Dynasty QB Rankings- QB9 (1 Viewer)

[KoolKat]

Because it is probably a flaw in my rankings..... I'll have to look at that one.

Nope, it isn't a flaw at all.Happy to look at it for you, but....

Porter isn't even 30 yet. (turns 30 in July)
He was the #1 target in Oakland last year
His QB situation was a mess last year
In 3 of the 5 prior seasons, he was a Top 30 WR. Last year he was 37th.
The 2 other years he missed Top 30 he missed 6 games and 12 games.Now if you want to say that you're high on Roddy White, ok - but I tend to like the WRs that have been there on a more consistent basis - but your statement that he's 32 is just wrong. Both WRs have iffy QB situations, but OAK is more likely to throw and also plays more wide open.

I didnt say Porter was 32, i said Stokley was.Porter will be 30 before the season starts and has never caught for 1000 yards or 10 TD's in a season, nor finished in the the top 25 WR's.

You might want to check that last "Fact".....As for 10 TDs / 1000 yards, he's had 9 twice and had 998 in 2004 (the year he was #20 in FBG scoring). Not many WRs get double-digit TDs.

Gotta love debating WR40-ish guys.....

Sorry, you are right, he did finish #20 in 2004. Also, i wouldnt be debating WR40-ish guys, if you didnt have Roddy White there. Only a couple months after he finished as the #16 WR in his 3rd season with a trio of QB's that shouldnt even be in the league.

Anyway, i promise i will stop hijacking now.

It is a tough ranking to justify. Even if you're a Roddy skeptic, you have to think that a young first round talent coming off a 1,200 yard season with junk quarterbacks is better than the dynasty WR44. Maybe he's the next Peerless Price, but maybe he's legit. You're not giving him enough credit putting him behind has-beens and never-weres like Isaac Bruce, Patrick Crayton, Donte Stallworth, Bryant Johnson, Jerry Porter, and Deion Branch. He has a good pedigree, he had a phenomenal year, and he's seemingly entering his prime. What's not to like? I have White towards the rear of my top 20. I think it would be hard to justify ranking him outside the top 30.

Hijack over.

It's more than a tough ranking to justify, but then again i don't really understand many of Jeff's dynasty rankings. Doesn't mean he's wrong, maybe i'm just stupid, but i've been baffled by quite a few of his rankings over the past couple years. It's almost as if i'm looking at redraft rankings when i look at them.

Its not you, whenever i go to look at the rankings, i put a little checkmark in the box above his name. I have been doing so since he had Shaun Alexander ranked as the #5 RB going into the 2007 season. I dont want to sound like a Richard, because i have no problems with Jeff, but his dynasty rankings are just bad.

I believe he doesn't value youth enough. I really only look at Bloom's ratings.

 

[FBGPoker]

Because it is probably a flaw in my rankings..... I'll have to look at that one.

Nope, it isn't a flaw at all.Happy to look at it for you, but....

Porter isn't even 30 yet. (turns 30 in July)
He was the #1 target in Oakland last year
His QB situation was a mess last year
In 3 of the 5 prior seasons, he was a Top 30 WR. Last year he was 37th.
The 2 other years he missed Top 30 he missed 6 games and 12 games.Now if you want to say that you're high on Roddy White, ok - but I tend to like the WRs that have been there on a more consistent basis - but your statement that he's 32 is just wrong. Both WRs have iffy QB situations, but OAK is more likely to throw and also plays more wide open.

I didnt say Porter was 32, i said Stokley was.Porter will be 30 before the season starts and has never caught for 1000 yards or 10 TD's in a season, nor finished in the the top 25 WR's.

You might want to check that last "Fact".....As for 10 TDs / 1000 yards, he's had 9 twice and had 998 in 2004 (the year he was #20 in FBG scoring). Not many WRs get double-digit TDs.

Gotta love debating WR40-ish guys.....

Sorry, you are right, he did finish #20 in 2004. Also, i wouldnt be debating WR40-ish guys, if you didnt have Roddy White there. Only a couple months after he finished as the #16 WR in his 3rd season with a trio of QB's that shouldnt even be in the league.

Anyway, i promise i will stop hijacking now.

It is a tough ranking to justify. Even if you're a Roddy skeptic, you have to think that a young first round talent coming off a 1,200 yard season with junk quarterbacks is better than the dynasty WR44. Maybe he's the next Peerless Price, but maybe he's legit. You're not giving him enough credit putting him behind has-beens and never-weres like Isaac Bruce, Patrick Crayton, Donte Stallworth, Bryant Johnson, Jerry Porter, and Deion Branch. He has a good pedigree, he had a phenomenal year, and he's seemingly entering his prime. What's not to like? I have White towards the rear of my top 20. I think it would be hard to justify ranking him outside the top 30.

Hijack over.

It's more than a tough ranking to justify, but then again i don't really understand many of Jeff's dynasty rankings. Doesn't mean he's wrong, maybe i'm just stupid, but i've been baffled by quite a few of his rankings over the past couple years. It's almost as if i'm looking at redraft rankings when i look at them.

Its not you, whenever i go to look at the rankings, i put a little checkmark in the box above his name. I have been doing so since he had Shaun Alexander ranked as the #5 RB going into the 2007 season. I dont want to sound like a Richard, because i have no problems with Jeff, but his dynasty rankings are just bad.

this was one of the most baffling, and i'm not being a revisionist, even previous to last season it didn't make sense (how many 30+ yr old RB's do we have to see before it's obvious they are a terrible risk if valued as a top 5 RB) There are exceptions, but that's why they are called exceptions and even the exceptions are gonna give you 1 to 2 premium years at best. Most of his rankings are fine and Jeff has made me rethink and alter my opinion at times, but some of his rankings just seem fundamentally flawed and really don't make much sense.Stokley over Roddy White

There is nothing, and i mean nothing that can explain that to me.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Because it is probably a flaw in my rankings..... I'll have to look at that one.

Nope, it isn't a flaw at all.Happy to look at it for you, but....

Porter isn't even 30 yet. (turns 30 in July)
He was the #1 target in Oakland last year
His QB situation was a mess last year
In 3 of the 5 prior seasons, he was a Top 30 WR. Last year he was 37th.
The 2 other years he missed Top 30 he missed 6 games and 12 games.Now if you want to say that you're high on Roddy White, ok - but I tend to like the WRs that have been there on a more consistent basis - but your statement that he's 32 is just wrong. Both WRs have iffy QB situations, but OAK is more likely to throw and also plays more wide open.

I didnt say Porter was 32, i said Stokley was.Porter will be 30 before the season starts and has never caught for 1000 yards or 10 TD's in a season, nor finished in the the top 25 WR's.

You might want to check that last "Fact".....As for 10 TDs / 1000 yards, he's had 9 twice and had 998 in 2004 (the year he was #20 in FBG scoring). Not many WRs get double-digit TDs.

Gotta love debating WR40-ish guys.....

Sorry, you are right, he did finish #20 in 2004. Also, i wouldnt be debating WR40-ish guys, if you didnt have Roddy White there. Only a couple months after he finished as the #16 WR in his 3rd season with a trio of QB's that shouldnt even be in the league.

Anyway, i promise i will stop hijacking now.

It is a tough ranking to justify. Even if you're a Roddy skeptic, you have to think that a young first round talent coming off a 1,200 yard season with junk quarterbacks is better than the dynasty WR44. Maybe he's the next Peerless Price, but maybe he's legit. You're not giving him enough credit putting him behind has-beens and never-weres like Isaac Bruce, Patrick Crayton, Donte Stallworth, Bryant Johnson, Jerry Porter, and Deion Branch. He has a good pedigree, he had a phenomenal year, and he's seemingly entering his prime. What's not to like? I have White towards the rear of my top 20. I think it would be hard to justify ranking him outside the top 30.

Hijack over.

It's more than a tough ranking to justify, but then again i don't really understand many of Jeff's dynasty rankings. Doesn't mean he's wrong, maybe i'm just stupid, but i've been baffled by quite a few of his rankings over the past couple years. It's almost as if i'm looking at redraft rankings when i look at them.

Its not you, whenever i go to look at the rankings, i put a little checkmark in the box above his name. I have been doing so since he had Shaun Alexander ranked as the #5 RB going into the 2007 season. I dont want to sound like a Richard, because i have no problems with Jeff, but his dynasty rankings are just bad.

this was one of the most baffling, and i'm not being a revisionist, even previous to last season it didn't make sense (how many 30+ yr old RB's do we have to see before it's obvious they are a terrible risk if valued as a top 5 RB) There are exceptions, but that's why they are called exceptions and even the exceptions are gonna give you 1 to 2 premium years at best. Most of his rankings are fine and Jeff has made me rethink and alter my opinion at times, but some of his rankings just seem fundamentally flawed and really don't make much sense.Stokley over Roddy White

There is nothing, and i mean nothing that can explain that to me.

White's done what he's done in 2007, but it was one year.Stokley consistently catches >60% of his targets, and I believe that he'll be the #2 target in Denver next year for a Top 10 QB. That should put Stokley in a very good position to perform, and I wouldn't be surprised at all for him to be the 2008 version of Bobby Engram.

Roddy White's QB situation is a mess, and yes I realize he put up very good numbers last year with that mess. With uncertainty at QB and the new coaching situation, plus only one year of production at that level, I'm not a White believer. I think that's what has some of you at odds with my ranking - rather than the company he's in - you think I have him too low.

I've said it time and time again, if you don't like or want to debate a ranking, feel free to start a thread. I'm fine talking about some of them. I stand behind them 90+% of the time, but if you make a convincing argument I'm not above tweaking them.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Because it is probably a flaw in my rankings..... I'll have to look at that one.

Nope, it isn't a flaw at all.Happy to look at it for you, but....

Porter isn't even 30 yet. (turns 30 in July)
He was the #1 target in Oakland last year
His QB situation was a mess last year
In 3 of the 5 prior seasons, he was a Top 30 WR. Last year he was 37th.
The 2 other years he missed Top 30 he missed 6 games and 12 games.Now if you want to say that you're high on Roddy White, ok - but I tend to like the WRs that have been there on a more consistent basis - but your statement that he's 32 is just wrong. Both WRs have iffy QB situations, but OAK is more likely to throw and also plays more wide open.

I didnt say Porter was 32, i said Stokley was.Porter will be 30 before the season starts and has never caught for 1000 yards or 10 TD's in a season, nor finished in the the top 25 WR's.

You might want to check that last "Fact".....As for 10 TDs / 1000 yards, he's had 9 twice and had 998 in 2004 (the year he was #20 in FBG scoring). Not many WRs get double-digit TDs.

Gotta love debating WR40-ish guys.....

Sorry, you are right, he did finish #20 in 2004. Also, i wouldnt be debating WR40-ish guys, if you didnt have Roddy White there. Only a couple months after he finished as the #16 WR in his 3rd season with a trio of QB's that shouldnt even be in the league.

Anyway, i promise i will stop hijacking now.

It is a tough ranking to justify. Even if you're a Roddy skeptic, you have to think that a young first round talent coming off a 1,200 yard season with junk quarterbacks is better than the dynasty WR44. Maybe he's the next Peerless Price, but maybe he's legit. You're not giving him enough credit putting him behind has-beens and never-weres like Isaac Bruce, Patrick Crayton, Donte Stallworth, Bryant Johnson, Jerry Porter, and Deion Branch. He has a good pedigree, he had a phenomenal year, and he's seemingly entering his prime. What's not to like? I have White towards the rear of my top 20. I think it would be hard to justify ranking him outside the top 30.

Hijack over.

It's more than a tough ranking to justify, but then again i don't really understand many of Jeff's dynasty rankings. Doesn't mean he's wrong, maybe i'm just stupid, but i've been baffled by quite a few of his rankings over the past couple years. It's almost as if i'm looking at redraft rankings when i look at them.

Its not you, whenever i go to look at the rankings, i put a little checkmark in the box above his name. I have been doing so since he had Shaun Alexander ranked as the #5 RB going into the 2007 season. I dont want to sound like a Richard, because i have no problems with Jeff, but his dynasty rankings are just bad.

I believe he doesn't value youth enough. I really only look at Bloom's ratings.

I believe some of you overvalue youth. Regardless, I look at ALL the rankings, because I know that someone in the league I am in agrees with more closely with Bloom or another than I do - and there's my trade opportunity.

I got criticized for trading Brandon Jones in a league last year for Bobby Engram (and more) about August or September. I made out like a bandit there. Veteran > promising younger player.

I just got criticized for trading Bowe and Willis for Plax last year as well. In retrospect, Willis crushed and Bowe came on sooner than expected, so I look bad on that deal. That said, Plax got me in the playoffs so it wasn't all bad.

Trades happen, good or bad. Same with rankings. I nail some, I miss on some (like SA - he's done). Hopefully I bat >.500.

I've got no issue with people not liking my rankings or even questioning them, but to not look at them at all is just shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[KoolKat]

Because it is probably a flaw in my rankings..... I'll have to look at that one.

Nope, it isn't a flaw at all.Happy to look at it for you, but....

Porter isn't even 30 yet. (turns 30 in July)

He was the #1 target in Oakland last year
His QB situation was a mess last year
In 3 of the 5 prior seasons, he was a Top 30 WR. Last year he was 37th.
The 2 other years he missed Top 30 he missed 6 games and 12 games.Now if you want to say that you're high on Roddy White, ok - but I tend to like the WRs that have been there on a more consistent basis - but your statement that he's 32 is just wrong. Both WRs have iffy QB situations, but OAK is more likely to throw and also plays more wide open.

I didnt say Porter was 32, i said Stokley was.Porter will be 30 before the season starts and has never caught for 1000 yards or 10 TD's in a season, nor finished in the the top 25 WR's.

You might want to check that last "Fact".....As for 10 TDs / 1000 yards, he's had 9 twice and had 998 in 2004 (the year he was #20 in FBG scoring). Not many WRs get double-digit TDs.

Gotta love debating WR40-ish guys.....

Sorry, you are right, he did finish #20 in 2004. Also, i wouldnt be debating WR40-ish guys, if you didnt have Roddy White there. Only a couple months after he finished as the #16 WR in his 3rd season with a trio of QB's that shouldnt even be in the league.

Anyway, i promise i will stop hijacking now.

It is a tough ranking to justify. Even if you're a Roddy skeptic, you have to think that a young first round talent coming off a 1,200 yard season with junk quarterbacks is better than the dynasty WR44. Maybe he's the next Peerless Price, but maybe he's legit. You're not giving him enough credit putting him behind has-beens and never-weres like Isaac Bruce, Patrick Crayton, Donte Stallworth, Bryant Johnson, Jerry Porter, and Deion Branch. He has a good pedigree, he had a phenomenal year, and he's seemingly entering his prime. What's not to like? I have White towards the rear of my top 20. I think it would be hard to justify ranking him outside the top 30.

Hijack over.

It's more than a tough ranking to justify, but then again i don't really understand many of Jeff's dynasty rankings. Doesn't mean he's wrong, maybe i'm just stupid, but i've been baffled by quite a few of his rankings over the past couple years. It's almost as if i'm looking at redraft rankings when i look at them.

Its not you, whenever i go to look at the rankings, i put a little checkmark in the box above his name. I have been doing so since he had Shaun Alexander ranked as the #5 RB going into the 2007 season. I dont want to sound like a Richard, because i have no problems with Jeff, but his dynasty rankings are just bad.

I believe he doesn't value youth enough. I really only look at Bloom's ratings.

I believe some of you overvalue youth. Regardless, I look at ALL the rankings, because I know that someone in the league I am in agrees with more closely with Bloom or another than I do - and there's my trade opportunity.

I got criticized for trading Brandon Jones in a league last year for Bobby Engram (and more) about August or September. I made out like a bandit there. Veteran > promising younger player.

I just got criticized for trading Bowe and Willis for Plax last year as well. In retrospect, Willis crushed and Bowe came on sooner than expected, so I look bad on that deal. That said, Plax got me in the playoffs so it wasn't all bad.

Trades happen, good or bad. Same with rankings. I nail some, I miss on some (like SA - he's done). Hopefully I bat >.500.

I've got no issue with people not liking my rankings or even questioning them, but to not look at them at all is just shooting yourself in the foot.

I shouldn't say that I don't look at your ratings. I do, otherwise I wouldn't know why I disagree with a lot of them. I should say that in formulating my own rankings I primarily rely on Bloom's input, because I think we are likeminded. I believe that many do overvalue youth, but it has a good amount of value in dynasty. In my opinion, you are on the other side of the spectrum, way undervalueing youth. For example, the fact that you have LT ahead of AP is evidence of not giving a legitimate amount of weight to youth. You may turn out to be right in certain cases, but it just does not fit with my logic and way thinking relative to fantasy football.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I shouldn't say that I don't look at your ratings. I do, otherwise I wouldn't know why I disagree with a lot of them. I should say that in formulating my own rankings I primarily rely on Bloom's input, because I think we are likeminded. I believe that many do overvalue youth, but it has a good amount of value in dynasty. In my opinion, you are on the other side of the spectrum, way undervalueing youth. For example, the fact that you have LT ahead of AP is evidence of not giving a legitimate amount of weight to youth. You may turn out to be right in certain cases, but it just does not fit with my logic and way thinking relative to fantasy football.

Well beyond a hijack already....I do tend to undervalue youth, but that's coupled with not proving themselves to the same degree as the older player. I've had success with veterans in Dynasty mostly because (A) they tend to perform like they have in the past and (B) they're cheaper to acquire. That said, I'll still collect both types of players, but I tend to like getting that 30+ yr old WR dirt cheap and plugging him in for 1-3 years where I know he'll be solid.BTW, interesting you bring up LT2 and ADP - that's a close call right now, and 3 of 4 staff have LT2 at 1, including myself and Bloom.That's another good example of a proven talent (LT2) over a guy with amazing ability and potential (ADP). Could ADP be > LT2, both in the short and long term? Yes, of course. However, I'll take the guy who's been there, done that for several seasons and has been much healthier.

 

[KoolKat]

I shouldn't say that I don't look at your ratings. I do, otherwise I wouldn't know why I disagree with a lot of them. I should say that in formulating my own rankings I primarily rely on Bloom's input, because I think we are likeminded. I believe that many do overvalue youth, but it has a good amount of value in dynasty. In my opinion, you are on the other side of the spectrum, way undervalueing youth. For example, the fact that you have LT ahead of AP is evidence of not giving a legitimate amount of weight to youth. You may turn out to be right in certain cases, but it just does not fit with my logic and way thinking relative to fantasy football.

Well beyond a hijack already....I do tend to undervalue youth, but that's coupled with not proving themselves to the same degree as the older player. I've had success with veterans in Dynasty mostly because (A) they tend to perform like they have in the past and (B) they're cheaper to acquire. That said, I'll still collect both types of players, but I tend to like getting that 30+ yr old WR dirt cheap and plugging him in for 1-3 years where I know he'll be solid.BTW, interesting you bring up LT2 and ADP - that's a close call right now, and 3 of 4 staff have LT2 at 1, including myself and Bloom.That's another good example of a proven talent (LT2) over a guy with amazing ability and potential (ADP). Could ADP be > LT2, both in the short and long term? Yes, of course. However, I'll take the guy who's been there, done that for several seasons and has been much healthier.

I am unable to view Bloom's ratings right now because they have not been updated in the last two weeks. I completely disagree. Peterson has his entire career ahead of him, and has proven he has all-pro ability. In dynasty, there is not question in my mind. Your point that LT2 is proven is irrelevant, becaue Peterson is also proven. The only real argument for LT2 in this case would be AP's fragility. With the recent injury troubles and rising age I would say that Peterson is only slightly more of an injury risk. You also may argue that AP will lose carries to Taylor while LT2 does not have this issue. I cannot respond with facts, but I personally believe that AP's exceeding talent will force the coaching staff to have him in as often as is possible. I advocate buying vets cheap too (I am big on buying Marvin Harrison in dynasty) but I still give considerable weight to guys that have time on their side. The probability that Peterson will play 5-6 years after LT2 is gone is substantial, and has to be considered even if you ascribe to the 3-4 window philosophy as I do.

 

[BassNBrew]

I shouldn't say that I don't look at your ratings. I do, otherwise I wouldn't know why I disagree with a lot of them. I should say that in formulating my own rankings I primarily rely on Bloom's input, because I think we are likeminded. I believe that many do overvalue youth, but it has a good amount of value in dynasty. In my opinion, you are on the other side of the spectrum, way undervalueing youth. For example, the fact that you have LT ahead of AP is evidence of not giving a legitimate amount of weight to youth. You may turn out to be right in certain cases, but it just does not fit with my logic and way thinking relative to fantasy football.

Well beyond a hijack already....I do tend to undervalue youth, but that's coupled with not proving themselves to the same degree as the older player. I've had success with veterans in Dynasty mostly because (A) they tend to perform like they have in the past and (B) they're cheaper to acquire. That said, I'll still collect both types of players, but I tend to like getting that 30+ yr old WR dirt cheap and plugging him in for 1-3 years where I know he'll be solid.BTW, interesting you bring up LT2 and ADP - that's a close call right now, and 3 of 4 staff have LT2 at 1, including myself and Bloom.That's another good example of a proven talent (LT2) over a guy with amazing ability and potential (ADP). Could ADP be > LT2, both in the short and long term? Yes, of course. However, I'll take the guy who's been there, done that for several seasons and has been much healthier.

I am unable to view Bloom's ratings right now because they have not been updated in the last two weeks. I completely disagree. Peterson has his entire career ahead of him, and has proven he has all-pro ability. In dynasty, there is not question in my mind. Your point that LT2 is proven is irrelevant, becaue Peterson is also proven. The only real argument for LT2 in this case would be AP's fragility. With the recent injury troubles and rising age I would say that Peterson is only slightly more of an injury risk. You also may argue that AP will lose carries to Taylor while LT2 does not have this issue. I cannot respond with facts, but I personally believe that AP's exceeding talent will force the coaching staff to have him in as often as is possible. I advocate buying vets cheap too (I am big on buying Marvin Harrison in dynasty) but I still give considerable weight to guys that have time on their side. The probability that Peterson will play 5-6 years after LT2 is gone is substantial, and has to be considered even if you ascribe to the 3-4 window philosophy as I do.

So how did AP's 2.67 ypc work out for you down the stretch. Of course that's coming off a couple of weeks on the pine.

 

[BassNBrew]

Rivers (and I can't stand the whiney tool)

 

[Crippler]

Other Phillip Rivers

Great 2nd half, young, great weapons in Gates, Chambers, Jackson, Buster and one of the best receiving RB's in game. Add in high scoring team and great D

 

[radiohead417]

I voted other for David Garrard. Maybe not the best candidate on the list, but absolutely should be on the list, especially ahead of Vince Young.

 

[FavreCo]

I find it laughable that people still consider VY a professional QB, let alone a worthwhile fantasy option

I wouldn't want him as my #1 fantasy QB, but IMO he is a proven winner and I'm very impressed with what he's accomplished in short order with virtually no help. Hopefully one day he'll be surrounded with some offensive talent and then we'll get to see just how good VY can be.

Let us remember that Vick was mentioned the same way. Exit Vick, enter Roddy White - 1000 yard season with what most would consider inferior QB's to vick.Fact is that Vick held back the passing game the same way Vince Young does. Defense won games for TENN. Not Young.

Who won games for Atlanta then? With Vick they were a legit playoff contender every year, without him they are one of the worst teams in the NFL.

QB's don't need to throw for gaudy stats to win games. Young may never become a great passing QB, but that doesn't mean he can't be a game changing QB who's team has a better chance to win with him then without.

Vince had a bad year in 07', but his rookie year he was the main reason for most of TENN wins, not the defense.

Atl Offensive rank in 2006 WITH Vick: 25th. Record in 2005 and 2006: Sucked, WITH Vick.

ATL defensive rank 2007: 29th.

That team was heading south with or without vick.

No. Defense took ATL to the playoffs. Defensive rank: 8th. Yeah the O was 5th but come playoff time you go against the big boys and if you can't pass, you lose. Vick can win some games with his legs. Big deal. What did that ever get them? NOTHING. With Vick they were a team that could compete for a playoff spot at best. NEVER could they compete for a superbowl title. Ditto Young.

Now on to Tenn. Who won those games for them this year? It sure as hell wasn't Young and his 9 TD, 17 INT performance. It was THEIR defense. Young is full of bad years to come. His rookie year sucked as well. Another guy who couldn't bust 300 yards passing to save his life. He's all yours.

Like I said Young = Vick.

 

[ThePittbully]

a reasonable assertion. I like Garrard's dependability, but before we call in a 3/4-season semi-wonder (remember, he wasn't the unquestioned starter until this year when Leftwich stunk it up), let's consider that he played 14 games last season, including the playoffs.totals - 21 TDs, 2927 yards. That's an average of about 1.5 TDs, 175 yards per game. Let's not get too wrapped up in his no-pick streak. That's all it was, a streak. He threw 0 picks the first 8 starts of 2007, then threw 6 picks in the final 6 games of the season, including the playoffs.for a part of a season, he was pretty consistent. I'd be a bit more convinced if his upside wasn't about equal to what Matt Hasselbeck has put up several times already in his career.

While I agree that Hass is undervalued and he should have been ranked at 8, I disagree with your assesment of Garrard. In his first year as a true starter and (I believe) his first year under a new OC, Garrard got off to a slow start. He threw only4 TD's and was underwhelming as a fantasy QB, that's true.However, anyone who followed his season can tell you he progressed greatly as it went on. In his last six games of the regular season, after returning from injury, he threw for 1368 yards and 13 passing TD's (plus 1 rushing) with only 3 INT's. That's an average of 228 pass yards per game and 2.3 TD's per game. In my league, through that stretch he averaged 20.6 ppg. On top of that, through the last six weeks of the season (including a week he did not play) he was top 5 in points by a qb. He finished 17th overall on the season among qb's and had he not missed 4 games he may have been top 10 despite his slow start. In other words,he's more than a bye week option.