I don't feel comfortable in the back half of the 1st round (1 Viewer)

[MAC_32]

Have fun with choosing between Matt Ryan or Jay Cutler each week. I'll be thrilled to plug in one of the big 3 against any defense.

Sure...but in contrast, have fun deciding between Willis McGahee and Stevan Ridley each week.

I hear you but the difference between one of the big three QB's and the #11 or #12 is huge and so much greater than the difference between (insert late 1st round RB here) and (insert 5th/6th/7th round RB here).In my league last year, Rodgers, Brady, and Brees put up 521, 470, and 528 points in that order. Fitzpatrick was #12 with 290. That's a 180 point swing between the #3 QB and the #12 QB. Granted, my league is 6 point passing TD's but you still get my point.And it's so much easier finding help on RB via the waiver wire due to injury. There's only so many good QB's. It's not often that you pick up a stud off the waiver wire.

You're losing me with this 5th/6th/7th round RB stuff. There was not value there last year. Fred Jackson was the only real hit early in the season, Jahvid Best for a bit too. If the Marshawn Lynch owner somehow made it to week 8 in contention he was as well. Obviously Sproles late (ppr leagues) and Demarco for a brief period midseason worked too.The point is there wasn't much value in the mid-late rounds last year and imho this year looks just as bad if not worse. If you missed on that mid round RB you're searching each week for the Ogbonnaya's, Battle's, and Ridley's of the game. Blech.Maybe all of this is just because I have had success finding under valued QB's in previous seasons, but I'm looking at QB's 6-11 and I'm seeing a ton of value there. There's reason to believe several in the 12-17 range take the step up too. And, like you said, due to the new rules QB's are getting injured less frequently. There's more risk in the early round RB's, but if you hit on one and pair him with a quality QB later you've got a pretty good start to a title contending team.

 

[-jb-]

Have fun with choosing between Matt Ryan or Jay Cutler each week. I'll be thrilled to plug in one of the big 3 against any defense.

Sure...but in contrast, have fun deciding between Willis McGahee and Stevan Ridley each week.

I hear you but the difference between one of the big three QB's and the #11 or #12 is huge and so much greater than the difference between (insert late 1st round RB here) and (insert 5th/6th/7th round RB here).In my league last year, Rodgers, Brady, and Brees put up 521, 470, and 528 points in that order. Fitzpatrick was #12 with 290. That's a 180 point swing between the #3 QB and the #12 QB. Granted, my league is 6 point passing TD's but you still get my point.

And it's so much easier finding help on RB via the waiver wire due to injury. There's only so many good QB's. It's not often that you pick up a stud off the waiver wire.

Yep, understood. Just be aware of the fact that one year does not make a trend.

It isn't just one year. The difference in top QBs to 12 or so is dramatic. And has been for a while. The OP is talking about getting by with Matt Ryan? Going with Brady vs Ryan will be like getting an extra flex player every week. Forget position. Look at the points. If I can get Brady and Graham picking anywhere close to the turn I will laugh.

If someone isn't willing to get out of that "I must get a RB in the first" mentality, that's fine. Doesn't mean the first round is weak

I keep posting this chart, because I think it's very telling. It shows QB1-QB12 production for the last eight years. Two things jump out at you:- There has been a steady increase across all starting QBs production, year over year. Rising tide lifts all ships and all.

- Rodgers/Brees/Brady/Stafford/Newton/Manning '11 (depicted in lavender), and Brady '07 (green) are TOTAL OUTLIERS.

Otherwise, the difference in QB1 to QB12 has remained pretty relative over the years. Now, you may very well believe that 2011 will be repeated this year, and that's cool. I beg to differ. I see more of a 2010 type of year in store. I'm not advocating going into battle with QB12. More like QB6.

Here's the difference in points between QB1 and QB6 since Brady's record breaking season:

2011 - 124

2010 - 24

2009 - 65

2008 - 70

2007 - 174 (difference in points between QB2 and QB6 was 55)

I'm definitely NOT saying that taking a QB in round 1 is a bad strategy...just making sure everyone knows what the implications are.

 

[joey]

or this thought...

drafting from the 12th slot in a 12 team league, don't you have to swing for the fences a bit to make up for the fact that the guys in the first 3 slots have such a big advantage over you at the RB1 position as well as drafting 3 of the top 25-ish players. So taking a guy like McFadden who COULD and SHOULD put up top 5 RB numbers IF healthly, paired with another proven RB like MJD, or Forte. Then hoping that the QB you take at the 3/4 or 5/6 turns ends up being closer to a top 6 QB than not.

Examples using FBG projections: (I'm not in a TE-mandatory redraft league, fwiw)...

"Safer" 1/2 turn:

Brees

Fitzgerald

Sproles

Gore

B Lloyd

DJax

vs.

Riskier 1/2 turn:

McFadden

Forte

Wallace

S Smith

Ryan

DJax

Projections for these 2 fake drafts, fwiw, are only NINE points apart in total by my math using DD's projections (1210 vs. 1201).

So at that point, it's a matter of what you're more comfortable with in the draft. I'm personally loving the depth

at WR this year and am very happy with a QB like Rivers/Romo/Ryan, so trying to make up the RB disadvantage by taking

high upside RBs like DMC and MJD (if he falls) or Forte or Murray fits my "style" more.

but differences in opinion is what makes the world go 'round...

 

[butcher boy]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

 

[rizzler]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

Ive said it countless times... doesnt seem to register.From the 12 spot, Id MUCH rather go Brees+Forte than MJD+Forte or DMC+Forte. I dont trust DMC's fitness nor do I trust MJD to suit up.. plus I hate him.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

To make their arguement look better, people are afraid of change, the way to get best value is to snag a QB at the bottom of the curve 10-12 picks.

 

[chickensoup]

Then the difference becomes what you lose at RB plus what you lose going from a WR 1 to a WR 3 for your third slot.

Taking a QB early has consequences, if you feel you are a good evaluator of WR talent, a QB/RB/RB strategy can work just as well as a RB/RB/WR first 3 Rounds can work. It's all a matter of opinion anyways.

For what it's worth I think the easiest way to make up the points gained by the guy who gets a top 3 pick is to gamble in rounds 1 and 2 with DMC/MJD/Peterson and then play "safer" with WR like Colston/Stevie/Bowe/Maclin and a QB like Romo/Ryan. The whole discussion is opinion oriented and an attempt to make the OP not so down on drafting in the back half of a draft.

 

[David Yudkin]

I never understood the "here's you could end up with as a team" arguement, as both teams in the exercise had access to and could have drafted the same players. So sure, if the argument is that you can still draft a could team starting with a disadvantage and you can be a poor draft and not draft as well the rest of the draft, I agree.

The other thing being left out of all of this is the fact that no one says you HAVE to start the same line up every week. You can bench guys that are off to slow starts. You can play guys with good match ups. You can pick up guys off of waivers. You can make trades. It's not like you HAVE to stick with the same configuration you start with.

I have often played QBBC (by necessity and by design). I frequently play WR3 by committee and play the best match up from a handful of receivers on my roster. I also burn through TEs like nobidies business when I don't get a top guy and usually don't care too much as there are usually servicable guys available at the TE spot. There have been times where I played a different defense every week because there were so many available on the waiver wire that there was no point in trying to keep one.

The point is, most owners don't do enough or get creative enough to win. If I went back over the years and showed people the winning line ups I had in the playoffs, many people would get nauseous. But they won . . . and beat some of the more studly guys on the opponent's team. It's called winning ugly . . . but it's still winning. I remember almost 10 years ago picking up Drew Brees and Antonio Gates off the waiver wire for a playoff game and benching some studs players because their match ups were terrible. (For you youngetrs, back then Breees was not very good and Gates was a complete unknown.) Brees went for 360/2 and Gates 5/120. Same thing with Billy Volek and Drew Bennett the following year. All that matters is getting points on the scoreboard, not the names of the players doing it.

 

[MAC_32]

Have fun with choosing between Matt Ryan or Jay Cutler each week. I'll be thrilled to plug in one of the big 3 against any defense.

Sure...but in contrast, have fun deciding between Willis McGahee and Stevan Ridley each week.

Every single year, you can pluck a top player at RB from the waiver wire. Some waiver guy will be as valuable to fantasy owners as some of these late 1st RBs. RB is the easiest position to find bargains, and QB is the most consistent at the top.

I really don't want to play the can I play in your leagues card (I hate that card), but I can't think of another response. If I'm searching for RB's on waivers last year I'm looking at Ogbonnaya's, Battle's, and Ridley's. Those are not solutions.

 

[Exit 1]

Have fun with choosing between Matt Ryan or Jay Cutler each week. I'll be thrilled to plug in one of the big 3 against any defense.

Sure...but in contrast, have fun deciding between Willis McGahee and Stevan Ridley each week.

Every single year, you can pluck a top player at RB from the waiver wire. Some waiver guy will be as valuable to fantasy owners as some of these late 1st RBs. RB is the easiest position to find bargains, and QB is the most consistent at the top.

 

[MAC_32]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

Most people that don't go QB round 1 are looking for them in these rounds, the trade off to going QB in round 1 is whatever pick you take in these rounds. It's easiest to draw the parallels by linking RB's since that's what most people pick instead of QB. The teams that go QB can follow up with 2 RB's, they're just weaker at WR - so the trade off is then Reggie Wayne instead of misc RB.

 

[-jb-]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

To make their arguement look better, people are afraid of change, the way to get best value is to snag a QB at the bottom of the curve 10-12 picks.

It was me that mentioned McGahee and Ridley. I did so because they have roughly the same ADP as Matt Ryan. Of course you can take a RB earlier, as you should. That doesn't mean that a typical 5th round selection will cause you any more or less heartburn in terms of startability.It has nothing to do with fear of change. I don't advocate one philosophy over the other. There are positives and negatives that go along with both. You can get a good team either way...provided you know the risks.

 

[butcher boy]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

Most people that don't go QB round 1 are looking for them in these rounds, the trade off to going QB in round 1 is whatever pick you take in these rounds. It's easiest to draw the parallels by linking RB's since that's what most people pick instead of QB. The teams that go QB can follow up with 2 RB's, they're just weaker at WR - so the trade off is then Reggie Wayne instead of misc RB.

The original statement said good luck deciding between Cutler and Ryan which was then followed up by a comparison saying good luck choosing between McGahee and Ridley if you go QB early. The point is that that comparison is wrong because taking a QB early doesn't leave you with crappy backs like that to choose from. WR is also very deep this year so I'm fine picking some in the 3rd-6th round range. Reggie Wayne is another bad example because his ADP is round 7. Much better WRs can still be had even on a team that goes QB/RB/RB to start the draft.

 

[-jb-]

Why are people talking about the 5/6/7th rounds? If you draft a QB in the first round, you dont have to wait that long to take a RB. It's hardly a choice between McGahee and Ridley. More like a choice between SJax and Bradshaw.

Most people that don't go QB round 1 are looking for them in these rounds, the trade off to going QB in round 1 is whatever pick you take in these rounds. It's easiest to draw the parallels by linking RB's since that's what most people pick instead of QB. The teams that go QB can follow up with 2 RB's, they're just weaker at WR - so the trade off is then Reggie Wayne instead of misc RB.

The original statement said good luck deciding between Cutler and Ryan which was then followed up by a comparison saying good luck choosing between McGahee and Ridley if you go QB early. The point is that that comparison is wrong because taking a QB early doesn't leave you with crappy backs like that to choose from. WR is also very deep this year so I'm fine picking some in the 3rd-6th round range. Reggie Wayne is another bad example because his ADP is round 7. Much better WRs can still be had even on a team that goes QB/RB/RB to start the draft.

The sentiment doesn't change. I'm not sure how else to explain that a typical 5th round pick will be categorically less consistent than a first round pick. If we want to use your WR analogy, that's cool. Would you rather have Calvin Johnson and Matt Ryan, or Drew Brees and Eric Decker?

 

[Instinctive]

Have fun with choosing between Matt Ryan or Jay Cutler each week. I'll be thrilled to plug in one of the big 3 against any defense.

Sure...but in contrast, have fun deciding between Willis McGahee and Stevan Ridley each week.

Every single year, you can pluck a top player at RB from the waiver wire. Some waiver guy will be as valuable to fantasy owners as some of these late 1st RBs. RB is the easiest position to find bargains, and QB is the most consistent at the top.

I really don't want to play the can I play in your leagues card (I hate that card), but I can't think of another response. If I'm searching for RB's on waivers last year I'm looking at Ogbonnaya's, Battle's, and Ridley's. Those are not solutions.

Spiller. McCluster. Kevin Smith. Roy Helu. Evan Royster. Marion Barber (didn't realize how useful he was for a game or two)...I think that I can get a solid RB, week to week, from the onset of byes til year's end, by mining the wire. I do every year. A game here, two games there...a late round guy hits sometimes. I just think it's much easier to do this at RB and get elite QB/TE production early instead. I've been the first guy to go TE in my league for years now for that very reason...With as many lotto tickets as you can grab at RB if needed, i have no issue going elsewhere early. You're at a disadvantage to Foster/Rice owners...why not build an advantage at the other positions to overcome that?Or take McFadden. Who's just as good. Only he's been unluckier. You're getting the "most people are stupid" discount on him, like you used to get with Andre Johnson, like we got with Stafford last year, like you used to get with Matt Schaub, like you got with SJax for years...

 

[amicsta]

I keep posting this chart, because I think it's very telling. It shows QB1-QB12 production for the last eight years. Two things jump out at you:

- There has been a steady increase across all starting QBs production, year over year. Rising tide lifts all ships and all.

- Rodgers/Brees/Brady/Stafford/Newton/Manning '11 (depicted in lavender), and Brady '07 (green) are TOTAL OUTLIERS.

Otherwise, the difference in QB1 to QB12 has remained pretty relative over the years. Now, you may very well believe that 2011 will be repeated this year, and that's cool. I beg to differ. I see more of a 2010 type of year in store. I'm not advocating going into battle with QB12. More like QB6.

Here's the difference in points between QB1 and QB6 since Brady's record breaking season:

2011 - 124

2010 - 24

2009 - 65

2008 - 70

2007 - 174 (difference in points between QB2 and QB6 was 55)

I'm definitely NOT saying that taking a QB in round 1 is a bad strategy...just making sure everyone knows what the implications are.

Here are the top 12 QBs off of fantasyplaymakers.com for the last 3 seasons2011

397.18

389.64

370.3

369.64

341.32

287.9

281.96

279.48

262.56

253.26

241.02

226.08

2010

314.32

306.48

301

287.8

287.6

273.8

262.44

254.4

249.6

241.08

239.38

231.14

2009

343.76

304.42

286.58

282.9

281.82

278.7

275.16

273.02

272.32

247.34

236.32

234.18

If we analyze the data, we get a Q3 of 302.71 and a Q1 of 251.43. Subtracting the two gives us an interquartile range of 51.28. Multiply this by 1.5 to get 76.92.

302.71+76.92=379.63

251.43-76.92=174.51

According to this analysis, only Rodgers and Brees's 2011 seasons could statistically be deemed as outliers. The term is thrown around way too often without statistical backing. I think once we start realizing that these other top QB performances were NOT outliers, we will see that they are not so out of the realm of repeating. In fact, if we combine this data with the increasing trend in passing yards for the league, it COULD be deemed reasonable to EXPECT similar seasons this year (I certainly do). I am not saying whether or not this makes it a "good" play to draft a QB at the end of the first round. The game, after all, is about building a team. I just wanted to straighten out some of this statistical banter that's being thrown around.

And as an aside, we need to stop acting as though the league is not changing. The uptick in league passing is REAL. Saying that this or that cannot happen because it hasn't happened before or because it hasn't happened "often enough" represents a stance that is too closeminded in this changing fantasy game we play. Being creative, being willing to change and to accept change, is what's going to separate people from the pack this year.

 

[-jb-]

If we analyze the data, we get a Q3 of 302.71 and a Q1 of 251.43. Subtracting the two gives us an interquartile range of 51.28. Multiply this by 1.5 to get 76.92.

302.71+76.92=379.63

251.43-76.92=174.51

According to this analysis, only Rodgers and Brees's 2011 seasons could statistically be deemed as outliers. The term is thrown around way too often without statistical backing. I think once we start realizing that these other top QB performances were NOT outliers, we will see that they are not so out of the realm of repeating. In fact, if we combine this data with the increasing trend in passing yards for the league, it COULD be deemed reasonable to EXPECT similar seasons this year (I certainly do). I am not saying whether or not this makes it a "good" play to draft a QB at the end of the first round. The game, after all, is about building a team. I just wanted to straighten out some of this statistical banter that's being thrown around.

And as an aside, we need to stop acting as though the league is not changing. The uptick in league passing is REAL. Saying that this or that cannot happen because it hasn't happened before or because it hasn't happened "often enough" represents a stance that is too closeminded in this changing fantasy game we play. Being creative, being willing to change and to accept change, is what's going to separate people from the pack this year.

Sorry, but you're too smart for me. What does the bolded mean? Can you explain in layman's terms?I think I've provided pretty good statistical backing, and the numbers you added above map out nearly identically to mine.

All I know is that I look at these numbers on a chart, and 2011 sticks out like a sore thumb. We don't have to call it an outlier if I'm using the term improperly. We can call it a sore thumb if you want.

I also completely agree that the league is changing. That's why I said, "there has been a steady increase across all starting QBs production, year over year. Rising tide lifts all ships and all." If you look at the chart I created, you actually see the uptick that we both agree on. It's subtle, however. Nothing like what we saw from 2010-2011.

Here is another thread where we threw around a lot of numbers. Have a look and let me know what you think.

 

[amicsta]

If we analyze the data, we get a Q3 of 302.71 and a Q1 of 251.43. Subtracting the two gives us an interquartile range of 51.28. Multiply this by 1.5 to get 76.92.

302.71+76.92=379.63

251.43-76.92=174.51

According to this analysis, only Rodgers and Brees's 2011 seasons could statistically be deemed as outliers. The term is thrown around way too often without statistical backing. I think once we start realizing that these other top QB performances were NOT outliers, we will see that they are not so out of the realm of repeating. In fact, if we combine this data with the increasing trend in passing yards for the league, it COULD be deemed reasonable to EXPECT similar seasons this year (I certainly do). I am not saying whether or not this makes it a "good" play to draft a QB at the end of the first round. The game, after all, is about building a team. I just wanted to straighten out some of this statistical banter that's being thrown around.

And as an aside, we need to stop acting as though the league is not changing. The uptick in league passing is REAL. Saying that this or that cannot happen because it hasn't happened before or because it hasn't happened "often enough" represents a stance that is too closeminded in this changing fantasy game we play. Being creative, being willing to change and to accept change, is what's going to separate people from the pack this year.

Sorry, but you're too smart for me. What does the bolded mean? Can you explain in layman's terms?I think I've provided pretty good statistical backing, and the numbers you added above map out nearly identically to mine.

All I know is that I look at these numbers on a chart, and 2011 sticks out like a sore thumb. We don't have to call it an outlier if I'm using the term improperly. We can call it a sore thumb if you want.

I also completely agree that the league is changing. That's why I said, "there has been a steady increase across all starting QBs production, year over year. Rising tide lifts all ships and all." Here is another thread where we threw around a lot of numbers. Have a look and let me know what you think.

Sorry haha I should've explained. If you've never taken a stats course that part probably doesn't make any sense. Perhaps you have heard of percentiles? Like if you, or your children if you have them, take some kind of standardized test, they will sometimes put in the percent of scores that the test taker did better than. That's a percentile. That leads us into quartiles, which are just particular percentiles, specifically the 25th, 50th (commonly called the median), and 75th. In shorthand, we usually say Q1 to represent the first quartile (or 25th percentile) and Q3 to represent the 3rd (or 75th percentile). Statistically speaking, to find an outlier, you are supposed to subtract Q1 from Q3 to obtain what is called the interquartile range. Multiply this by 1.5 to obtain the number which will be used to find outliers. That result is added to Q3 and subtracted from Q1, giving a new "range" of data. Any number outside that range is deemed to be an outlier.

The "league is changing" comment was really just a passing thought that I've been having about all theses debates with regards to passing. It wasn't really aimed at you directly.

As far as the "rising tides lifts all ships" concept, I don't know if that really applies here. Yes, of course the increase in passing has been seen across the league. However, I think that as the overall numbers increase, the differences between top players and middle of the road players can become more significant. There are so many players clustered in the middle, that those few who stand out can make a big impact. The scoring numbers are now so high, that having a guy in the 9-12 range at QB is really no longer a value. In the past, committee QBs or players in the back end of the top 12 could reasonably be expected to compete with the top guys at different points. Right now, I don't believe that this is the case. Clearly we saw this last season, and I think that will be the trend for at least another year or two. Now as always, it still is a game of teambuilding, and perhaps that difference still does not merit taking a quarterback over other, thinner positions like RB.

Oh and another thing with that chart, I agree that the points you have highlighted stand out, but that doesn't mean that its unlikely they wont repeat. I would argue that having half of the top 12 standout would represent a possibly shift in outcomes and the start of a new trend rather than a "sore thumb" of an existing one.

 

[-jb-]

If we analyze the data, we get a Q3 of 302.71 and a Q1 of 251.43. Subtracting the two gives us an interquartile range of 51.28. Multiply this by 1.5 to get 76.92.

302.71+76.92=379.63

251.43-76.92=174.51

According to this analysis, only Rodgers and Brees's 2011 seasons could statistically be deemed as outliers. The term is thrown around way too often without statistical backing. I think once we start realizing that these other top QB performances were NOT outliers, we will see that they are not so out of the realm of repeating. In fact, if we combine this data with the increasing trend in passing yards for the league, it COULD be deemed reasonable to EXPECT similar seasons this year (I certainly do). I am not saying whether or not this makes it a "good" play to draft a QB at the end of the first round. The game, after all, is about building a team. I just wanted to straighten out some of this statistical banter that's being thrown around.

And as an aside, we need to stop acting as though the league is not changing. The uptick in league passing is REAL. Saying that this or that cannot happen because it hasn't happened before or because it hasn't happened "often enough" represents a stance that is too closeminded in this changing fantasy game we play. Being creative, being willing to change and to accept change, is what's going to separate people from the pack this year.

Sorry, but you're too smart for me. What does the bolded mean? Can you explain in layman's terms?I think I've provided pretty good statistical backing, and the numbers you added above map out nearly identically to mine.

All I know is that I look at these numbers on a chart, and 2011 sticks out like a sore thumb. We don't have to call it an outlier if I'm using the term improperly. We can call it a sore thumb if you want.

I also completely agree that the league is changing. That's why I said, "there has been a steady increase across all starting QBs production, year over year. Rising tide lifts all ships and all." Here is another thread where we threw around a lot of numbers. Have a look and let me know what you think.

Sorry haha I should've explained. If you've never taken a stats course that part probably doesn't make any sense. Perhaps you have heard of percentiles? Like if you, or your children if you have them, take some kind of standardized test, they will sometimes put in the percent of scores that the test taker did better than. That's a percentile. That leads us into quartiles, which are just particular percentiles, specifically the 25th, 50th (commonly called the median), and 75th. In shorthand, we usually say Q1 to represent the first quartile (or 25th percentile) and Q3 to represent the 3rd (or 75th percentile). Statistically speaking, to find an outlier, you are supposed to subtract Q1 from Q3 to obtain what is called the interquartile range. Multiply this by 1.5 to obtain the number which will be used to find outliers. That result is added to Q3 and subtracted from Q1, giving a new "range" of data. Any number outside that range is deemed to be an outlier.

The "league is changing" comment was really just a passing thought that I've been having about all theses debates with regards to passing. It wasn't really aimed at you directly.

As far as the "rising tides lifts all ships" concept, I don't know if that really applies here. Yes, of course the increase in passing has been seen across the league. However, I think that as the overall numbers increase, the differences between top players and middle of the road players can become more significant. There are so many players clustered in the middle, that those few who stand out can make a big impact. The scoring numbers are now so high, that having a guy in the 9-12 range at QB is really no longer a value. In the past, committee QBs or players in the back end of the top 12 could reasonably be expected to compete with the top guys at different points. Right now, I don't believe that this is the case. Clearly we saw this last season, and I think that will be the trend for at least another year or two. Now as always, it still is a game of teambuilding, and perhaps that difference still does not merit taking a quarterback over other, thinner positions like RB.

Oh and another thing with that chart, I agree that the points you have highlighted stand out, but that doesn't mean that its unlikely they wont repeat. I would argue that having half of the top 12 standout would represent a possibly shift in outcomes and the start of a new trend rather than a "sore thumb" of an existing one.

Thanks for the explanation. You make some good points. I'm not convinced that last year's top 6 performances are necessarily repeatable, but I can at least understand your POV.