Derek Anderson #32 QB - Staff Dynasty Rank (1 Viewer)

[PahtyTom]

Regardless of if you think Quinn is the starter in Cleveland next year, to rank a guy like Griese ahead of DA is crazy.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Some of those guys are not putting much thought into their rankings.

Why do you say that? Is this a pattern? I haven't really kept track of FBG's rankings to see if this is the case.If it is - What do you suggest to be done? Pruning? Or otherwise?

Some are better than others, but overall, i just see far too many obvious mistakes. I have no problem with making some calls that are a bit outside the box, but some guys are taking it way too far.I dont know how these staff members qualify to post their dynasty rankings, but there are guys on the forums who are much better suited for the job, IMO. F&L's dynasty thread is far more valuable for dynasty rankings.

I've always put my rankings out there for commentary. Feel free to tell me your opinions. Nothing is set in stone.

 

[GreenNGold]

Cleveland would have to be as dumb as San Diego to start quinn over DA next year (see Drew Brees). If they let DA go he will start somewhere. He has already shown much more potential than several QB's ranked ahead of him.

If I was Cleveland, I would probably let Quinn ride the bench one more year, and if DA repeats his performance, trade quinn. If DA falls, then consider switching to Quinn. The job is DA's to lose.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Some of those guys are not putting much thought into their rankings.

Why do you say that? Is this a pattern? I haven't really kept track of FBG's rankings to see if this is the case.If it is - What do you suggest to be done? Pruning? Or otherwise?

Some are better than others, but overall, i just see far too many obvious mistakes. I have no problem with making some calls that are a bit outside the box, but some guys are taking it way too far.I dont know how these staff members qualify to post their dynasty rankings, but there are guys on the forums who are much better suited for the job, IMO. F&L's dynasty thread is far more valuable for dynasty rankings.

I've always put my rankings out there for commentary. Feel free to tell me your opinions. Nothing is set in stone.

Actually Jeff, i think your rankings have come a long way since the preseason, where yours were, well, not so good. I wouldnt argue with too much of your current rankings, other than a few guys at WR. I dont want to give away to much paid content, but i would love to hear your reasonng for AJ as low as he is, and having Harrison 10-12 spots higher than guys like Jennings and Bowe.Honestly, would you trade Bowe or Jennings straight up for Harrison?

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Some of those guys are not putting much thought into their rankings.

Why do you say that? Is this a pattern? I haven't really kept track of FBG's rankings to see if this is the case.If it is - What do you suggest to be done? Pruning? Or otherwise?

Some are better than others, but overall, i just see far too many obvious mistakes. I have no problem with making some calls that are a bit outside the box, but some guys are taking it way too far.I dont know how these staff members qualify to post their dynasty rankings, but there are guys on the forums who are much better suited for the job, IMO. F&L's dynasty thread is far more valuable for dynasty rankings.

"I've always put my rankings out there for commentary. Feel free to tell me your opinions. Nothing is set in stone.

Actually Jeff, i think your rankings have come a long way since the preseason, where yours were, well, not so good. I wouldnt argue with too much of your current rankings, other than a few guys at WR. I dont want to give away to much paid content, but i would love to hear your reasonng for AJ as low as he is, and having Harrison 10-12 spots higher than guys like Jennings and Bowe.Honestly, would you trade Bowe or Jennings straight up for Harrison?

....totally concur about the Harrison ranking.Young studs like Jennings and Bowe behind a 35 year old WRin a dynasty league usually leave me scratching my head,"irregardless" of the offensive scheme..

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Some of those guys are not putting much thought into their rankings.

Why do you say that? Is this a pattern? I haven't really kept track of FBG's rankings to see if this is the case.If it is - What do you suggest to be done? Pruning? Or otherwise?

Some are better than others, but overall, i just see far too many obvious mistakes. I have no problem with making some calls that are a bit outside the box, but some guys are taking it way too far.I dont know how these staff members qualify to post their dynasty rankings, but there are guys on the forums who are much better suited for the job, IMO. F&L's dynasty thread is far more valuable for dynasty rankings.

"I've always put my rankings out there for commentary. Feel free to tell me your opinions. Nothing is set in stone.

Actually Jeff, i think your rankings have come a long way since the preseason, where yours were, well, not so good. I wouldnt argue with too much of your current rankings, other than a few guys at WR. I dont want to give away to much paid content, but i would love to hear your reasonng for AJ as low as he is, and having Harrison 10-12 spots higher than guys like Jennings and Bowe.Honestly, would you trade Bowe or Jennings straight up for Harrison?

....totally concur about the Harrison ranking.Young studs like Jennings and Bowe behind a 35 year old WRin a dynasty league usually leave me scratching my head,"irregardless" of the offensive scheme..

When I did the rankings I had Harrison as much more of a stud than he currently appears.I have AJ lower because I had questions about both his QB and his personal health. I would surmise his present value is about where I have him, although one can argue that it should be higher. However, if you try and trade him for a higher value, I bet he doesn't quite fetch it because of the knee questions.Harrison should certainly drop precipitously next time I go through the process.As I've said before, I don't do this on a weekly basis because I feel that it clouds judgment - Dynasty rankings should have a longer timeline of perspective, and 1 week / game doesn't do that for me. 3-4 weeks is about right.

 

[AussieOyOyOy]

Anderson's year is an anomaly, IMO. He's gotten very lucky with busted coverages and freak plays. And he's thrown the ball into dangerous situations without being punished like he possibly should have been. I really don't think he has played THAT well. I'd bet that he's not starting in week one of 2009 anywhere.

 

[The Sniper]

Jeff,You're making the same mistake made by a lot of the staff on this site: overweighting opportunity and underweighting talent. Talent always gets an opportunity eventually. Anderson is clearly outperforming many of the qb's ranked ahead of him. I don't understand what other explanation you need!?Tavaris Jackson ahead of Derek Anderson? That's embarrassing.

I've been accused of this as well (and I'm WAY higher than Jeff on Derek right now), but you're omitting things that also have value:- Roster spots, because you can't wait forever. Case in point - Michael Vick. If he comes back in 2010(?) he has good value, but can you keep a zero for two years?- Opportunity creates value. Talent is "potential" that can be nullified much easier than opportunity. Bad coach, bad situation, bad O-line, injury, drafted by wrong team, stuck on the bench..... some or all can be the situation for talented prospects. Opportunity also can score points for your team now, rather than later. IMHO, opportunity is underappreciated by many.

What do you mean - "you can't wait forever?" Anderson is producing now. Tavaris Jackson - not so much.As an aside, I disagree with you that Mike Vick has "good value." Those types of players don't get within 10 feet of my roster.No doubt that opportunity is a component in a player's value; but talent is an equal, if not greater, component (especially in a dynasty context).Maybe I'm just hypersensitive to instances on this site where talent has been underrepresented in analysis (see discussions of Priest Holmes when he was a free agent after leaving the Ravens, having backed up Eric Rhett and Jamal Lewis) and opportunity has been overrepresented (see Kevin Barlow analysis before the 2004 year). For some reason, this discussion of Derek Anderson feels the same way.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Jeff,You're making the same mistake made by a lot of the staff on this site: overweighting opportunity and underweighting talent. Talent always gets an opportunity eventually. Anderson is clearly outperforming many of the qb's ranked ahead of him. I don't understand what other explanation you need!?Tavaris Jackson ahead of Derek Anderson? That's embarrassing.

I've been accused of this as well (and I'm WAY higher than Jeff on Derek right now), but you're omitting things that also have value:- Roster spots, because you can't wait forever. Case in point - Michael Vick. If he comes back in 2010(?) he has good value, but can you keep a zero for two years?- Opportunity creates value. Talent is "potential" that can be nullified much easier than opportunity. Bad coach, bad situation, bad O-line, injury, drafted by wrong team, stuck on the bench..... some or all can be the situation for talented prospects. Opportunity also can score points for your team now, rather than later. IMHO, opportunity is underappreciated by many.

What do you mean - "you can't wait forever?" Anderson is producing now. Tavaris Jackson - not so much.As an aside, I disagree with you that Mike Vick has "good value." Those types of players don't get within 10 feet of my roster.No doubt that opportunity is a component in a player's value; but talent is an equal, if not greater, component (especially in a dynasty context).Maybe I'm just hypersensitive to instances on this site where talent has been underrepresented in analysis (see discussions of Priest Holmes when he was a free agent after leaving the Ravens, having backed up Eric Rhett and Jamal Lewis) and opportunity has been overrepresented (see Kevin Barlow analysis before the 2004 year). For some reason, this discussion of Derek Anderson feels the same way.

The Sniper,I believe that you're reading this entirely wrong. Maybe I didn't express myself well enough.There is a term called "opportunity cost" which means that if you take "talent" over "opportunity", you are foresaking the one player who is playing now (Mr. Opportunity) for one that may perform better later (Mr. Talent).If Talent's situation never improves, that potential will be lost and never have contributed for you.Many on this site have argued that Michael Turner is a starting RB if he's not behind Tomlinson. That could be true, and it might be not, but the actuality is that he is LT2's backup. So, he has talent but little-to-no opportunity. Earnest Graham may have far less talent than Turner, but he has more present value because he gets the ball 20-25 times a week. Right now, I might start Graham, and I'd certainly start him over Turner if I had both (which I actually do in one league). Now, I'll still take Brady Quinn over Tarvaris Jackson, even if Jackson starts Sunday. But for me, the talent has to far exceed the opportunity in several examples.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Some of those guys are not putting much thought into their rankings.

Why do you say that? Is this a pattern? I haven't really kept track of FBG's rankings to see if this is the case.If it is - What do you suggest to be done? Pruning? Or otherwise?

Some are better than others, but overall, i just see far too many obvious mistakes. I have no problem with making some calls that are a bit outside the box, but some guys are taking it way too far.I dont know how these staff members qualify to post their dynasty rankings, but there are guys on the forums who are much better suited for the job, IMO. F&L's dynasty thread is far more valuable for dynasty rankings.

"I've always put my rankings out there for commentary. Feel free to tell me your opinions. Nothing is set in stone.

Actually Jeff, i think your rankings have come a long way since the preseason, where yours were, well, not so good. I wouldnt argue with too much of your current rankings, other than a few guys at WR. I dont want to give away to much paid content, but i would love to hear your reasonng for AJ as low as he is, and having Harrison 10-12 spots higher than guys like Jennings and Bowe.

Honestly, would you trade Bowe or Jennings straight up for Harrison?

....totally concur about the Harrison ranking.Young studs like Jennings and Bowe behind a 35 year old WR

in a dynasty league usually leave me scratching my head,

"irregardless" of the offensive scheme.

.

When I did the rankings I had Harrison as much more of a stud than he currently appears.I have AJ lower because I had questions about both his QB and his personal health. I would surmise his present value is about where I have him, although one can argue that it should be higher. However, if you try and trade him for a higher value, I bet he doesn't quite fetch it because of the knee questions.

Harrison should certainly drop precipitously next time I go through the process.

As I've said before, I don't do this on a weekly basis because I feel that it clouds judgment - Dynasty rankings should have a longer timeline of perspective, and 1 week / game doesn't do that for me. 3-4 weeks is about right.

When I did the rankings I had Harrison as much more of a stud than he currently appears.

Your last rankings were done six days ago, how much more "studly" was he last Wednesday?

However, if you try and trade him for a higher value, I bet he doesn't quite fetch it because of the knee questions.

While this maybe true, its the sharks that are trading for him right now, from the people who think his injury affects his value that much.

I have AJ lower because I had questions about both his QB and his personal health.

You do know that David Carr is no longer the Texans QB, right? Serioulsy though, AJ put together back to back big games before his injury, something i am not sure he ever did with arr as his QB. Not to mention the less than average WR's currently playing for the Texans have managed to put up solid numbers with Texans QB's not named Carr. I understand his health issues being a bit of a concern, but this is dynasty we are talking about, and i doubt this injury affects him much past the next week or two.

 

[The Sniper]

I think I'm understanding you correctly, but here's my last add on the topic, Jeff. I actually think Graham has more upside than Turner. Turner is too upright of a runner. G'Night.

 

[Jene Bramel]

2. As Jeff noted, the bulk of his value has come from TD passes and big plays. A significant minority of those plays have come on blown coverages and amazing catches by Edwards and Winslow. Bloom has made the argument privately that Anderson might realize that those two are so athletic that he doesn't need to be precise. I argue that his completion percentage (well below 60%) and visual evidence -- 2nd half vs PIT and 1st half vs CIN in particular -- show that he's got an arm but serious accuracy issues. Take away a stud receiving talent and the protection of his offensive line and I believe Anderson is a trainwreck waiting to happen.

I think this comment, (No offense intended Jene) is similar to the guy that says, Soandso RB really sucks cause if you take away is 5@75 yard TD runs, his average is only 3.5. You can't "take" away from his stats cause a guy made a great play and I don't think it's fair to hold it against a guy. I also think, you may be able to pinpoint a few plays, but he has been fairly solid all year long and that is with one of the worst RB's in the entire NFL behind him.

Also hard to blame the QB for having a good line.

The quotes got messed up along the way, but for clarification's sake, the italicized portions are my words not RavensUNFL in this quote and the below excerpts.My argument that Anderson is currently being overrated by his fantasy statistics and ranking derives from his talent not the surrounding cast. I'm arguing that his inaccuracies would be much easier to see -- because his statistics would suffer -- if he didn't have the benefit of having the athletes he has. I'm not taking anything away from his 2007 stats or situation. Instead, I'm trying to make the point that the athletes and situation have made him what he is. If you put together a highlight reel of his 2007 TD passes, you'd come away wondering where the coverage was and how his receivers made those plays on a significant number of plays.

The line about "taking away his OL and receivers" was to highlight my belief that Anderson in a new situation in 2008 may put my concerns about his talent in sharp relief.

2. As Jeff noted, the bulk of his value has come from TD passes and big plays. A significant minority of those plays have come on blown coverages and amazing catches by Edwards and Winslow. Bloom has made the argument privately that Anderson might realize that those two are so athletic that he doesn't need to be precise. I argue that his completion percentage (well below 60%) and visual evidence -- 2nd half vs PIT and 1st half vs CIN in particular -- show that he's got an arm but serious accuracy issues. Take away a stud receiving talent and the protection of his offensive line and I believe Anderson is a trainwreck waiting to happen.

He's been over 60% in 3 of his last 4 games and over 70% in 2 of his last 4 games. Over that same span he's had almost 1,000 yards, 10 TDs and 1 INT. He's a kid with little experience before this season and appears to be improving rapidly.

Again, the italics were my words, not RavensUNFL.No question, Anderson perfomed well against MIA, STL and SEA. I think the 6-19 effort in the second half against PIT is just as important. He was seriously inaccurate despite good protection and wide open receivers on many of those occasions. I think accuracy is the most important attribute a QB has. Inconsistencies there will be exploited over the long haul. His receivers cannot bail him out on every occasion. Complete a few of those passes in the second half and he might have won me over. He didn't, and further solidified my concerns re: his future success.

Take away a stud receiving talent and the protection of his offensive line and I believe Anderson is a trainwreck waiting to happen.

Huh????Take away Reggie Wayne, Marvin, and Peyton's pass protection... oh wait, just take away Marvin... and he throws 6 INTs vs the Chargers. But like Peyton and Brees... even when he has a bad game he still provides some production (unlike a Bulger or Rivers, who just fully melteddown).

That's dumb. Again, my post above... look the defenses he's faced... wait until the batting donut is off the rest of the way,. especially weeks 14-16, when he faces #24, #26, #28 (NYJ, BUF, CIN. Which will make the anti-Derek Anderson burn hurt even more, when teams are succesful starting him the most important weeks of the year... or SF in week 17 for those formats.

I clearly wasn't making my argument clearly enough . My apologies. Petyon Manning is extremely accurate. Drew Brees, over the past four seasons, has been extremely accurate. Sure, their receivers make great plays. But, for the most part, their QBs put them in position to take advantage. Both of the players you cited lost TD passes on extremely accurate throws recently -- see Anthony Gonzalez. Go through the NFL.com highlights for the Browns games. Be impressed at the crazy catches Edwards and Winslow have made. That may well continue. But, again, the point intended was that Derek Anderson and his foibles could be magnified if he goes to a different team in 2008.

The argument is not fake football based; it's real world based. You must take into account opportunity, but you better be considering talent as well. That's all I'm getting at there.

 

[trader jake]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

.

 

[BucFan40]

One thing that we're missing here is that FBG is a collaborative of a bunch of folks, not just one. This evens out the playing field a bit. If you look at the average ranking of Anderson he was 17th or something, which is fair. Personally, I like to see that he was ranked 30th by one person and 8th by another. That tells me that there may be some risk/reward there. The collaboration is the key benefit. If I'm just going to listen to one person, then I might as well just hand them my team.

I stilll question the #30 ranking a bit, but that all comes down to the talent vs opportunity debate.

 

[Wadsworth]

In a strange way this debate reminds me of the numerous MJD debate threads. Jones-Drew puts up good numbers but some people go out of there way to justify why those numbers don't mean anything. Afterall, he was a late second round pick, so he can't be any good right? Anderson was not a premium first round QB, but he is lighting it up in his third season big time. If Alex Smith has the exact same stats as Anderson right now, would he be the 32nd dynasty QB? No, he'd be borderline top 5 I'd bet. If Favre retired this past off season and Aaron Rodgers has 22 TDs, 9 INTs and was on pace for near 4,000 would he be 32nd?

Anderson is a third year QB blowing up in front of our eyes. He's is having an excellent season, against some very good defenses and improving noticably even in his short term as a starter. Anyone not rating him in the top half of dynasty QBs is missing it.

 

[Wadsworth]

One thing that we're missing here is that FBG is a collaborative of a bunch of folks, not just one. This evens out the playing field a bit. If you look at the average ranking of Anderson he was 17th or something, which is fair. Personally, I like to see that he was ranked 30th by one person and 8th by another. That tells me that there may be some risk/reward there. The collaboration is the key benefit. If I'm just going to listen to one person, then I might as well just hand them my team.I stilll question the #30 ranking a bit, but that all comes down to the talent vs opportunity debate.

I agree, I like that you can get many different opinions here. It balances out nicely.

 

[az_prof]

Just because someone put up big passing yards doesn't mean they are a long term NFL starting caliber QB. Scott Mitchell threw for over 4000 yards and we all know how that turned out.

This is true Anthony, but it is even more true that just because a kid threw for 3,000 yards and 30 some TDs in college, doesn't mean he will ever do anything in the NFL. There are even more guys who fit that profile. So, while Anderson's performance this year does not guarantee future success, it is a good sign. Guys like Mitchell are the exception that proves the rule: usually when someone has a year like this they continue to have a good career, unless they suffer a bad injury.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Anderson reminds me of Scott Mitchell. He is not accurate, but his receivers constantly bail him out when he makes a poor throw. I'm not taking away from his season because he has played better than anyone thought, but I can't see him being a long term dynasty factor. And you also can't ignore Quinn in this.

EDIT TO ADD: I haven't done my dynasty rankings, but when I do (likely in the next 2 weeks), he will be somewhere in the 20's.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Anderson reminds me of Scott Mitchell. He is not accurate, but his receivers constantly bail him out when he makes a poor throw. I'm not taking away from his season because he has played better than anyone thought, but I can't see him being a long term dynasty factor. And you also can't ignore Quinn in this.

#32 ?I couldn't disagree more with this statement.Kid is still a work in progress, and he has alreadyfar surpassed anyone's targets.Scott Mitchell was a very careless passer.I don't see anything in DA which remeinds me of Mitchellfrom mechanics to pocket awareness.Anderson can process and react in the pocketmuch quicker than half the current starting QBs in the NFL, imo..

 

[trader jake]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

The group of QB's you list (Jackson, Griese, Boller, Smith) have all received enough playing time for me to have little or no interest in having them on my dynasty squad. If I could add one on the cheap and hope they turn it around, fine...otherwise I'd pass. I stated above that Derek Anderson should be ranked higher than #32, but #11? You're crazy.Every few years a QB comes out of nowhere to impress on the fantasy football stage, but you are stating that there are only 10 QB's in the entire NFL that you would rather have on your dynasty roster than Derek Anderson? His opportunity isn't even a given for the remainder of this season and his talent is that of a back-up. I'm not going to let a few shootouts, poor defenses faced, and some great performances by two top 10 draft selections (Edwards and Winslow) make me rank him foolishly high like you are.

We'll talk at the end of the 2008 season. BTW - Don Majkowski called and he likes the way you rank your dynasty QB's.

 

[Wadsworth]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

The group of QB's you list (Jackson, Griese, Boller, Smith) have all received enough playing time for me to have little or no interest in having them on my dynasty squad. If I could add one on the cheap and hope they turn it around, fine...otherwise I'd pass. I stated above that Derek Anderson should be ranked higher than #32, but #11? You're crazy.Every few years a QB comes out of nowhere to impress on the fantasy football stage, but you are stating that there are only 10 QB's in the entire NFL that you would rather have on your dynasty roster than Derek Anderson? His opportunity isn't even a given for the remainder of this season and his talent is that of a back-up. I'm not going to let a few shootouts, poor defenses faced, and some great performances by two top 10 draft selections (Edwards and Winslow) make me rank him foolishly high like you are.

We'll talk at the end of the 2008 season. BTW - Don Majkowski called and he likes the way you rank your dynasty QB's.

According to Footballguys SoS for QBs Anderson has had 2 easy match ups, 3 average match ups, and 4 tough match ups. So I'm not sure where you are getting the "poor defenses faced" comment. And while Edwards and Winslow have certainly shown great promise in the past, they have looked their best with Anderson under center. Garcia threw to a bunch of top 10 drafted WRs in Detriot, it didn't seem to help him much. The fact that people need to go as far back as Mitchell and Majkowski to shoot holes in Anderson is interesting.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

The group of QB's you list (Jackson, Griese, Boller, Smith) have all received enough playing time for me to have little or no interest in having them on my dynasty squad. If I could add one on the cheap and hope they turn it around, fine...otherwise I'd pass. I stated above that Derek Anderson should be ranked higher than #32, but #11? You're crazy.Every few years a QB comes out of nowhere to impress on the fantasy football stage, but you are stating that there are only 10 QB's in the entire NFL that you would rather have on your dynasty roster than Derek Anderson? His opportunity isn't even a given for the remainder of this season and his talent is that of a back-up. I'm not going to let a few shootouts, poor defenses faced, and some great performances by two top 10 draft selections (Edwards and Winslow) make me rank him foolishly high like you are.

We'll talk at the end of the 2008 season. BTW - Don Majkowski called and he likes the way you rank your dynasty QB's.

I love the fact that people are discounting Anderson's skillsdue to the fact that he is throwing the ball to Edwards and Winslow.

Is this some sort of joke ?

Edward's numbers have skyrocketed since he's had

Derek Anderson tossing him the ball.

Maybe it's purely coincidence.

.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

The group of QB's you list (Jackson, Griese, Boller, Smith) have all received enough playing time for me to have little or no interest in having them on my dynasty squad. If I could add one on the cheap and hope they turn it around, fine...otherwise I'd pass. I stated above that Derek Anderson should be ranked higher than #32, but #11? You're crazy.Every few years a QB comes out of nowhere to impress on the fantasy football stage, but you are stating that there are only 10 QB's in the entire NFL that you would rather have on your dynasty roster than Derek Anderson? His opportunity isn't even a given for the remainder of this season and his talent is that of a back-up. I'm not going to let a few shootouts, poor defenses faced, and some great performances by two top 10 draft selections (Edwards and Winslow) make me rank him foolishly high like you are.

We'll talk at the end of the 2008 season. BTW - Don Majkowski called and he likes the way you rank your dynasty QB's.

I love the fact that people are discounting Anderson's skillsdue to the fact that he is throwing the ball to Edwards and Winslow.

Is this some sort of joke ?

Edward's numbers have skyrocketed since he's had

Derek Anderson tossing him the ball.

Maybe it's purely coincidence.

.

Edwards has improved because of maturity, good health and better players around him. It's not just Anderson. Edwards was never healthy last year. He is a real talent, and the main reason for his improvement is him.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

The group of QB's you list (Jackson, Griese, Boller, Smith) have all received enough playing time for me to have little or no interest in having them on my dynasty squad. If I could add one on the cheap and hope they turn it around, fine...otherwise I'd pass. I stated above that Derek Anderson should be ranked higher than #32, but #11? You're crazy.Every few years a QB comes out of nowhere to impress on the fantasy football stage, but you are stating that there are only 10 QB's in the entire NFL that you would rather have on your dynasty roster than Derek Anderson? His opportunity isn't even a given for the remainder of this season and his talent is that of a back-up. I'm not going to let a few shootouts, poor defenses faced, and some great performances by two top 10 draft selections (Edwards and Winslow) make me rank him foolishly high like you are.

We'll talk at the end of the 2008 season. BTW - Don Majkowski called and he likes the way you rank your dynasty QB's.

I love the fact that people are discounting Anderson's skillsdue to the fact that he is throwing the ball to Edwards and Winslow.

Is this some sort of joke ?

Edward's numbers have skyrocketed since he's had

Derek Anderson tossing him the ball.

Maybe it's purely coincidence.

.

Edwards has improved because of maturity, good health and better players around him. It's not just Anderson. Edwards was never healthy last year. He is a real talent, and the main reason for his improvement is him.

If one is going to give credit to Braylon Edwards for Derek Anderson's success,then one must also give credit to Derek Anderson for Braylon Edward's success,

especially since this is the year that Braylon Edwards has emerged as a bigtime NFL talent,

at precisely then time when Derek Anderson took over the reigns at QB in Cleveland.

.

 

[Mcnabbfan]

Those of you who think the ranking is too low, please explain why it should be higher. I can be persuaded ....

I definitely believe you are undervaluing Derek Anderson. I think the flaw in your thinking is believing the Browns are tied to Brady Quinn. If Quinn was a top 5 draft pick then I would think otherwise, but the fact he was the 22nd pick, he falls into the same category as Aaron Rogers. Quinn is not costing the Browns much against the cap and with Anderson playing the way he is, Quinn won't meet any of the incentives in his contract. A guy's opinion I truly respect, Pat Kirwin on Sirius NFL Radio, really likes the way Anderson is playing and has stated that he would not be surprised if Quinn was the one moved in the future. With Anderson in the lineup, Winslow and Edwards are finally playing to their potential and the Browns are,arguably, a top 5 offense in the NFL. One other point, Anderson is only 24 and he'll be around for a long time. I would definitely rank him higher that at least a 15 other QB's on that list. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Those of you who think the ranking is too low, please explain why it should be higher. I can be persuaded ....

I definitely believe you are undervaluing Derek Anderson. I think the flaw in your thinking is believing the Browns are tied to Brady Quinn. If Quinn was a top 5 draft pick then I would think otherwise, but the fact he was the 22nd pick, he falls into the same category as Aaron Rogers. Quinn is not costing the Browns much against the cap and with Anderson playing the way he is, Quinn won't meet any of the incentives in his contract. A guy's opinion I truly respect, Pat Kirwin on Sirius NFL Radio, really likes the way Anderson is playing and has stated that he would not be surprised if Quinn was the one moved in the future. With Anderson in the lineup, Winslow and Edwards are finally playing to their potential and the Browns are,arguably, a top 5 offense in the NFL. One other point, Anderson is only 24 and he'll be around for a long time. I would definitely rank him higher that at least a 15 other QB's on that list. Just my 2 cents.

In the end I just don't see the Browns carrying bothQuinn and Anderson on their roster next year.One should be dealt to help a need, but I truly believeboth will be starting next season.

 

[Fallerjw]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

, unless you are specifically talking about fantasy football.

 

[cartel]

Anybody else find it humorous that some pro-Derek Anderson FBG's are arguing the "talent" side of the opportunity vs. talent debate?

Derek Anderson has "Rob Johnson Part II" written all over him. With that said I'd still rank him higher than #32.

This post has to be fixed for posterity. Dude has done nothing but shine for half a season,

for what was supposed to be a garbage can team.

Are you saying these farce QBs who just happen to

have a starting opportunity, Tavaris Jackson, Griese, Boller, ASmith,

should be ranked ahead of Derek Anderson ?

Until I see otherwise I've got this guy at #11 for dynasty QBs,

and ascending.

, unless you are specifically talking about fantasy football.

I agree DA will be starting somewhere next year but my guess is he will not be starting for many fantasy teams by the end of next season.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I agree DA will be starting somewhere next year but my guess is he will not be starting for many fantasy teams by the end of next season.

He's done pretty well in Cleveland since he was handedthe starting job. Cleveland was slated to be one of the worstteams in the NFL at the start of the season. I think DA deserves some credit for the turnaround.I would like to see him in the Minnesota or Chicago offense.My guess is he will continue to improve. He is still a raw talent.

 

[stevegamer]

I picked up Anderson as bye week filler once Frye got benched - I was carrying Frye for Manning's bye in a dynasty.

He doesn't have much value right now, because of Quinn. If the Browns didn't have Brady Quinn, Anderson's value would be much higher than it is now. So he's been downgraded on "opportunity" - although he's got a legit shot at being the #2 fantasy QB this year. It would be hard to catch Brady, even if he sits a game or 2, but catching Romo who will likely sit some in the last game or 2 is quite possible.

I work under the theory that once you've proven you can do something it is possible for you to do it again. That's no guarantee to eliminate fluke years (I'm talking to you, Mr. Brady Anderson and your 50 HR), but I think that a 24 year old QB has to get the benefit of the doubt that he is talented enough to do this again. This is especially true when we see that what he's done and how he's done it is very similar to the guys who are right now sitting #1 & #2 in FF circles at QB - lightly regarded QB taking over a team, and progressing from there. Only 2 differences is that the Cowboys & Pats were good when Romo & Brady came to the fore - the Browns - not so much; and of course, Drew Bledsoe isn't on the Browns.