you say he's a middle of the pack starter so he's pretty much erratic. Look, you might hate him as a NFL QB but your opinion is clearly biased.

 

[Marc Levin]

People are calling Brooks a marginal QB1?

Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------2000 0 29 3362001 59 6 212002 44 6 362003 26 5 442004 32 8 462005 0 16 130--------------------------------------------------With the exception of his rookie year and last year, he is much more than that. There is a lot of perception not being backed up by facts in this thread.

In our 10-team league those rankings above mean the best he has EVER done was a middle-of-the-pack starting QB (only slightly better in a 12-team one). That's pretty much in the marginal area.

PS and oh btw most people play H2H and in such games just looking at final rankings/stats is misleading. Game to game he is erratic as hell and just as likely to lead you to a loss as help you win. I don't know about your league(s),but that won't cut it in ours most times.

What the hell...you say he's a middle of the pack starter so he's pretty much erratic. Look, you might hate him as a NFL QB but your opinion is clearly biased.

can't argue with that.Tom Brady is a middle of the pack fantasy starter too - last year was an aberration inhis statistical performance year to year.

Also, in 10-team leagues, QB is meaningless unless you have Peyton. Meaningless b/c there are WAY too many QBs to draft and WAY too few teams to start them on - I'd never be in a 10-teamn league unless it was start-2 QBs.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Well I suppose if Rackers can go from joke to stud kicker virtually overnight, anything is possible. I mean, hell I've seen Jim Everett go first overall in fantasy drafts in my time. That being said, um, not likely...

-QG

 

[a_f13nd]

Well I suppose if Rackers can go from joke to stud kicker virtually overnight, anything is possible. I mean, hell I've seen Jim Everett go first overall in fantasy drafts in my time. That being said, um, not likely...-QG

Can we at least agree he can't be #1 if your league penalizes for turnovers?

 

[Britney Spears]

a top 5 performance would be more than rewarding to those who draft him in the later rounds.I recognize that the stats reflected his play. It's not hard to assume that when he goes 18/34, 0/4, that he didn't play too well. I'm definitely curious to see how he does this year.

Wow, these are some tidbits of some serious fantasy insight. Good god.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

After seeing last night's game, some guys in a van are headed your way to fit you with a straight jacket.

No way in God's green Earth that A-Brooks will be the #1 FF QB this season.

 

[ShotGunStyle]

After seeing last night's game, some guys in a van are headed your way to fit you with a straight jacket.No way in God's green Earth that A-Brooks will be the #1 FF QB this season.

Yeah, the guy threw only three passes but still threw the only TD pass for either side in the whole game. Terrible.

 

[cantrell]

Why did the Raiders pick up this guy? None of their QB's look good, but I say throw Walter in there as a starter. They aren't going anywhere this season anyway.

 

[TheLastDispatch]

After seeing last night's game, some guys in a van are headed your way to fit you with a straight jacket.No way in God's green Earth that A-Brooks will be the #1 FF QB this season.

Yeah, the guy threw only three passes but still threw the only TD pass for either side in the whole game. Terrible.

Well you could also look at it as he only threw 3 passes and managed to have one intercepted and one incomplete.Either way, it's only a preseason game. ONE preseason game. It's nothing to jump ship about. I liked Brooks value as a later round QB pick with good upside before the game, and I still do now. If the rest of the preseason looks similar, however, I might drop him down a few rankings.

 

[Mario Kart]

Well you could also look at it as he only threw 3 passes and managed to have one intercepted and one incomplete.Either way, it's only a preseason game. ONE preseason game. It's nothing to jump ship about. I liked Brooks value as a later round QB pick with good upside before the game, and I still do now. If the rest of the preseason looks similar, however, I might drop him down a few rankings.

So... he was 2/3 with 1 TD?

 

[ShotGunStyle]

After seeing last night's game, some guys in a van are headed your way to fit you with a straight jacket.No way in God's green Earth that A-Brooks will be the #1 FF QB this season.

Yeah, the guy threw only three passes but still threw the only TD pass for either side in the whole game. Terrible.

Well you could also look at it as he only threw 3 passes and managed to have one intercepted and one incomplete.Either way, it's only a preseason game. ONE preseason game. It's nothing to jump ship about. I liked Brooks value as a later round QB pick with good upside before the game, and I still do now. If the rest of the preseason looks similar, however, I might drop him down a few rankings.

The guy threw two deep passes and a TD and he's getting criticized. It's like this guy has somehow screwed everybody on this board in a way they have to hold a lifelong grudge.