I'm taking Peyton Manning in the 4th spot (1 Viewer)

[cobalt_27]

I agree with Mark and the big thing I am seeing with you all defending the Manning pick and listing your teams stating " i thought my draft turned out pretty well" is this: Your lack of talent at the RB position. It is almost like with all of the examples you guys gave, you sacrificed taking manning at 4,5, or 6 in return to only having 1 good RB.

What Mark is stating is while you are doing this trend and hoping on the manning bandwagon, other teams are loading up on SOLID RB's and will grab a QB that will be outscored by Peyton by around 5 -9 points a game.

Great, you have won the QB battle guy....well while you have been doing that his combination of Rudi/Mcgahee just rolled over your combination westbrook and gore(are you kidding?)...by leaps and bounds.

People taking manning in the first are forced to take ..... mid to low level running backs and will be suffering. I would rather Have a RUDI/Mcgahee/Brees combo anyday over a westbrook/m. bell/manning combo.

Strawman argument. Plenty of better options at RB than a Westbrook/Mike Bell combo.You're prolly looking at some combo of McGahee, K.Jones, Parker, C.Taylor, J.Lewis, etc available in 2nd/3rd in 10-team leagues.

 

[gdub]

I am enjoying this discussion, especially with my 6 pt passing td league drafting this week. I think Chaka makes a fair assessment. Using previous data and data projected for this year, Manning isn't a great pick in the mid-first. But, if someone can tell me with certainty who the #2 or #3 quarterback will be so I can take them in round 4 like Marc suggests...I am all ears. If someone can tell me with certainty who the right back to take in the mid-first that will produce top 10 rb numbers...I am all ears. Certainty, which cannot be backed by numbers, should be factored into a decision now and then.

 

[Da Guru]

There is no way I agree with this statement. Manning has proven capable of throwing 49 TDs, the most in NFL history and you have to go back to 1999 to find a QB who even topped 40.

Ummm - in that record setting year, D.Culpepper was VERY close to him in FF points - Manning has YET to prove that he scores SO MUCH MORE than the #2 QB that he is worth taking THREE or FOUR full rounds ahead of the #2 QB.You are simply missing the entire point of draft value if you believe this argument is proof of Manning being worth the #4 overall. Even at 6 per pass TD, Manning does not OUTSCORE the #2 QB enough to make him worth that draft spot.The #1 RB DOES outscore the #12 RB that much to makehim worth the #1 overall, but the #12 RB is generally drafted by 2.06 in every draft.The #2 QB is not drafted until sometime around 4.04 or later. Manning at #4 overall is POOR drafting.

I understand that thinking, but getting the #2 guy is no lock. Manning may outscore the #6 or 7 guy by enough points to jusify it.

 

[Ronnie Mack]

The term- "poor drafting" is somewhat harsh, no? I dont think that would be a proper label for a stud like Manning. Even with the logic of overall value, etc. I applaud someone that would approach the draft in the manner of not going by the book, and againest the grain. Guys- another aspect here is the overall depth of rb's this season, pretty deep.

Good luck this season to all, we're headed out to vegas for our draft.

 

[mbuehner]

Here's the shorthand- in a 10 team league if you take a QB in the mid 1st you should assume there will be 13 or so RBs off the board before you get your first. Right off the bat you are sacrificing RB5 (say) for RB14 and your second back RB15 for RB24... roughly. Meanwhile you could still have gotten QB10 basically anywhere in the first 8 rounds.

Now I, for one, feel far more confident in being able to pick a viable QB10 than a RB14 or 24. People vastly overestimate their ability to consistantly pick successful RBs late. Its the gamblers perspective, you always hear about and remember when you or others hit, but ignore the misses. We all remember Willie Parker and forget Kevan Barlow, Michael Bennett, Maurice Clarett etc.

The guy who took Manning in the first last year and rolled with JJ Arrington as his RB2 probably isnt reminding us of it.

 

[Chaka]

Here's the shorthand- in a 10 team league if you take a QB in the mid 1st you should assume there will be 13 or so RBs off the board before you get your first. Right off the bat you are sacrificing RB5 (say) for RB14 and your second back RB15 for RB24... roughly. Meanwhile you could still have gotten QB10 basically anywhere in the first 8 rounds.

Now I, for one, feel far more confident in being able to pick a viable QB10 than a RB14 or 24. People vastly overestimate their ability to consistantly pick successful RBs late. Its the gamblers perspective, you always hear about and remember when you or others hit, but ignore the misses. We all remember Willie Parker and forget Kevan Barlow, Michael Bennett, Maurice Clarett etc.

The guy who took Manning in the first last year and rolled with JJ Arrington as his RB2 probably isnt reminding us of it.

People also overestimate their ability to pick successful RBs early too if the 50% rate of first round busts is any indication.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Here's the shorthand- in a 10 team league if you take a QB in the mid 1st you should assume there will be 13 or so RBs off the board before you get your first. Right off the bat you are sacrificing RB5 (say) for RB14 and your second back RB15 for RB24... roughly. Meanwhile you could still have gotten QB10 basically anywhere in the first 8 rounds.

Now I, for one, feel far more confident in being able to pick a viable QB10 than a RB14 or 24. People vastly overestimate their ability to consistantly pick successful RBs late. Its the gamblers perspective, you always hear about and remember when you or others hit, but ignore the misses. We all remember Willie Parker and forget Kevan Barlow, Michael Bennett, Maurice Clarett etc.

The guy who took Manning in the first last year and rolled with JJ Arrington as his RB2 probably isnt reminding us of it.

People also overestimate their ability to pick successful RBs early too if the 50% rate of first round busts is any indication.

I agree. The Stud RB theory only works out if your RB actually ends up being a stud.Most years I would not draft a QB in Round 1, but I would consider P.Manning this year between 1.10 and 1.12, especially if your scoring favors the QB position. There will still be a solid RB left at the turn in Round 2 such as McGahee, Bush, Westbrook, and maybe even Portis. And there will still be a decent crop of RB's available in Rounds 4-6 to load up on for your #2 and #3 RB or a handcuff combo like Benson/Jones.

You could argue that QB #2 will not be far behind Manning in scoring (and may even surpass Manning) but good luck guessing who will actually be the #2. It could be any number of at least 5 players. Meanwhile there seems to be a lot more value at RB this year after Round 3.

 

[Chaka]

Here's the shorthand- in a 10 team league if you take a QB in the mid 1st you should assume there will be 13 or so RBs off the board before you get your first. Right off the bat you are sacrificing RB5 (say) for RB14 and your second back RB15 for RB24... roughly. Meanwhile you could still have gotten QB10 basically anywhere in the first 8 rounds.

Now I, for one, feel far more confident in being able to pick a viable QB10 than a RB14 or 24. People vastly overestimate their ability to consistantly pick successful RBs late. Its the gamblers perspective, you always hear about and remember when you or others hit, but ignore the misses. We all remember Willie Parker and forget Kevan Barlow, Michael Bennett, Maurice Clarett etc.

The guy who took Manning in the first last year and rolled with JJ Arrington as his RB2 probably isnt reminding us of it.

People also overestimate their ability to pick successful RBs early too if the 50% rate of first round busts is any indication.

I agree. The Stud RB theory only works out if your RB actually ends up being a stud.Most years I would not draft a QB in Round 1, but I would consider P.Manning this year between 1.10 and 1.12, especially if your scoring favors the QB position. There will still be a solid RB left at the turn in Round 2 such as McGahee, Bush, Westbrook, and maybe even Portis. And there will still be a decent crop of RB's available in Rounds 4-6 to load up on for your #2 and #3 RB or a handcuff combo like Benson/Jones.

You could argue that QB #2 will not be far behind Manning in scoring (and may even surpass Manning) but good luck guessing who will actually be the #2. It could be any number of at least 5 players. Meanwhile there seems to be a lot more value at RB this year after Round 3.

I agree although with Carson Palmer's performance last night I, personally, am confident in placing him as the clear #2 QB on my board. That lowers Manning's overall value but I would still pull the trigger on both of them before the end of the second round.

 

[mbuehner]

There's another major advantage to taking a top tier RB, their backups are more likely to be established making handcuffing plausible. I can build my team around a backfield instead of a specific player. If i'm depending on Chris Brown, i probably cant afford Henry and White as well. If Foster, not Deangelo. If Lundy, no Morency and Smith. When you are already grasping for RB picks late in the draft, its a lot harder to spare a midround pick and roster spot for RBBC mates and backups. Otoh, I can take LT2 and get Turner late and never think about it again. The virtue of them being studs automatically means their backups have less value and hence are much further down in the draft. When you are grasping at maybes the competition is much fiercer.

 

[TwinTurbo]

There's another major advantage to taking a top tier RB, their backups are more likely to be established making handcuffing plausible. I can build my team around a backfield instead of a specific player. If i'm depending on Chris Brown, i probably cant afford Henry and White as well. If Foster, not Deangelo. If Lundy, no Morency and Smith. When you are already grasping for RB picks late in the draft, its a lot harder to spare a midround pick and roster spot for RBBC mates and backups. Otoh, I can take LT2 and get Turner late and never think about it again. The virtue of them being studs automatically means their backups have less value and hence are much further down in the draft. When you are grasping at maybes the competition is much fiercer.

That's a valid point but it really only applies to about 5 RB's in the first round this year. LT/TurnerLJ/BennettSA/MoMoPortis/DuckettTiki/JacobsBut the rest of the top 10 RB's don't really have an established backup. Who do you pair with Rudi? Chris Perry is probably going on the PUP list. What about Caddy: Pittman or Alstott? Who starts in Miami if Ronnie Brown goes down and would you even want to play them? There are a lot of question marks. That's why I prefer some of the Round 3-6 combos like Benson/Jones, Foster/Williams, and Bell/Bell to some of the RB's in the bottom of Round 1. And another reason why it could be justified to draft Manning over a player such as Lamont Jordan.

 

[sartre]

That's why I prefer some of the Round 3-6 combos like Benson/Jones, Foster/Williams, and Bell/Bell to some of the RB's in the bottom of Round 1. And another reason why it could be justified to draft Manning over a player such as Lamont Jordan.

I feel fairly confident that the combos of Foster/Williams and Bell/Bell have just as good a chance as not of putting up numbers this year on par with SJax, Caddy, McGahee, Jordan, etc.

In other words, I can spend 2 picks in rounds 4 through 7 and get a first round caliber RB. Yes, you are burning two midround picks, but I doubt anyone wouldn't trade a Round 4 and Round 6 for a late 1st.

On the other hand, I have no confidence that I can platoon QBs and come anywhere near the expected production of Manning.

 

[mbuehner]

There is truth to that, but on the other hand i think just the fact that a guy is definately not going to get challenged for his position has value- look at what happened with Chris Brown and Travis Henry today. Completely out of the blue and I know there are a lot of guys in just the scenario we are talking about that grabbed Chris Brown as a RB3. Now if they had a brain they grabbed some other guys to cover their butts, but that doesnt change the fact that the season hasnt started yet and one of the guys they rolled the dice on is in trouble. Caddy might blow out his knee, god forbid, but Pittman isnt going to take his spot (and if he did get hurt, it would certainly be Pittman and not Alstot )

 

[mbuehner]

I feel fairly confident that the combos of Foster/Williams and Bell/Bell have just as good a chance as not of putting up numbers this year on par with SJax, Caddy, McGahee, Jordan, etc.In other words, I can spend 2 picks in rounds 4 through 7 and get a first round caliber RB.

Yeh, but thats crazy talk because there is a strong possibility those backfields will see big chunks of RBBC, and in fantasy you dont get to add two players together (unless you want to start them both). All those first round guys are likely to see way more touches per game than the others. There are a whole lot of reasons those guy are 'studs' and they arent all purely talent. I can find a full time QB in round 8 or later that will take every snap this season (barring injury).

 

[Chaka]

There's another major advantage to taking a top tier RB, their backups are more likely to be established making handcuffing plausible. I can build my team around a backfield instead of a specific player. If i'm depending on Chris Brown, i probably cant afford Henry and White as well. If Foster, not Deangelo. If Lundy, no Morency and Smith. When you are already grasping for RB picks late in the draft, its a lot harder to spare a midround pick and roster spot for RBBC mates and backups. Otoh, I can take LT2 and get Turner late and never think about it again. The virtue of them being studs automatically means their backups have less value and hence are much further down in the draft. When you are grasping at maybes the competition is much fiercer.

You assume that there would be limited or no dropoff in production between the starter and backup. Michael Turner is the only backup to one of the full time backs that I would have any confidence in performing at a high level.With Manning you don't need to spend any pick on his backup. So the Manning owner spends a pick on Ced Benson, Tatum Bell, Jerrious Norwood or Wali Lundy while the LT owner gets a guy who barring a catastropic event will spend the entire season wasting a roster spot. The way I see it is the LT owner is spending a pick that is only meaningful if LT goes down, likely ending your fantasy season regardless of who is the backup. The Manning owner gets another lottery pick to spend on that guy (Lundy, Norwood) who might emerge without something happening to Manning or Dunn or Morrency.

 

[mbuehner]

Yeh, but who is more critical to your team, Manning or LT2? I would argue in the eggs in one basket contest, Manning is by far the greater potential risk. A stud RBs backup may not be a stud, but he is likely to be serviceable. Mannings backup is a pretty big question mark- he may do very well but that it goes back to the small QB gap, pretty well is almost not worth having for a QB there are so many at the same level. Would you rather stake your season rolling with Maurice Morris running behind the Seattle O-line, or Jim Sorgi throwing to Wayne and Harrison? I like my chances with MM.

 

[Koya]

Onto this idea of "poor drafting" if you go Manning...

first, in a traditional league, I wouldnt take Manning in the first and he wouldnt be there in the second. That said:

(1) Projections - everyone lives and die by projections, then feed it in vbds and all that jazz. Well, wth do projections REALLY mean? A guess? Seriously - we know that 1/2 the top RBs wont be, that guys get injured, or lose their position, or a combo of the two. Projections seem to be a pretty "optimistic" viewpoint.

When you have a very very good chance of getting an advantage by going QB, and a slim chance of striking gold, decent chance at doing good, decent chance at doing meh and sizeable chance of bust with a RB?

When you then take into account the next points about why you can veer away from the traditional thought that you must go RB and that VBD or whatnot tells us there is no value elsewhere.....

(2) How other guys draft

If you know that you can get two RBs that YOU think have a very good chance to do well, or better than well in the 2/3/4/5 rounds, hey - more power to you. Lets face it, there is a good amount of shuffle year to year. If you can pick out which guys rebound, or come from know where, or are just undervalued/underated and drop, then it is pretty smart to take another position (be it QB or WR) and go RB later.

(3) Points over the competition on a week to week basis

Once again, we focus so much on lists, and sheets and projections at this time a year.

In a week, we will be talking about THIS weekend. What player "x" will do against the Bears defense and should I start Samie Parker or Matt Jones. Or, one or the other could be hurt, or lost a slot on the depth chart and those projections over a year are rendered useless.

Consistency comes into play. The chance of my players to outcore your players on an individual and group basis. If I can get a QB (or WR) that I know will help me win fantasy football matchups each weeks.

Before my ramble goes on TOO long, let's just say that there is more to winning fantasy football games and leagues than projected numbers which assume no injury (for the most part) and really lose a lot of meaning for different reasons, when looking at week to week fantasy football realities.

And of course, if your draft will lead you very good value at RB later, and you have a chance to gain an advantage elsewhere, it seems prudent to do so.

Sorry I dont have any charts to back that up.

 

[Pabst Blue Ribbon]

Here's what I did from the 4th spot in a 10 team redraft...QB/2RB/3WR league

I did a ton of mocks and it was clear that by the time i was up again at 17 in the 2nd round the pickings would be slim at RB and there would be better picks at WR than stretching for an RB. So this year I went QB/WR/WR/RB/RB/RB in the 1st 6 rounds

Ended up with Manning/Fitzgerald/Wayne/K. Jones/Foster/Droughns

Overall, I'm pretty satisfied with what I ended up with considering I was going 4th overall. Also grabbed Maroney and Deangelo so I feel somewhat secure at RB.

 

[Koya]

Here's what I did from the 4th spot in a 10 team redraft...QB/2RB/3WR leagueI did a ton of mocks and it was clear that by the time i was up again at 17 in the 2nd round the pickings would be slim at RB and there would be better picks at WR than stretching for an RB. So this year I went QB/WR/WR/RB/RB/RB in the 1st 6 roundsEnded up with Manning/Fitzgerald/Wayne/K. Jones/Foster/DroughnsOverall, I'm pretty satisfied with what I ended up with considering I was going 4th overall. Also grabbed Maroney and Deangelo so I feel somewhat secure at RB.

I did take manning with the 8th pick in a two QB league... I also grabbed Foster, whom I NEVER thought I would take (figured RB/RB until Manning was available) and was a bit nervous about the pick. Felt better when I took DeAngelo. Just has to be decent, not great.

 

[Chaka]

Yeh, but who is more critical to your team, Manning or LT2? I would argue in the eggs in one basket contest, Manning is by far the greater potential risk. A stud RBs backup may not be a stud, but he is likely to be serviceable. Mannings backup is a pretty big question mark- he may do very well but that it goes back to the small QB gap, pretty well is almost not worth having for a QB there are so many at the same level. Would you rather stake your season rolling with Maurice Morris running behind the Seattle O-line, or Jim Sorgi throwing to Wayne and Harrison? I like my chances with MM.

I think in traditional 1 QB leagues your season is more likely over if you lose SA and have to go with Morris than if you lose Manning and have to go with whoever you drafted as your #2 QB. I said earlier that you would not need to draft Manning's backup (Sorgi) but I did not mean to imply that you should not draft a second QB at all.Heck in most 1QB leagues there will be decent WW QBs available. But to answer your question I don't have much faith in MoMo or Sorgi and as far as I am concerned it is a push. But see no reason to be less optimistic about Sorgi in a good offense that he knows than MoMo in Seattle.Okay now for the question, which player do you consider more likely to see playing time? Sorgi or MoMo?I say MoMo. Manning and SA have been Iron Men but I think Seattle is more likely to lock up their playoff position earlier than Indy and RBs just take far more abuse.

 

[mbuehner]

I think my point got lost there- it isnt who would perform better, it is who's performance is more valuable. Sorgi may be fine, but a fine QB wont begin to make up for what you lose in Manning, he probably wouldnt even end up being your best option, as you say there will be solid guys in the WW. THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING FOR YOUR ARGUMENT. In fact, it proves our point about QBs, there simply isnt enough daylight between them to make them worth basing your team around.

On the other hand, look at the Larry Johnson example of last year. Now thats a loaded example, I realize, but even if it had been Michael Bennett, wouldnt he have been a darn valuable commodity just because of that offensive line? Sorgi would be practically unstartable barring a flat out miracle even putting up 'good' numbers because a dozen other QBs put up the same or better. Now a top RB has a very real chance of having a top protege behind him that could be a viable top 10 back, but even if not they still have very good chance of having a guy that is at least RB2 material. IE better than whoever the Manning guy in the draft took as their real RB2. Im probably much happier with starter Brandon Jacobs, Willie Parker, Trent Green than Willie Parker, Deshawn Foster, Trent Green.

In other words, your stud RB goes down, you do have a realistic (if not great) chance that his replacement can save your season. There is no realistic chance that Manning's replacement or another QB2 can save your season because of the nature of QBs in fantasy.

 

[Koya]

I think my point got lost there- it isnt who would perform better, it is who's performance is more valuable. Sorgi may be fine, but a fine QB wont begin to make up for what you lose in Manning, he probably wouldnt even end up being your best option, as you say there will be solid guys in the WW. THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING FOR YOUR ARGUMENT. In fact, it proves our point about QBs, there simply isnt enough daylight between them to make them worth basing your team around.

On the other hand, look at the Larry Johnson example of last year. Now thats a loaded example, I realize, but even if it had been Michael Bennett, wouldnt he have been a darn valuable commodity just because of that offensive line? Sorgi would be practically unstartable barring a flat out miracle even putting up 'good' numbers because a dozen other QBs put up the same or better. Now a top RB has a very real chance of having a top protege behind him that could be a viable top 10 back, but even if not they still have very good chance of having a guy that is at least RB2 material. IE better than whoever the Manning guy in the draft took as their real RB2. Im probably much happier with starter Brandon Jacobs, Willie Parker, Trent Green than Willie Parker, Deshawn Foster, Trent Green.

In other words, your stud RB goes down, you do have a realistic (if not great) chance that his replacement can save your season. There is no realistic chance that Manning's replacement or another QB2 can save your season because of the nature of QBs in fantasy.

For one, many teams don't have an obvious, designated air to the stud RB thrown. If you don't get the right backup, or if things don't work out (which is very often the case), then you have no backup at all.Second, how many replacements to Stud RBs become studs right away? How many LJs are there? I dont have the data/history in front of me, but I seem to recall a lot of examples where the backup - often sniped during the draft - gets their chance and does nothing.

Take Ahman Green the last few years and Davenport. EVERY year I hear about poop - and nothing happens. He gets a chance to play, everyone gets all excited, then he is either meh, or gets hurt right away.

Point being, it seems that plenty of times the backup is either someone unexpected, or the expected guy underpeforms. I dont see why you think that having a stud RB seems to guarantee you a good RB should they go down.

Heck, a better situation is say a Deshaun Foster who, if he goes down, has DeAngelo Williams waiting in the wings... and Foster is far from a stud RB. His backup could be (we dont know, right now just a very talented rookie on a good team)

 

[mbuehner]

For one, many teams don't have an obvious, designated air to the stud RB thrown

Im not disagreeing with you. Some do, many dont. The point is no QB has that. And very, very few of the RBs taken in later rounds. The only likely candidates are the stud RBs, and that is part of why they are valuable. What makes a good RB is talent, plus a good line, plus a good system (and a few other things). Hence many back ups RBs can fit that nitch and produce. QBs dont work that way, again, because of the nature of the position relating to fantasy. 'Good' RBs are very valuable. 'Good' QBs are very common. So the bottom line is your stud RB has a decent chance of having a valuable replacement, while your stud QB has almost no chance. And that in itself adds value to your stud RB.To reiterate, this is not universally true, but it is true often enough to be meaningful.

 

[Koya]

oh, that should read heir.

 

[steelerfan1]

i ended up going manning at 4 just because i had lj as a keeper and the other 3 rb's were off the board and too many ? on the others.

i had 6 or so wr's as potential #1's so i went with manning. we can also use a flex position to start an extra qb, so i grabbed palmer as well.

all td's are 6 so i think it was the right thing to do.

 

[Goooals]

Had my 8-team draft yesterday where we start 2QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE and 1 Flex (RB,WR or TE). Had fourth pick and took Manning with no questions. Here are the results of the first few rounds:

P. Manning

C. Williams

R. Moss

C. Chambers

W. Dunn

T. Jones

R. Droughns

L. Evans

 

[jon_mx]

I see Manning having a huge year this year, something like 4500 yards and 40+ TDs. The only guy close will be Palmer at about 4000 yards and 30-35 TDs. Manning will outscore Palmer by 50-80 points and everyone else by 100. Manning is worth it. 4th is a bit high, but a league is foolish to let Manning drop to the second round. I always have good years going against the grain and getting stud WR's and QB and getting lucky on RBs.

 

[njxbean]

would anyone change their thoughts if you got a 2pt bonus for tds over 50 yards? would this bump peyton into the 4-6 range?

 

[Super King]

in a 12 team or larger i would definitely take rudi / tiki over manning. you can probably get away with this in a 10 teamer though ...

just drafted him for a buddy in a work 8 teamer (4 other potential owners didnt show up to draft). he still has a stacked team with Manning, Edge, K. Jones, D. Foster, T.O., S. Moss, Roy Williams, Horn, Shockey, L.J. Smith

 

[jive miguel]

i play in a crazy league that has 6pt passing tds (with bonuses of 3pts for 30+ yd tds and 6pts for 50+ yd tds).... plus you start 6 flex players... that's right, i said 6 flex players, instead of the usual 2rb 3wr and 1te.

knowing this... would that be enough to convince anyone to take manning in the first round?

there are no cheatsheets or magazines or websites that come close to predicting how to handle a league like this.

 

[njxbean]

would anyone change their thoughts if you got a 2pt bonus for tds over 50 yards? would this bump peyton into the 4-6 range?

bump.... any thoughts?

 

[ElectricShockey]

I took Manning with the #2 pick in a 6 pt passing TD, 1 PPR league

Then I took, Holt and scored Westbrook early in the 3rd round (no idea why he was still there in a 12 team league with 1 PPR)

Ended up with

Manning, Brunell

Westbrook, T. Jones, T. Bell, S. Gago, V. Morency, M. Moore

Holt, D Jax, T. Glenn, D. Branch

Ben Watson

Jets D

J. Brown

I think that's pretty good for a 12 teamer.

 

[harryhood]

I took Manning with the #2 pick in a 6 pt passing TD, 1 PPR leagueThen I took, Holt and scored Westbrook early in the 3rd round (no idea why he was still there in a 12 team league with 1 PPR)Ended up with Manning, BrunellWestbrook, T. Jones, T. Bell, S. Gago, V. Morency, M. MooreHolt, D Jax, T. Glenn, D. BranchBen WatsonJets DJ. BrownI think that's pretty good for a 12 teamer.

So you have manning, one RB(westbrook) who has been dinged up and being pused by fan favorite buckhalter, Holt, an injured DJAX and ben watson.As stated before you have no viable number 2 RB option, you are going out on a whim hoping TJ, bell gado morency and more play 16 games. Right now, not one of them will start 16 games. you gave up depth at RB(frankly your RBs are terrible) to land manning. I do not believe that he will make up the point differential to keep you winning, but good luck. If DJAx misses substantial time you are toast

 

[Vintage_Football]

I still believe that you take RB up to the 9-10 spot, then take Manning if you want to, cause if you wait and pick up Brady or Palmer or Bulger, Eli, Hasselback, you won't be that far behind, and you'll like having say Rudi, LaMont, Edge, Jackson, or Portis with one of them besides having Manning and a McGahee or Westbrook or Julius or Lewis,....and thats assuming they even fall to you,...I'm the guy that says,..."Let someone else take Manning".

 

[the spanker]

I still believe that you take RB up to the 9-10 spot, then take Manning if you want to, cause if you wait and pick up Brady or Palmer or Bulger, Eli, Hasselback, you won't be that far behind, and you'll like having say Rudi, LaMont, Edge, Jackson, or Portis with one of them besides having Manning and a McGahee or Westbrook or Julius or Lewis,....and thats assuming they even fall to you,...I'm the guy that says,..."Let someone else take Manning".

So I guess I did terrible myself taking Manning at 1.09?ManningWestbrook, Foster, KJ, Gore, Haynes (I know was trying to deal for DeAngelo)Holt, Driver, Evans, Branch, Reggie BrownWatsonStoverSteelers

 

[the spanker]

I still believe that you take RB up to the 9-10 spot, then take Manning if you want to, cause if you wait and pick up Brady or Palmer or Bulger, Eli, Hasselback, you won't be that far behind, and you'll like having say Rudi, LaMont, Edge, Jackson, or Portis with one of them besides having Manning and a McGahee or Westbrook or Julius or Lewis,....and thats assuming they even fall to you,...I'm the guy that says,..."Let someone else take Manning".

So I guess I did terrible myself taking Manning at 1.09?ManningWestbrook, Foster, KJ, Gore, Haynes (I know was trying to deal for DeAngelo)Holt, Driver, Evans, Branch, Reggie BrownWatsonStoverSteelers

I'm in a 1ppr league by the way. Branch I know is having problems but I'm still deep at WR and can always manage.

 

[kutta]

In my 12 team redraft I took Manning at 1.8. I would much rather have a guy that I KNOW will put up top 3 numbers at his position than someone that MIGHT put up top 10 numbers. And for those of you talking about what to do if Manning goes down - one of the reasons you draft Manning early is because of his durability. Sure, if he goes down you are in trouble. But you draft him knowing he has started every game for the last few years, and you bank on that continuing.

Anyway, my team looks like:

Manning, McNair

McGahee, K. Jones, Lundy, Morency, Moroney

Wayne, TJ Housh, Galloway, Branch, Curtis

LJ Smith

I'm just fine with that.

 

[ffnut]

In my 12 team redraft I took Manning at 1.8. I would much rather have a guy that I KNOW will put up top 3 numbers at his position than someone that MIGHT put up top 10 numbers. And for those of you talking about what to do if Manning goes down - one of the reasons you draft Manning early is because of his durability. Sure, if he goes down you are in trouble. But you draft him knowing he has started every game for the last few years, and you bank on that continuing.

Anyway, my team looks like:

Manning, McNair

McGahee, K. Jones, Lundy, Morency, Moroney

Wayne, TJ Housh, Galloway, Branch, Curtis

LJ Smith

I'm just fine with that.

That can be said for anyone that you take in the first round. The difference with Manning and someone like R. Brown in that spot is that you don't have to worry about Manning not producing - that can't be said with certainty about the RB you will get there. I have no problem with people taking Manning in the first round. That said, I just couldn't bring myself to do it at 1.04 last week - picked S JAX instead.