Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Brady at (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Wrigley
- Start date
Keys Myaths
Pokerguy
Yes, it's a bad pick.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
In a 2QB league, not at all.
In a 6 pts / TD, its debatable, but if you project him some 10+ TD ahead of QB2, its not a bad pick there, no matter what conventional wisdom says.
I don't have him outdistancing the QBs by that much, and personally wouldn't take him there.
In a 6 pts / TD, its debatable, but if you project him some 10+ TD ahead of QB2, its not a bad pick there, no matter what conventional wisdom says.
I don't have him outdistancing the QBs by that much, and personally wouldn't take him there.
Clifton
Footballguy
Did the NE offense get worse during the off-season? Brady's as sure a bet as anyone in the game to produce. At #9 he's pretty much risk free and you can grab a decent RB on the turn. If Brady fell to me at 10 I would take him. If you want to make statements about Brady's numbers plummeting give a decent reason. Hint, a hunch isn't a good reason.
Buckeyedawgs
Footballguy
Brady will never make it to 9 in a 2 qb league. Tradationally the top 2 qb's go first 5 picks. I am thinking Manning might make it to 9 this year because everyone worried about his knee. I will find out Friday night! He has never made it past the top 3 last few years!
Why is the assitant coaches forum robbing the Shark space lately?
Why is the assitant coaches forum robbing the Shark space lately?
Road Warriors
Footballguy
My projections are just that... mine. You don't have to agree with them. I see Brady throwing 35-38 TDs this year, but I also have Romo, Manning and Brees in the 30+ range. If I can take one of the others in 3, I'd pass on Brady in the 1st. I don't expect the gap between QB1 and QB2-4 to be as large as it was last year. As for reasons that Brady & the Patriots won't throw for 50 TDs again? While I love the Pats offense, record setting performances are not the norm. The #1 reason I don't see a repeat is the health of the O-line. Neal is on the PUP, Light hasn't been seen all camp. The line was absolutely huge in the 1st half of the season, giving Brady 4 - 5 seconds to survey the field and allow someone to come free. If that unit is dinged up, there is no chance the Pats passing attack is as potent as it was in the first 8 games last year. It will still be the top attack in the game, but I don't think they'll be +25% over the next best.Clifton said:
My league is 6 pts/passing TD, and using FBG projections, Brady is the #4 overall, scoring 346 total points and the dropoff to the #2 (Romo) is 55 points.
With 0.5 ppr, the top 10 are:
LT
Westbrook
AP
Brady
Moss
Jackson
Barber
Addai
Owens
Gore
Just passing along the info...
With 0.5 ppr, the top 10 are:
LT
Westbrook
AP
Brady
Moss
Jackson
Barber
Addai
Owens
Gore
Just passing along the info...
sdsjr3
Footballguy
Yeah, I have Brady and Romo in a tier by themselves and then a slight dropoff to Brees/Manning/Palmer/Roeth in that order.
that being said, I can see an argument either way for Brady. On one hand, I think Palmer and Ben offer great value where they are being drafted. But at the same time, while I see all of the QBs above being in the neighborhood of 3800 yards and 28+tds you have to think that Brady is the best bit to surpass that mark. Which to some would make him worthy of a first round pick in any format. I'm not going to be the guy to draft him simply because I would prefer taking a chance or Palmer or Ben later but I wouldn't knock anyone for taking Brady early either.
that being said, I can see an argument either way for Brady. On one hand, I think Palmer and Ben offer great value where they are being drafted. But at the same time, while I see all of the QBs above being in the neighborhood of 3800 yards and 28+tds you have to think that Brady is the best bit to surpass that mark. Which to some would make him worthy of a first round pick in any format. I'm not going to be the guy to draft him simply because I would prefer taking a chance or Palmer or Ben later but I wouldn't knock anyone for taking Brady early either.
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Clifton knows numbers. Its fine if some want to assume continuation of the trend; they may end up big winners.However, as RW pointed out, you have to believe that Brady will outperform Manning, Romo and Brees among others by +10 TDs.Clifton said:
Then, a further consideration of 2007 season split shows you what you can expect out of the 08 Pats. "Cold weather" is not the only reason New England's stormtrooper offense slowed down by year end.
I've got it, roughly speaking,
Brady 38 TDs
Romo 34 TDs
Brees 31 TDs
Manning 30 TDs
There are also a couple "stealth" QB candidates who can make it to 30 TDs, but since we all know who they are, let's not mention them.
Lastly, depending on the shady health of NE's and Indy's Olines, chaos could ensue, which is why Romo and Brees are the better rosterable candidates.
Depending on your scoring format and roster requirements, getting Brady with the 9th pick is good.
In the league that I draft this coming Tuesday that is a 12 team, 6 pt for all TD, start two WR and no PPR, Brady comes out as #2 on the VBD. That is with
Brady downgraded to 35 TD, which I think is a reasonable mid-range expectation (some would say it's too low). If I run the same league with 4pts for passing
touchdowns and six for all others, he still comes up 5th.
I probably will not take him if I get the 2nd pick because I prefer QBBC, but would not think anyone made a serious mistake if they took him in the first
round.
In the league that I draft this coming Tuesday that is a 12 team, 6 pt for all TD, start two WR and no PPR, Brady comes out as #2 on the VBD. That is with
Brady downgraded to 35 TD, which I think is a reasonable mid-range expectation (some would say it's too low). If I run the same league with 4pts for passing
touchdowns and six for all others, he still comes up 5th.
I probably will not take him if I get the 2nd pick because I prefer QBBC, but would not think anyone made a serious mistake if they took him in the first
round.
conan2
Footballguy
I've got Brady at 4200/35, and the rest of the big 4 at 4000/30. So that's decent value...but then sitting at the 9-spot you've got to realize if you don't take a QB in the first two rounds, you're probably not going to see any of the big 4 in round 3. I really think this year taking QB/WR or WR/WR in the first and second, especially from a late draft slot, is a good way to go. There is a lot of RB value to be found in 3-6.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think at 9 he is perhaps the safest pick you could have. Depending on who all is available at that spot (I am guessing maybe a Lynch or Gore or someone of that nature...Brady is far more of a guarantee to not end up killing your team than those guys.
I would not expect him to carry your team this year like he did last year, but if you draft well in the following rounds he will be as good of a starting QB as you will want, I would imagine. Lynch or Gore could blow up and dominate this year but they could also suck (as many of the late 1st round RBs did last year). That same thought does not seem to exist with Brady.
I am not sure if this is a play to compete vs play to win argument, but I think it is close enough. Brady pretty much guarantees you will compete.
I would not expect him to carry your team this year like he did last year, but if you draft well in the following rounds he will be as good of a starting QB as you will want, I would imagine. Lynch or Gore could blow up and dominate this year but they could also suck (as many of the late 1st round RBs did last year). That same thought does not seem to exist with Brady.
I am not sure if this is a play to compete vs play to win argument, but I think it is close enough. Brady pretty much guarantees you will compete.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
The problem with taking a QBin the first round (specifially very early in the first round) is that histroically QBs that had record breaking seasons struggle to repeat those numbers again the following season). The hows and whys of that are less important as the end results.
I agree that in theory and on paper the Pats offense hasn't changed much, but to expect the same results is playing with fire. I would pencil Brady in for 4200/35 if he and the other main players in the offense stay healthy. If you get better numbers than that, great, that's gravy. Even those numbers would be better than any other QB historically not named Favre.
Alos historically, for whatever reason, first round QBs have had problems staying upright and playing 16 games. That to me is a coincidence and certainly one cannot predict Brady will get hurt. However, it's just another risk you take in drafting a QB that high. I understand that any first round pick (especially RB) can get hurt. However, you can get decent starting RBs in the first round. But probably not in the 6-8th rounds. You CAN get decent QBs that late, and that fact could make dafting a QB early less enticing.
I won't tell anyone whent ot draft a QB, but I can say let the buyer beware based on past results. There have been a ton of heated discussion on this type of thing in the past (mostly with Manning in the first not Brady). I suggest people search for those threads to get a full perspective on the topic with a lot of good contributions from a lot of Shark Pool regulars.
I agree that in theory and on paper the Pats offense hasn't changed much, but to expect the same results is playing with fire. I would pencil Brady in for 4200/35 if he and the other main players in the offense stay healthy. If you get better numbers than that, great, that's gravy. Even those numbers would be better than any other QB historically not named Favre.
Alos historically, for whatever reason, first round QBs have had problems staying upright and playing 16 games. That to me is a coincidence and certainly one cannot predict Brady will get hurt. However, it's just another risk you take in drafting a QB that high. I understand that any first round pick (especially RB) can get hurt. However, you can get decent starting RBs in the first round. But probably not in the 6-8th rounds. You CAN get decent QBs that late, and that fact could make dafting a QB early less enticing.
I won't tell anyone whent ot draft a QB, but I can say let the buyer beware based on past results. There have been a ton of heated discussion on this type of thing in the past (mostly with Manning in the first not Brady). I suggest people search for those threads to get a full perspective on the topic with a lot of good contributions from a lot of Shark Pool regulars.
Not trying to play devils advocate here, but looking at the rankings, it seems that on avg the staffers predicted Brady to go for 4230/36 (the 36 is actually 35.6 which included a random rushing TD on some projections).This is very close to the 4200/35 you are saying as well.And all of those projections *should* include the hesitations you mentioned in your post, regarding following a record breaking season and getting injured.So if those numbers are accurate as to what Brady "most likely will do" considering every aspect possible, then isn't there a certain point when you just trust the numbers?I realize every prediction is just that. But, IF Brady puts up those numbers and IF everyone else puts up the numbers they are projected to put up, then Brady could be (in some leagues depending on scoring) a #2 (using aburt19's scoring) or a #4 (using my scoring) overall pick.So considering that, the only thing that should stop people from taking him where he is projected (especially if you are using YOUR OWN projections, which in this case yours are very close to the staff) is the simple fact that you don't believe in taking a QB in round 1, and would never do it, no matter how high the guy is ranked.Otherwise, if you trust your projections and use your own league scoring, and he is the #4 or whatever (based on VBD), then I don't see why you wouldn't take him.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
IMO, it's not quite that simple. Yes, everyone's projections are different. If in this case we have Brady pegged at 4200/35 but there are a lot of other QBs close to that (Romo, Manning, Brees for starters) and the guys behind them also scoring fairly well, Brady's scoring dominance should be way less than last season.HOWEVER . . . the other issue is having to make up for what you would have gotten had the RB you would have taken scored at the level he was projected at. That's why I said "very early" in the first round was an even dicier proposition. If for argument's sake you choose to forgo a RB pegged for 300 fantasy points and instead have to settle for one that is projected at 150, you've now pretty much lost any advantage you had in taking Brady (if not more) unless Brady outperforms his projection.Again looking historically, there are not a ton of QBs that end up with a value of 150 points. I'm not saying it won't happen or that it can't happen, but passing on a 300 point scoring RB doesn't make a hole lot of sense in my book. You can find decent QB options later. But you find a true stud RB rounds and rounds later.But if people are confident that Brady can put up 4500/40 this year, by all means the numbers will likely support taking him in the first round (and maybe in the Top 3-5 picks).
I agree that based on the projections and the VBD position, Brady is a very good choice at pick 9. Again, I probably wouldn't do it, but would not think thatsomeone who did it was making a poor choice.I am of the group that will not take a QB in round 1 because I do believe that it's possible to pick up a QB that can put up top 5 numbers in the 6th round(which I did with Roethlisberger last year) or play a QBBC.But I have seen teams that take a QB in round 1 and won the league. There isn't any one strategy that guarantees success. In my experience, the draftis normally won in the middle rounds (4-8), although it is possible to lose it by really poor selections/injuries to players in the first two rounds.
All valid points. I guess maybe my concern is more of a question than trying to argue against your point.I thought that the "tools", such as the DD and VBD application took all of that stuff you mentioned into consideration?In other words, the fact that you won't get as good of a RB and the fact that the other QBs projections are what they are, all of that is factored into the formulas/programs.So if you #1 agree w/ the projections (or adjust them to your liking) and then #2 run the software, and it tells you that taking Brady w/ the #4 overall is the right move (because apparently if everyone lives up to the projections, you'll still come out on top even w/ the RB dropoff and the other QB rankings), then the only reason you shouldn't is that you don't want a QB in round 1 because you don't want one.I'm not talking about anyone out performing projections, that adds a different twist to it entirely. If you think some of the RBs or some of the other QBs are MORE LIKELY to outperform their projection than Brady is, I can see why you bump him down a bit. But if you take it at face value, that your projections are your projections and you're sticking to them, and Brady is spit out as the #4, are you saying that the VBD isn't accurate? Or do you think it's something to ignore and stick to traditional drafting logic?Maybe that is more what I am asking.
OK, good to know - so you don't really follow the VBD when it comes down to the fine line, you like to go w/ your gut and your strategy instead. Even if you agree w/ every single statistical projection for every single player and Brady is a 1st round QB based on that, you'll skip him because of your strategy? I don't see a problem w/ it, like I said in my first post, if someone agrees w/ VBD theory completely and Brady is a 1st round pick, I would think that they take him.But if someone is like you, and values your own personal strategy and "just refuse to take a QB in the first round, no matter what", then you ignore his VBD position.
OK, good to know - so you don't really follow the VBD when it comes down to the fine line, you like to go w/ your gut and your strategy instead. Even if you agree w/ every single statistical projection for every single player and Brady is a 1st round QB based on that, you'll skip him because of your strategy?
I don't see a problem w/ it, like I said in my first post, if someone agrees w/ VBD theory completely and Brady is a 1st round pick, I would think that they take him.
But if someone is like you, and values your own personal strategy and "just refuse to take a QB in the first round, no matter what", then you ignore his VBD position.
I will probably state this poorly and get blasted on it, but here is my thinking on it.
If I draft 10th and the owner in front of me picks Brady, he has a big advantage in having Brady over the QB that I will select in the 6th or 7th rounds. But
to offset that I am ahead at almost every other starting position and I believe that offsets the advantage. The advantage that I get from selecting a RB in
round 1 versus the RB that the owner drafting 9th gets in round 2 isn't very big because those players are selected close together. But the player that I
select in the 2nd round should offer significantly more value than the player that the 9th owner selects at that position. The same thing occurs betweent he
player that I select in the 4th round versus the player that he selects in the 5th round.
Using VBD and my scoring rules, there are four QB that should be taken in the first two rounds and I won't end up with any of them. I agree with Yudkin
that the difference between Brady and Romo, Brees and Manning will be a lot less this year than last year.
We'll see how it works out.
I don't see a problem w/ it, like I said in my first post, if someone agrees w/ VBD theory completely and Brady is a 1st round pick, I would think that they take him.
But if someone is like you, and values your own personal strategy and "just refuse to take a QB in the first round, no matter what", then you ignore his VBD position.
I will probably state this poorly and get blasted on it, but here is my thinking on it.
If I draft 10th and the owner in front of me picks Brady, he has a big advantage in having Brady over the QB that I will select in the 6th or 7th rounds. But
to offset that I am ahead at almost every other starting position and I believe that offsets the advantage. The advantage that I get from selecting a RB in
round 1 versus the RB that the owner drafting 9th gets in round 2 isn't very big because those players are selected close together. But the player that I
select in the 2nd round should offer significantly more value than the player that the 9th owner selects at that position. The same thing occurs betweent he
player that I select in the 4th round versus the player that he selects in the 5th round.
Using VBD and my scoring rules, there are four QB that should be taken in the first two rounds and I won't end up with any of them. I agree with Yudkin
that the difference between Brady and Romo, Brees and Manning will be a lot less this year than last year.
We'll see how it works out.
Tanner9919
Footballguy
thats optimistic, given the foot 'injury' and the decline of his O-line..even if he's healthy, I can't see him passing for more than 3900/27
back to an average-joe type of season for Brady..just my opinion, I don't think NE passes NEARLY as much as last season...
conan2
Footballguy
I think 3900/27 is absolutely Brady's floor, barring injury. He was putting up those numbers back when he had just a bunch of guys for receivers. Now he's got Moss. He's the reason for the big spike in Brady's stats last year and he's still on the team. I personally think the foot is a complete non-issue...but we'll see when KC comes to town. The decline of the o-line is a concern. However, the return of Matt Light makes a big difference. We'll see if Light plays tonight. I don't think there is any reason to believe the run-pass ratio will be drastically different than last year. They probably won't pass as much, but they will still pass alot. That's just the bread and butter for this team, and even with the addition of Jordan, passing is still going to be how this team wins games. Also, the defense has not looked all that great so far, which may mean there will be more pressure to pass that last year. Furthermore, I think his upside is great, while the downside is still pretty solid. 40+ is certainly not out of the question, and I think your prediction of 3900/27 is pretty much the least you will get.thats optimistic, given the foot 'injury' and the decline of his O-line..
even if he's healthy, I can't see him passing for more than 3900/27
back to an average-joe type of season for Brady..just my opinion, I don't think NE passes NEARLY as much as last season...
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
Surely you're kidding here. Let's say you have a 4cyl Camry and take it out on the track.. it peaks out at 125mph. Not bad
even if he's healthy, I can't see him passing for more than 3900/27
back to an average-joe type of season for Brady..just my opinion, I don't think NE passes NEARLY as much as last season...
You run it again... it hits 129mph... better. Then you run a 3rd time.... only this time you drop in a V8 Hemi motor and it hits 175mph.
What is the most likely outcome if you were to run the Camry a 4th time in it's current state?
a) 125 mph
b) 129 mph
c) 175 mph
Brady still has Moss and Welker compared the the scrubs of previous years. There are no other drastic changes that enable you to do anything but throw out the old data.
Sure.. the Camry may only hit 160-165 this next lap but it sure isn't going back to 125mph.
I'm willing to wager any amount of money you want (while giving you 3/2 odds) that Brady surpasses 27 touchdowns this year.
Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
switz
Footballguy
But that is much much higher than Brady has ever done before... AND the Patriots lost the SB because they became a pass happy team last season. They added Jordan, and will return to a team that runs, throws "safe" passes, and wins the game in the trenches (if they can, their OL is shot). Too many things in NE lead me to believe you'll see a tremendous drop in pass attempts for Brady. I could see 28-30 TDs, but not 35.Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
[icon]
Insoxicated
Before.... he got Moss and Welker as targets?
The pats were 18-0 as a pass happy team last year. Pretty sure the pass happy offense was a success. They lost the superbowl because the Giants had the talent and gameplan to eke out a last second victory over a dinged up brady and company.Come on switz...
David Yudkin
Footballguy
NE lost the SB because of a fluke play to Tyree. NE got in a position to lose the SB because they did not change their game plan to enhance their protection of Brady. I don't think they lost the SB because of their running game.For those that haven't looked at the NE rushing stats over the years, the Pats have not been a great running attack with the exception of Dillon's one big year.But that is much much higher than Brady has ever done before... AND the Patriots lost the SB because they became a pass happy team last season. They added Jordan, and will return to a team that runs, throws "safe" passes, and wins the game in the trenches (if they can, their OL is shot). Too many things in NE lead me to believe you'll see a tremendous drop in pass attempts for Brady. I could see 28-30 TDs, but not 35.Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
With Moss and Welker on board their passing game was phenomenal. All of Brady's numbers from before then to me are not really relevant. While I don't see Brady at 4700/50 again, I don't think his baseline from his early years is accurate as a comparison.
The Pats have been practicing the dink and dunk passing attack again due to the injuries to their OL and to help combat the blitz. So you may be right in that regard. But I don't see the team relying on the run any more than they did last year . . . when they ranked in the Top 10 in rushing attempts.
Clifton
Footballguy
They lost the SB because they were pass happy? Winning in the trenches?? A tremendous drop is pass attempts???They absolutely blew teams out of the water and IIRC Maroney was moving the rock pretty well on the ground late last year.But that is much much higher than Brady has ever done before... AND the Patriots lost the SB because they became a pass happy team last season. They added Jordan, and will return to a team that runs, throws "safe" passes, and wins the game in the trenches (if they can, their OL is shot). Too many things in NE lead me to believe you'll see a tremendous drop in pass attempts for Brady. I could see 28-30 TDs, but not 35.Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
When the biggest weapons they have are Brady, Moss and Welker why would they be returning to the trenches to win games? Because they lost one game? The goal is to win games and they won quite a few chucking the ball around last year. These guys are their biggest weapons and they will utilize them. Lamont Jordan and Sammy Morris are going to have the Pats rushing in the trenches all year? They'll try and come out like they did last year and ring teams up.
Road Warriors
Footballguy
I agree with some of your analysis, but don't come to the same conclusion. I think they will be more balanced this year. But this offense is built to short pass, screen, take a shot here & there. It is not built to power run. I think they'll move the ball with a mix of play action, draws, screens & lots of short stuff, but when it comes to punching it in, I don't see the power running attack it would take when things get tighter down on the goalline. I think NE scores about 55 TDs this year with a rough breakdown of 35 passing 15 rushing & 5 DT/ST scores.But that is much much higher than Brady has ever done before... AND the Patriots lost the SB because they became a pass happy team last season. They added Jordan, and will return to a team that runs, throws "safe" passes, and wins the game in the trenches (if they can, their OL is shot). Too many things in NE lead me to believe you'll see a tremendous drop in pass attempts for Brady. I could see 28-30 TDs, but not 35.Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
Judge Smails
Footballguy
Switz, I think that's a little simplistic. They lost for a lot of reasons. Giants played them tough in week 17 I believe, gave them confidence. Brady was not a 100%. They may have been "tight" going for history. But mostly it was because they got absolutely owned in the trenches. Giants D front 4 played out of their minds. I took the Giants on the money line, thinking they were probably the one team that could beat NE that day. NE will adjust. They'll mix things up. Brady may not throw quite as much. But, unless they face teams that could put Straham/Osi like pressure with 4 pass rushers they will eat people's lunch with the likes of Moss and Welker, again. Pats do not have a great running game. 34 TD passes equates to 2 a game for Brady. I think it's highly likely he'll do that.But that is much much higher than Brady has ever done before... AND the Patriots lost the SB because they became a pass happy team last season. They added Jordan, and will return to a team that runs, throws "safe" passes, and wins the game in the trenches (if they can, their OL is shot). Too many things in NE lead me to believe you'll see a tremendous drop in pass attempts for Brady. I could see 28-30 TDs, but not 35.Picking Brady based on 35 TD is a considerable discount from last seasons stats of 50 TD.
Alias
Footballguy
One thing Brady has been good at and is projected by most this year is his low INT/TD ratio. So if you are in a league that penalizes -2 or -3 per Int then he has even greater value (particularly 6 TD leagues).
Conversely Warner could be a much better pick 10++ rounds later, similar ceiling but lower floor and hence riskier pick. But when you compare the cost of a first round pick vs. an 11th (?) you can see why people here would claim 9th overall is a mistake.
Conversely Warner could be a much better pick 10++ rounds later, similar ceiling but lower floor and hence riskier pick. But when you compare the cost of a first round pick vs. an 11th (?) you can see why people here would claim 9th overall is a mistake.
Chaka
Footballguy
I agree. It's the gap between QB4 & QB5 that you should think about.
JerseyPaul
Footballguy
Here's my view. Comes the week you play against Brady you say to yourself... oops, this is going to be tough. Say that #9 team took Lynch instead, you still worried?
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Say the team with Brady has to start Justin Fargas and the Lynch owner starts Brees. We can go around and around ont his one and come up with any combination of outcomes.
theToes
Footballguy
Here is my opinion
If Brady is there When I pick (5th in a 12 teamer) I'm taking him.
I'm in a 6 pt td league with yardage bonuses at 300 yards and ppr and Brady will be a great start. Top Qb's fly off the board in this leagus and it is not out of the qustion that by the end of the 2nd 6-7 qb's will have been drafted.
I did a few mocks and I like what I see with going Brady first. Grab a top WR in the 2nd and go for the best rb in the 3rd and fill in the rb slots later in the draft.
I know this goes against a lot of opinions on these boards but rb's just don't carry the value in my league. Of the top 30 scorers in my league last year, only 2 were rb's. There 7 WR's in the top 30 and the rest were qb's.
It's pretty important to have a top qb in my league and manning, brees, romo will not make it back to me in the 2nd.
If Brady is there When I pick (5th in a 12 teamer) I'm taking him.
I'm in a 6 pt td league with yardage bonuses at 300 yards and ppr and Brady will be a great start. Top Qb's fly off the board in this leagus and it is not out of the qustion that by the end of the 2nd 6-7 qb's will have been drafted.
I did a few mocks and I like what I see with going Brady first. Grab a top WR in the 2nd and go for the best rb in the 3rd and fill in the rb slots later in the draft.
I know this goes against a lot of opinions on these boards but rb's just don't carry the value in my league. Of the top 30 scorers in my league last year, only 2 were rb's. There 7 WR's in the top 30 and the rest were qb's.
It's pretty important to have a top qb in my league and manning, brees, romo will not make it back to me in the 2nd.
Last edited by a moderator:
I probably should not be responding to this because I agree with you that Brady holds value even potentially as early as at pick 5, but the bolded argument that you make here actually tells me that good RB's hold more value than QB's. If there are that many QBs in the top 30, then it is clear that even with a lower level QB (say #12) you are still getting a guy in the top 30. With a RB, you truly have to have one of the best ones to get the sort of value that will scare a person week in and week out.
theToes
Footballguy
I understand what you are saying but I just don't like the drop off after Sjax.The first 4 picks will more than likely be LT, ADP, Westbook, Sjax. I am just not that sure of the next group of backs (addai, gore, mb3) I think I can do better with the combo of brady, a top WR and a decent rb with all of the value at rb in the 4th - 7th rounds.
