Brooks is quickly off and running with the Raiders (1 Viewer)

[joffer]

I'm not a big Brooks fan. In fact, i think i only own him as a #2 or #3 QB in one or two of my 8 dynasty leagues. However, has anyone thought that its possible Brooks is seeing this as a new start, and his last chance, and could actually have a solid year? I mean, he does have more talent at WR than he's ever had before IMO. And other QBs have made some impressive strides later in their careers. Just saying, he COULD surprise. I sure wouldn't want him as my #1 QB though....

for me, i don't think it's a question of motivation for Brooks, i just don't think he's very good. but anything could happen.as long as you've got a decent back-up plan, Brooks does offer some nice value where he's going right now.

 

[Tau837]

Jeff Hostetler was QB3 and QB10 under Shell.  Jeff Hostetler.  Enough said.

i'm really not arguing that Brooks won't put up decent fantasy numbers while he's playing, however, the year that Hos was QB3 (1993), the Raiders had little in the way of a running game
+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Name                 |  G |  RSH  YARD   AVG  TD  |  REC  YARD   AVG  TD |+----------------------+----+-----------------------+----------------------+| Nick Bell            | 10 |   67   180   2.7   1  |   11   111  10.1   0 || Randy Jordan         | 10 |   12    33   2.8   0  |    4    42  10.5   0 || Napoleon McCallum    | 13 |   37   114   3.1   3  |    2     5   2.5   0 || Tyrone Montgomery    | 12 |   37   106   2.9   0  |   10    43   4.3   0 || Greg Robinson        | 12 |  156   591   3.8   1  |   15   142   9.5   0 || Steve Smith          | 16 |   47   156   3.3   0  |   18   187  10.4   0 |and Hostetler ranked there on the strength of his 5 rushing TDs, not on the strength of his 3200 passing yards and 14 passing TDs.

This is true. When Hos was QB3 and QB10, the Raiders rushing game was ranked 26th & 21st, respectively. Then again:1. Last year the Raiders running game ranked 29th. I expect some improvement with Shell's arrival, but not enough to render the comparisons with Hostetler's situation invalid.

2. In those good years for Hostetler, the Raiders defense was ranked 10th & 12th. Last year, the Raiders defense ranked 27th. Again, I wouldn't be surprised to see some improvement, but I seriously doubt they'll be top 12. So in comparison to Hostetler, this should lead to a need for higher scoring and thus for more passing and rushing attempts for Brooks.

As for Hostetler's rushing being important, Brooks is no slouch at rushing himself. His numbers are posted in other threads, but he should rush for 200+/2+. Meanwhile, Brooks is a much better passer than Hostetler ever was. And while Hostetler had Tim Brown, he's no Moss, and Hos never had WR2/3 as good as Porter & Curry or a receiving RB as good as Jordan.

Brooks is better than Hostetler was and his situation is better than Hostetler's was under Shell. So the fact that Hostetler was QB3 and QB10 under Shell is a great sign for Brooks.

 

[joffer]

Meanwhile, Brooks is a much better passer than Hostetler ever was.

that's where we disagree. i know what the stats say, but to me, the only thing Brooks has had going for him are a strong arm and a coach willing to live with his shortcomings.but i agree that as long as he keeps the job, he'll put up some nice numbers.

 

[ShotGunStyle]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

 

[Family Matters]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

Another factor you have consider, or at least you should if you want to win FF championships, is to evaluate the players performance weeks 14-16, which is when most championships are played. Brooks has had some disappointing games for many teams during that stretch. In leagues that count TO's his performance is not as good as his regular season. This is likely where many have found their distaste for his past performance and question his decison making. And of course it effects other players around him too. I can remember Horn having some bad games based on Brooks poor decison making.

 

[Tau837]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

Another factor you have consider, or at least you should if you want to win FF championships, is to evaluate the players performance weeks 14-16, which is when most championships are played. Brooks has had some disappointing games for many teams during that stretch. In leagues that count TO's his performance is not as good as his regular season. This is likely where many have found their distaste for his past performance and question his decison making. And of course it effects other players around him too. I can remember Horn having some bad games based on Brooks poor decison making.

As with all hypotheses offered so far (he has big highs and lows, he gets all his points in garbage time), the data doesn't agree with this.Using the Data Dominator, from 2002 to 2005, in weeks 14 to 16, he is QB10. But, of course, he missed weeks 15 & 16 last season, plus as I have said before in these Brooks threads, IMO it is not valid to use last season as a predictor for him given all of the extraordinary circumstances he played in.

So let's look at weeks 14 to 16 from 2002 to 2004. Brooks was QB5 and averaged 19.1 fantasy points per game (FBG scoring). And by the way, Horn was WR4 over that same sample. I'm not seeing any evidence to back your point.

 

[SSOG]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

Another factor you have consider, or at least you should if you want to win FF championships, is to evaluate the players performance weeks 14-16, which is when most championships are played. Brooks has had some disappointing games for many teams during that stretch. In leagues that count TO's his performance is not as good as his regular season. This is likely where many have found their distaste for his past performance and question his decison making. And of course it effects other players around him too. I can remember Horn having some bad games based on Brooks poor decison making.

Also, once again, Brooks is no more turnover-prone than the vast majority of starting QBs in the NFL.Really, I don't get where all of this factually incorrect Brooks-hate is coming from. It's like people want to dislike him and be down on him so badly that they're inventing reasons. Like I said- is he a top 10 QB? Nope. Is he a bottom 10 QB? Nope. He's strictly middle of the road, maybe slightly below average, but a huge upgrade over a ton of starting QBs in the real NFL... and a top-10 QB in fantasy football. I would have no qualms about using Brooks as my #1 QB, even without a very solid backup. I've done it before, and I've won with it before.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

Another factor you have consider, or at least you should if you want to win FF championships, is to evaluate the players performance weeks 14-16, which is when most championships are played. Brooks has had some disappointing games for many teams during that stretch. In leagues that count TO's his performance is not as good as his regular season. This is likely where many have found their distaste for his past performance and question his decison making. And of course it effects other players around him too. I can remember Horn having some bad games based on Brooks poor decison making.

As with all hypotheses offered so far (he has big highs and lows, he gets all his points in garbage time), the data doesn't agree with this.Using the Data Dominator, from 2002 to 2005, in weeks 14 to 16, he is QB10. But, of course, he missed weeks 15 & 16 last season, plus as I have said before in these Brooks threads, IMO it is not valid to use last season as a predictor for him given all of the extraordinary circumstances he played in.

So let's look at weeks 14 to 16 from 2002 to 2004. Brooks was QB5 and averaged 19.1 fantasy points per game (FBG scoring). And by the way, Horn was WR4 over that same sample. I'm not seeing any evidence to back your point.

I love when somebody proves someone wrong with factual info.

 

[Family Matters]

People take Brooks for granted. The guy had four straight 3500 yard passing seasons along with 25 total TDs in each season. That's more rare than you think. The only players that come to mind that have done that is Favre and Manning in the history of the NFL. Who could I be missing?

Another factor you have consider, or at least you should if you want to win FF championships, is to evaluate the players performance weeks 14-16, which is when most championships are played. Brooks has had some disappointing games for many teams during that stretch. In leagues that count TO's his performance is not as good as his regular season. This is likely where many have found their distaste for his past performance and question his decison making. And of course it effects other players around him too. I can remember Horn having some bad games based on Brooks poor decison making.

As with all hypotheses offered so far (he has big highs and lows, he gets all his points in garbage time), the data doesn't agree with this.Using the Data Dominator, from 2002 to 2005, in weeks 14 to 16, he is QB10. But, of course, he missed weeks 15 & 16 last season, plus as I have said before in these Brooks threads, IMO it is not valid to use last season as a predictor for him given all of the extraordinary circumstances he played in.

So let's look at weeks 14 to 16 from 2002 to 2004. Brooks was QB5 and averaged 19.1 fantasy points per game (FBG scoring). And by the way, Horn was WR4 over that same sample. I'm not seeing any evidence to back your point.

I love when somebody proves someone wrong with factual info.

Not so fast my friends. This is not a good posting. I based my comments on leagues whereby you get dinged for TO's, which FBG's doesn't account for if I'm not mistaken.In my home league whereby we take pass yards 1 pt for 25 and rush yards 1 pt for 10, 6 pt TD's and 2 pt TO's here is his actual performance:

2005-QB 19 YTD and QB 29 weeks 14-16. He did not play week 15 & 16.

2004-QB 9 YTD and QB 12 weeks 14-16.

2003-QB 10 YTD and QB 3 weeks 14-16. Please note the inconsistency of week 14=8 points and week 15 was 39 points. Now I agree that the week 15 points is nice but after his 8 point low in week 14 there's a good chance you weren't arounf in week 15 to enjoy and thus banging your head like many others.

So my point was and is that he is inconsistent and his playoff numbers outside of 1 week out 9 were not very good.

Lastly, if you're saying that having the 10th best QB in a league of 10 or 12 teams is good then you might want to rethink that. Having the bottom performer at any position is usually not a good thing. But hey that's just me.

 

[texasheat]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

 

[TheFanatic]

I'd take him as QB2 for sure, but his ADP keeps going up. He's at 15 now and Brees, Big Ben, Leftwich, McNair, and Carr are all ranked lower. I'd take any of them first

If you did that you would get housed in your leagues. Brooks, in a ROUGH year finished ahead of Big Ben, Leftwich and Carr. He finished 4 points behind McNair. Only Brees significantly outscored him. Both Brees and McNair are on new teams. Brees is recovering from a rotator cuff injury that generally lessens arm strength which Brees didn't have in abundance in the first place. And for those of you that think that Big Ben is a great FFB QB, didn't you learn your lesson with Aikman in the 90's? Ben averaged 22 attempts a game and a whopping 14 completions a game And for those of you who think that as Ben learns more they will open up the passing game more...well, he averaged a half a pass attempt more a game in 04 than 05 and had 1 more completion per game his rookie year. If anything they use him less as he learns the game.

Big Ben does not equal a viable QB1 in FFB and probably not even a QB2. The guy was 30th in attempts and 29th in completions last year. That's not pretty. Even if you add in his season averages for attempts and completions he's 21st in attempts and 18th in completions....

 

[Family Matters]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

 

[SSOG]

Lastly, if you're saying that having the 10th best QB in a league of 10 or 12 teams is good then you might want to rethink that. Having the bottom performer at any position is usually not a good thing. But hey that's just me.

When there's so little difference between the point output of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, but 5 or 6 rounds of difference between the draft position of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, then absolutely having the bottom performer at a position is a good thing, insomuch as it allows you to have better performers everywhere else.

 

[joffer]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

because i think there is a significant risk that he gets benched.

 

[texasheat]

Lastly, if you're saying that having the 10th best QB in a league of 10 or 12 teams is good then you might want to rethink that. Having the bottom performer at any position is usually not a good thing. But hey that's just me.

When there's so little difference between the point output of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, but 5 or 6 rounds of difference between the draft position of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, then absolutely having the bottom performer at a position is a good thing, insomuch as it allows you to have better performers everywhere else.

Well said...It's all about value, and at current ADP 9.09 a top 10 QB is good value.

 

[SSOG]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

 

[texasheat]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004).  I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily.  I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

 

[chris1969]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

exactly why I'm shying away from Brooks

there are around 6 guys around the same range that project the same that I feel more comfortable finishing the season.

 

[Tau837]

Lastly, if you're saying that having the 10th best QB in a league of 10 or 12 teams is good then you might want to rethink that. Having the bottom performer at any position is usually not a good thing. But hey that's just me.

When there's so little difference between the point output of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, but 5 or 6 rounds of difference between the draft position of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, then absolutely having the bottom performer at a position is a good thing, insomuch as it allows you to have better performers everywhere else.

On top of that, many of us around here play in 14+ team leagues. I'll play in 3 leagues this year, with 12, 14, and 16 teams. Brooks will be huge value in every one of them.

 

[Family Matters]

Lastly, if you're saying that having the 10th best QB in a league of 10 or 12 teams is good then you might want to rethink that. Having the bottom performer at any position is usually not a good thing. But hey that's just me.

When there's so little difference between the point output of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, but 5 or 6 rounds of difference between the draft position of the 3rd and the 10th player at a position, then absolutely having the bottom performer at a position is a good thing, insomuch as it allows you to have better performers everywhere else.

On top of that, many of us around here play in 14+ team leagues. I'll play in 3 leagues this year, with 12, 14, and 16 teams. Brooks will be huge value in every one of them.

Here's where I do agree. Larger leagues mean you have to find value and QB is the best place in which to do so.

 

[Family Matters]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004).  I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily.  I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

I guess it depends on your league. I'm guessing you don't get dinged for TO's and if so you may be right. The league I played in shows a bigger difference in the regular season numbers to the tune of 3.5 points per game.But again I must go back to my original point from my first post that seems to be getting missed. My point was to assess what Brooks is doing in the ff playoffs. His numbers are not that good. 1-2 good games out of his last 9 does not represent value at any ADP IMO. His regular season numbers are decent if you can get him late but his FF playoff numbers are not what champions are made of. I much prefer to see him on someone else's team.

OBTW-I have never lost a champioship to a team that had Brooks as their QB. I do know of 1 person that won a championship with him. It was 2 years ago. when Brooks had his week 14 8 pointer and week 15 39 pointer. This owner had a bye week that week 14 otherwise they would've lost.

 

[SSOG]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004). I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily. I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

I guess it depends on your league. I'm guessing you don't get dinged for TO's and if so you may be right. The league I played in shows a bigger difference in the regular season numbers to the tune of 3.5 points per game.But again I must go back to my original point from my first post that seems to be getting missed. My point was to assess what Brooks is doing in the ff playoffs. His numbers are not that good. 1-2 good games out of his last 9 does not represent value at any ADP IMO. His regular season numbers are decent if you can get him late but his FF playoff numbers are not what champions are made of. I much prefer to see him on someone else's team.

OBTW-I have never lost a champioship to a team that had Brooks as their QB. I do know of 1 person that won a championship with him. It was 2 years ago. when Brooks had his week 14 8 pointer and week 15 39 pointer. This owner had a bye week that week 14 otherwise they would've lost.

First off, by your own admission, he's been a top-12 QB during the playoffs still. I don't get what the problem was.Second off, you keep touting his 8-point game. Was he the only QB in the history of the NFL to post an 8-point game during the fantasy playoffs? How much was Peyton Manning worth in the playoffs last year, out of curiousity?

Third off, just because you never knew anyone who won the league with Brooks as their starting QB doesn't mean anything. I've never known anyone who won their league with Manning as their starting QB. Does this mean you wouldn't want Peyton Manning on your team now?

By the way... Here's a link to the QB rankings from weeks 14-16 over the past 4 years. Despite missing two games last season, Brooks still ranks 10th. If you go from 2002 to 2004 to get rid of last year's data (where he missed), Brooks ranks 5th. If you want to launch into a tirade about turnovers blah blah blah again, then I urge you to look again at the numbers. Aaron Brooks has 4 interceptions during that span. That's less than anyone else in the top 30 over that span except for #16 Steve McNair (4 INTs), #20 Billy Volek (3 INTs), #24 Patrick Ramsey (3 INTs), and #30 Tommy Maddox (4 INTs). So ding him all you want for turnovers- that'll just move him up 2 spots in the rankings to #8 overall- again, despite missing 2 of the 3 weeks last year.

I really have no idea where you're getting your numbers from, but it really doesn't seem to be from real-world results.

 

[Tau837]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004).  I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily.  I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

I guess it depends on your league. I'm guessing you don't get dinged for TO's and if so you may be right. The league I played in shows a bigger difference in the regular season numbers to the tune of 3.5 points per game.But again I must go back to my original point from my first post that seems to be getting missed. My point was to assess what Brooks is doing in the ff playoffs. His numbers are not that good. 1-2 good games out of his last 9 does not represent value at any ADP IMO. His regular season numbers are decent if you can get him late but his FF playoff numbers are not what champions are made of. I much prefer to see him on someone else's team.

OBTW-I have never lost a champioship to a team that had Brooks as their QB. I do know of 1 person that won a championship with him. It was 2 years ago. when Brooks had his week 14 8 pointer and week 15 39 pointer. This owner had a bye week that week 14 otherwise they would've lost.

First off, by your own admission, he's been a top-12 QB during the playoffs still. I don't get what the problem was.Second off, you keep touting his 8-point game. Was he the only QB in the history of the NFL to post an 8-point game during the fantasy playoffs? How much was Peyton Manning worth in the playoffs last year, out of curiousity?

Third off, just because you never knew anyone who won the league with Brooks as their starting QB doesn't mean anything. I've never known anyone who won their league with Manning as their starting QB. Does this mean you wouldn't want Peyton Manning on your team now?

By the way... Here's a link to the QB rankings from weeks 14-16 over the past 4 years. Despite missing two games last season, Brooks still ranks 10th. If you go from 2002 to 2004 to get rid of last year's data (where he missed), Brooks ranks 5th. If you want to launch into a tirade about turnovers blah blah blah again, then I urge you to look again at the numbers. Aaron Brooks has 4 interceptions during that span. That's less than anyone else in the top 30 over that span except for #16 Steve McNair (4 INTs), #20 Billy Volek (3 INTs), #24 Patrick Ramsey (3 INTs), and #30 Tommy Maddox (4 INTs). So ding him all you want for turnovers- that'll just move him up 2 spots in the rankings to #8 overall- again, despite missing 2 of the 3 weeks last year.

I really have no idea where you're getting your numbers from, but it really doesn't seem to be from real-world results.

 

[Family Matters]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004).  I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily.  I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

I guess it depends on your league. I'm guessing you don't get dinged for TO's and if so you may be right. The league I played in shows a bigger difference in the regular season numbers to the tune of 3.5 points per game.But again I must go back to my original point from my first post that seems to be getting missed. My point was to assess what Brooks is doing in the ff playoffs. His numbers are not that good. 1-2 good games out of his last 9 does not represent value at any ADP IMO. His regular season numbers are decent if you can get him late but his FF playoff numbers are not what champions are made of. I much prefer to see him on someone else's team.

OBTW-I have never lost a champioship to a team that had Brooks as their QB. I do know of 1 person that won a championship with him. It was 2 years ago. when Brooks had his week 14 8 pointer and week 15 39 pointer. This owner had a bye week that week 14 otherwise they would've lost.

First off, by your own admission, he's been a top-12 QB during the playoffs still. I don't get what the problem was.Second off, you keep touting his 8-point game. Was he the only QB in the history of the NFL to post an 8-point game during the fantasy playoffs? How much was Peyton Manning worth in the playoffs last year, out of curiousity?

Third off, just because you never knew anyone who won the league with Brooks as their starting QB doesn't mean anything. I've never known anyone who won their league with Manning as their starting QB. Does this mean you wouldn't want Peyton Manning on your team now?

By the way... Here's a link to the QB rankings from weeks 14-16 over the past 4 years. Despite missing two games last season, Brooks still ranks 10th. If you go from 2002 to 2004 to get rid of last year's data (where he missed), Brooks ranks 5th. If you want to launch into a tirade about turnovers blah blah blah again, then I urge you to look again at the numbers. Aaron Brooks has 4 interceptions during that span. That's less than anyone else in the top 30 over that span except for #16 Steve McNair (4 INTs), #20 Billy Volek (3 INTs), #24 Patrick Ramsey (3 INTs), and #30 Tommy Maddox (4 INTs). So ding him all you want for turnovers- that'll just move him up 2 spots in the rankings to #8 overall- again, despite missing 2 of the 3 weeks last year.

I really have no idea where you're getting your numbers from, but it really doesn't seem to be from real-world results.

Well it seems clear that you want to ignore what I posted so that's fine and I'll leave it at that. But I have to say that anyone that is touting the #12 QB, which is the worst of a 12 team league, as being a good value leaves one to wonder what your thinking is.On that note I rest my case.

 

[SSOG]

Well it seems clear that you want to ignore what I posted so that's fine and I'll leave it at that. But I have to say that anyone that is touting the #12 QB, which is the worst of a 12 team league, as being a good value leaves one to wonder what your thinking is.On that note I rest my case.

On that logic, we should all stop drafting after 9 rounds when we all have 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 PK, and 1 D/ST. Obviously players beyond that cannot possibly offer value, right?On that note, I rest my case.

 

[Family Matters]

Well it seems clear that you want to ignore what I posted so that's fine and I'll leave it at that. But I have to say that anyone that is touting the #12 QB, which is the worst of a 12 team league, as being a good value leaves one to wonder what your thinking is.On that note I rest my case.

On that logic, we should all stop drafting after 9 rounds when we all have 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 PK, and 1 D/ST. Obviously players beyond that cannot possibly offer value, right?On that note, I rest my case.

Well if that's what you think. I hope you're not just trying to argue. Earlier you were suggesting that having the worse starting QB is a good thing. Aren't you? Or are you saying something else now? It's fine if you are but please stay with your position because that's what I was addressing.My whole point was and remains that he's not that good for a starting FF QB. His performance in the regular season is alright but his numbers in the playoffs are not that good. As long as you're ok with a strategy that leaves you with a low ranking playoff QB then all is well. I'm suggesting there are better options.

 

[SSOG]

Well it seems clear that you want to ignore what I posted so that's fine and I'll leave it at that. But I have to say that anyone that is touting the #12 QB, which is the worst of a 12 team league, as being a good value leaves one to wonder what your thinking is.On that note I rest my case.

On that logic, we should all stop drafting after 9 rounds when we all have 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 PK, and 1 D/ST. Obviously players beyond that cannot possibly offer value, right?On that note, I rest my case.

Well if that's what you think. I hope you're not just trying to argue. Earlier you were suggesting that having the worse starting QB is a good thing. Aren't you? Or are you saying something else now? It's fine if you are but please stay with your position because that's what I was addressing.My whole point was and remains that he's not that good for a starting FF QB. His performance in the regular season is alright but his numbers in the playoffs are not that good. As long as you're ok with a strategy that leaves you with a low ranking playoff QB then all is well. I'm suggesting there are better options.

My first point wasn't that having a bad starting QB was a good thing, all other things being equal. My point was that all other things WON'T be equal. Having a bad starting QB is a good thing if it allows you to get an upgrade at WR and RB- because the dropoff at RB and WR is steeper than it is at QB. Would I rather have Aaron Brooks than Eli Manning? Nope. Would I rather have Aaron Brooks and Thomas Jones/Ahman Green (the two RBs drafted before/after Manning) than Eli Manning and Chris Perry/Greg Jones (the two RBs drafted before/after Brooks)? Three words. Abs. Oh. Lutley.My second point is that it's not like we're talking about the 12th best QB in the league here. Brooks always finished as 8th or better, and with Moss, he has a chance to outperform that in a big way. If you can get a QB 15th off the board whose career *FLOOR* to this point in time, has been QB8... well then, that's ridiculous value.Your arguements just don't make sense to me. I mean, it's like arguing that Rod Smith and Kennison and Bruce are all bad WR picks, because they tend to be bottom-3rd starting WRs, and who wants to start anyone who is at the bottom third of their position? Kennison, Bruce, and Smith have been three of the most consistantly undervalued players in all of fantasy football- bottom-third starter status notwithstanding- for years now. Just because a player is in the bottom third at his position does not mean he's a bad player to have on your team.Like Rod Smith, like Eddie Kennison, Aaron Brooks represents ridiculous value this year. He is a player who is being drafted *SIGNIFICANTLY* below what his average production has been- and even below what his FLOOR has been.Edit: Also, enough with this "low-ranking Playoff QB" arguement. Aaron Brooks was the #5 playoff QB from 2002 to 2004, and the #9 playoff QB from 2002-2005, despite missing two games. And as I already demonstrated, penalizing for turnovers only INCREASES that ranking.

 

[KP]

Has anyone out there heard anything positive or negative about Walter's performance so far at camp?

 

[Family Matters]

Well it seems clear that you want to ignore what I posted so that's fine and I'll leave it at that. But I have to say that anyone that is touting the #12 QB, which is the worst of a 12 team league, as being a good value leaves one to wonder what your thinking is.On that note I rest my case.

On that logic, we should all stop drafting after 9 rounds when we all have 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 PK, and 1 D/ST. Obviously players beyond that cannot possibly offer value, right?On that note, I rest my case.

Well if that's what you think. I hope you're not just trying to argue. Earlier you were suggesting that having the worse starting QB is a good thing. Aren't you? Or are you saying something else now? It's fine if you are but please stay with your position because that's what I was addressing.My whole point was and remains that he's not that good for a starting FF QB. His performance in the regular season is alright but his numbers in the playoffs are not that good. As long as you're ok with a strategy that leaves you with a low ranking playoff QB then all is well. I'm suggesting there are better options.

My first point wasn't that having a bad starting QB was a good thing, all other things being equal. My point was that all other things WON'T be equal. Having a bad starting QB is a good thing if it allows you to get an upgrade at WR and RB- because the dropoff at RB and WR is steeper than it is at QB. Would I rather have Aaron Brooks than Eli Manning? Nope. Would I rather have Aaron Brooks and Thomas Jones/Ahman Green (the two RBs drafted before/after Manning) than Eli Manning and Chris Perry/Greg Jones (the two RBs drafted before/after Brooks)? Three words. Abs. Oh. Lutley.My second point is that it's not like we're talking about the 12th best QB in the league here. Brooks always finished as 8th or better, and with Moss, he has a chance to outperform that in a big way. If you can get a QB 15th off the board whose career *FLOOR* to this point in time, has been QB8... well then, that's ridiculous value.Your arguements just don't make sense to me. I mean, it's like arguing that Rod Smith and Kennison and Bruce are all bad WR picks, because they tend to be bottom-3rd starting WRs, and who wants to start anyone who is at the bottom third of their position? Kennison, Bruce, and Smith have been three of the most consistantly undervalued players in all of fantasy football- bottom-third starter status notwithstanding- for years now. Just because a player is in the bottom third at his position does not mean he's a bad player to have on your team.Like Rod Smith, like Eddie Kennison, Aaron Brooks represents ridiculous value this year. He is a player who is being drafted *SIGNIFICANTLY* below what his average production has been- and even below what his FLOOR has been.Edit: Also, enough with this "low-ranking Playoff QB" arguement. Aaron Brooks was the #5 playoff QB from 2002 to 2004, and the #9 playoff QB from 2002-2005, despite missing two games. And as I already demonstrated, penalizing for turnovers only INCREASES that ranking.

I see why you are so high on him. Nice int.

 

[pretender]

If you're watching the game - why is Moss not still in the game. He was in for the first three and out and now he is out. Is he hurt?

 

[SSOG]

I see why you are so high on him. Nice int.

Holy crap wow Brooks was horrible in the hall of fame game I totally retract everything I ever said about him man.AARON BROOKS = AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Edit for Clarity: I'm just jerking your chain, man. I know you were kidding.

 

[Riffraff]

If you're watching the game - why is Moss not still in the game. He was in for the first three and out and now he is out. Is he hurt?

Pretty sure he's going to make the team. Time to see who the roster cuts are going to be.

 

[Britney Spears]

Brooks has finished no worse than QB8 in season's where he played in all 16 games (2001-2004).  I don't understand why the majority on this board dismiss him so easily.  I beleive he represents great value at his current ADP.

You're right if you like a bottom of the league performer. QB 8 in a 10 team league isn't that good regardless of ADP. In fact it's not that good in a 12 team league either. Teams with the lower QB performers are at a huge disadvantage for winning their championships. Especially those that perform poorly during your fantasy playoffs.Now if you can somehow manage to get the #1RB, a top 5 WR and the top TE then maybe you can get away with it. But it's not the best situation you can find yourself in if you can avoid it.

The point difference between QB4 and QB12 last year was 1.33 points per game. The ADP difference between QB4 and QB12 this year is 39 draft picks. If you think that 1.33 points per game is a huge disadvantage, then you're crazy. If you don't think that 39 extra draft slots is worth 1.33 points per game, then you're crazy.For comparison purposes, the difference between RB4 and RB12 is 7.32 points per game. The difference between RB8 and RB24 is 5.11. The difference between RB27 (who is being drafted around QB4) and RB41 (who is being drafted around QB12) is 1.96 points per game. As a result, RB27 + QB12 will outscore RB41 + QB4.

All of this is drastically ignoring Brooks' upside, though. He's not being drafted as QB12, he's being drafted as QB15. And he's not finishing as QB12- he's always finished as QB8. The difference between QB4 and QB8 last year was .86 points per game, but draft-wise, it's a difference of *FIFTY DRAFT SLOTS*. That, my friend, is EXTREME value- and that's even ignoring Brooks' upside now that he's playing with Randy Moss.

Edit: Basically, like TEs, once you get past the top 2-3 QBs, everyone else is clustered really really tightly, and so QB12 presents virtually no disadvantage compared to QB4. There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

exactly why I'm shying away from Brooks

there are around 6 guys around the same range that project the same that I feel more comfortable finishing the season.

LOFL

 

[ShotGunStyle]

There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

Everyone needs to just think about that for a second before they take a Matt Hasslebeck or Trent Green early on when Aaron Brooks will be there around pick 100.

 

[Family Matters]

I see why you are so high on him. Nice int.

Holy crap wow Brooks was horrible in the hall of fame game I totally retract everything I ever said about him man.AARON BROOKS = AVOID AT ALL COSTS. Edit for Clarity: I'm just jerking your chain, man. I know you were kidding.

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

 

[Family Matters]

There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

Everyone needs to just think about that for a second before they take a Matt Hasslebeck or Trent Green early on when Aaron Brooks will be there around pick 100.

While the point by itself is valid the issue doesn't change. By the time I draft any QB my starting RB's have long been addressed. Brooks isn't the solution on my team. I can draft other QB's, avoid Brooks and still have great RB's. It's not an either or proposition for some of us.OBTW-another QB that can had with great value is Warner. His upside id huge but he comes with risk. I would go to war with him long before Brooks.

 

[Marc Levin]

There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

Everyone needs to just think about that for a second before they take a Matt Hasslebeck or Trent Green early on when Aaron Brooks will be there around pick 100.

While the point by itself is valid the issue doesn't change. By the time I draft any QB my starting RB's have long been addressed. Brooks isn't the solution on my team. I can draft other QB's, avoid Brooks and still have great RB's. It's not an either or proposition for some of us.OBTW-another QB that can had with great value is Warner. His upside id huge but he comes with risk. I would go to war with him long before Brooks.

don't count on Warner falling. I have done three drafts in the last week, and in every single one, Warner was taken between QB8 and QB13 - and always by the 7th/8th round. NUTS, imo. Brooks, OTOH, has been available WAY WAY after that in each of those drafts.

 

[brakeyawself]

Im gonna add A. Walter to a few of my teams after that HOF game.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Are they 0-1.

Of course Brooks will be the starting QB in September, if he is still there in December I will be surprised.

Out of curiousity, who is going to beat him out for the job? The immortal Andrew Walter? The legendary Kent Smith? Or perhaps the awe-inspiring Marques Tuiasosopo. Aaron Brooks might have a 1.5:1 TD:Int ratio, but Tuiasosopo has a 1.5:1 vowel:consonant ratio! Top that, Brooks! ...he's a huge rushing threat, and he posts a solid ypa. Could I name 10 QBs that I'd rather have than Aaron Brooks? Absolutely. Could I name 10 QBs that I'd rather have Aaron Brooks than? Absolutely.

Tui wins the old VC ratioIf he stays healthy I am very sure that Brooks will be a top 10 QB; he has done that every year but last. With the talent around him better I wouldn't be shocked to see top 5. Oakland is not good and they will need to throw a lot. Brooks isn't less consistent than other QB's, he just goes about it "more dumb" than others. The back pitch to a lineman was about as dumb as it gets, but guys like Favre and even Tom Brady make some bonehead plays as well. Like clutch hitting in baseball, people have perception issues...

 

[SSOG]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

 

[redman]

As crisp as McNabb looked in running his offense was as shaky as Brooks looked running his. The TD pass was a high toss that the TE went up and got, but it looked ad libbed more than a designed play to me.

I was one who was not impressed with Brooks.

 

[Delusions Of Adequacy]

As crisp as McNabb looked in running his offense was as shaky as Brooks looked running his. The TD pass was a high toss that the TE went up and got, but it looked ad libbed more than a designed play to me.

I was one who was not impressed with Brooks.

McNabb: could run the Eagles offense by now in his sleep.Brooks: new team/coach/OC/offense. Threw 3 passes in his first preseason game.

Do you really think you have enough data here to draw conclusions?

 

[Family Matters]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

Well after 2 preseason games he's only completed 2 passes. He's already got Moss ticked at him and Porter isn't looking to play much. I didn't think he'd look this bad but he's not doing anything so far to make me think I'm off base on how I feel about him.

 

[SSOG]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

Well after 2 preseason games he's only completed 2 passes. He's already got Moss ticked at him and Porter isn't looking to play much. I didn't think he'd look this bad but he's not doing anything so far to make me think I'm off base on how I feel about him.

After the preseason two years ago, Jake Plummer didn't have a single TD pass, and had a brutal QB rating (I think it was in the 50s). He then proceeded to throw for 4,000 yards and 27 scores. Then, last year, Plummer's preseason numbers went through the roof, and his regular season numbers dropped through the floor.It's the preseason. I wish his OL was playing better, but Brooks is still a top-12 fantasy QB. All this means is that he's now going to be available even cheaper than before.

 

[redman]

As crisp as McNabb looked in running his offense was as shaky as Brooks looked running his. The TD pass was a high toss that the TE went up and got, but it looked ad libbed more than a designed play to me.

I was one who was not impressed with Brooks.

McNabb: could run the Eagles offense by now in his sleep.Brooks: new team/coach/OC/offense. Threw 3 passes in his first preseason game.

Do you really think you have enough data here to draw conclusions?

I drew no conclusions, I just said I wasn't impressed. Of course, we have a larger sample size now, don't we!

 

[Family Matters]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

Well after 2 preseason games he's only completed 2 passes. He's already got Moss ticked at him and Porter isn't looking to play much. I didn't think he'd look this bad but he's not doing anything so far to make me think I'm off base on how I feel about him.

After the preseason two years ago, Jake Plummer didn't have a single TD pass, and had a brutal QB rating (I think it was in the 50s). He then proceeded to throw for 4,000 yards and 27 scores. Then, last year, Plummer's preseason numbers went through the roof, and his regular season numbers dropped through the floor.It's the preseason. I wish his OL was playing better, but Brooks is still a top-12 fantasy QB. All this means is that he's now going to be available even cheaper than before.

In re-reading your Plummer comparison I realize that Plummer was working from a good core to build around. Brooks not only doesn't have the skills to carry this team, he doesn't have anything much to work with. Save Moss and Jordan, there's not much there. The O-line is not bery good and ot continues to show. It's not going to get much better either.It's important to remember that things are never as bad as the media portrays them nor are ever as good when teams are on a roll. But this team is as low as a team can get. The wideouts are not happy as we know well about Jordan and now we're starting to hear about Moss too. Trading away a decent WR3 to NE and starting a guy that shouldn't be more than a back up doesn't exactly command confidence in the offense.With that said, Brooks will have a difficult time making top 10 this year. Sure he'll have some games to like but the consistency will not be there and that can be brutal to a fantasy team. Come week 14 he might not even be the starter anymore as we are hearing rumblings that his job is on the line already.So I think you're right about 1 thing. His value has never been lower. In fact it can only get better.

 

[Family Matters]

There was a greater point difference between RB11 and RB13 last year than there was between QB4 and QB12.

Everyone needs to just think about that for a second before they take a Matt Hasslebeck or Trent Green early on when Aaron Brooks will be there around pick 100.

While the point by itself is valid the issue doesn't change. By the time I draft any QB my starting RB's have long been addressed. Brooks isn't the solution on my team. I can draft other QB's, avoid Brooks and still have great RB's. It's not an either or proposition for some of us.OBTW-another QB that can had with great value is Warner. His upside id huge but he comes with risk. I would go to war with him long before Brooks.

don't count on Warner falling. I have done three drafts in the last week, and in every single one, Warner was taken between QB8 and QB13 - and always by the 7th/8th round. NUTS, imo. Brooks, OTOH, has been available WAY WAY after that in each of those drafts.

I know it's only 1 week but things seems to be going as expected. Brooks doesn't look too godd and Warner is solid. Of course, Warner will need to stay healthy and that might be more difficult than Brooks throwing a deep post to Porter.

 

[DeCleater]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.

But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

Well after 2 preseason games he's only completed 2 passes. He's already got Moss ticked at him and Porter isn't looking to play much. I didn't think he'd look this bad but he's not doing anything so far to make me think I'm off base on how I feel about him.

After the preseason two years ago, Jake Plummer didn't have a single TD pass, and had a brutal QB rating (I think it was in the 50s). He then proceeded to throw for 4,000 yards and 27 scores. Then, last year, Plummer's preseason numbers went through the roof, and his regular season numbers dropped through the floor.It's the preseason. I wish his OL was playing better, but Brooks is still a top-12 fantasy QB. All this means is that he's now going to be available even cheaper than before.

In re-reading your Plummer comparison I realize that Plummer was working from a good core to build around. Brooks not only doesn't have the skills to carry this team, he doesn't have anything much to work with. Save Moss and Jordan, there's not much there. The O-line is not bery good and ot continues to show. It's not going to get much better either.It's important to remember that things are never as bad as the media portrays them nor are ever as good when teams are on a roll. But this team is as low as a team can get. The wideouts are not happy as we know well about Jordan and now we're starting to hear about Moss too. Trading away a decent WR3 to NE and starting a guy that shouldn't be more than a back up doesn't exactly command confidence in the offense.

With that said, Brooks will have a difficult time making top 10 this year. Sure he'll have some games to like but the consistency will not be there and that can be brutal to a fantasy team. Come week 14 he might not even be the starter anymore as we are hearing rumblings that his job is on the line already.

So I think you're right about 1 thing. His value has never been lower. In fact it can only get better.

Jim Mora "Playoffs" voice "Top 10" are you crazy.

Brooks is very close to bagging groceries. You can call him value all you want but he is terrible.

 

[Family Matters]

Well if we can't have a little fun then why even bother? On a serious note, I wasn't impressed at all. When he threw the TD, was it against a bunch of back ups? I quit watching after that so I wasn't sure if Philly had also taken a bunch of their D stars out.But when he threw that int it was just another example of his decision making that I have been seeing from the last couple of years. Not a guy I feel comfortable with as my starter.

Haha, I don't have any problems with anyone who wants to make some jokes or talk some trash, as long as they're willing to back up their position when the conversation turns serious- and you definitely have been willing to back up your position.

Well after 2 preseason games he's only completed 2 passes. He's already got Moss ticked at him and Porter isn't looking to play much. I didn't think he'd look this bad but he's not doing anything so far to make me think I'm off base on how I feel about him.

After the preseason two years ago, Jake Plummer didn't have a single TD pass, and had a brutal QB rating (I think it was in the 50s). He then proceeded to throw for 4,000 yards and 27 scores. Then, last year, Plummer's preseason numbers went through the roof, and his regular season numbers dropped through the floor.It's the preseason. I wish his OL was playing better, but Brooks is still a top-12 fantasy QB. All this means is that he's now going to be available even cheaper than before.

I bring this up because I don't want to see this go the way of "oh he was injured" excuses. I really do not think there is any way he could of finished top 12 based on what we've seen in the preseason and 2 regular season games. He's bad and to be fair he's on a very bad team right now. Not the type of situation any QB can be successful in.What's interesting to note is that many felt Brooks would be better than Collins because he could buy more time with his scrambling ability. So IOW-they knew the O-line sucked and rather than upgrade and address the problem they get a QB they think can run from their troubles. No one can run from that much trouble.

 

[suchislife]

I bring this up because I don't want to see this go the way of "oh he was injured" excuses. I really do not think there is any way he could of finished top 12 based on what we've seen in the preseason and 2 regular season games. He's bad and to be fair he's on a very bad team right now. Not the type of situation any QB can be successful in.

What's interesting to note is that many felt Brooks would be better than Collins because he could buy more time with his scrambling ability. So IOW-they knew the O-line sucked and rather than upgrade and address the problem they get a QB they think can run from their troubles. No one can run from that much trouble.

I don't think any sane person could possibly say Brooks' poor performance was injury related. He's currently ranked 35th in my league - behind SD's backup QB Charlie Whitehurst. No, Brooks and the Raiders are just awful. Brooks should be thankful he gets a few weeks rest.BTW, I'm always a little suspicious with injuries like this. Any chance this "injury" is just a case of showing some respect for the veteran so the young guy can come in and show what he's got? Ya know, so they don't have to say Brooks is being benched? Or is he really injured?