Making a case for Duante in the 1st round (1 Viewer)

[Eradicator]

Let's look at some of Duante's #'s-'03- top scoring FF QB @ 23.5 ppg. Manning, McNair & Garcia were all slightly above 20 ppg.'02- again the top scoring FF QB, tied w/ Rich Gannon @ 22.6 ppg. Vick was @ 22.2, Manning 20.4. (McNabb was 25.9 in 10 games)'01- 2nd over in ppg in 11 games (behind Kurt Warner) @ 22.2 ppg.'00- tops again @ 25.1 (Garcia 24.6, Manning 22.2)Duante has had a chokehold on the #1 spot ever since being annointed the starter. He also typifies a player who's fantasy value far exceeds his 'real football' value. Case in point, 2 years ago (w/ out looking at any numbers) he had to have been close to setting some sort of turnover records, looking HORRIBLE at times doing it. Still, he finished the year at the top in ppg. Last year, he cracked a bone is his back that severly limited his rushing and still was the top QB.My assertion- Given the current scenario: Vikes are the #1 offense, Duante seems to have rounded into form as a passer, RB woes should boost his running #'s, Duante should not only be the #1 QB in FF ppg this year, he should distance himself so much from the #2, that he is worthy of a 1st round selection after the 'Big 6' Rb's. You'll sleep easy at night w/ the lack of risk as well.

 

[E_Smith]

interesting point. drafting at 10 in a 12 teamer I have considered it, but not seriously. I should be able to grab Moss, Jamal, or Taylor, and then a solid WR or RB on the way back. Taking QB first round really puts your team in a hole at the other positions, especially with so many QBs around late.

 

[BlueOnion]

Probably depends on scoring and rules. Are passing touchdowns worth 3, 4 or 6 points? Are there negative points for turnovers? Start two quarterbacks or one quarterback? Scoring for passing yards or completions? Any other odd 'scoring'?

 

[LongDuckDong]

Daunte, not Duante.And I think unless you have some funky rules, that you're giving too much away at RB to not get one in rd 1.Now, if you think your league will leave a couple of the sleeper RB on the table into rounds 3 and 4 (Brown, K or T Jones, Suggs, etc), you might gamble, but you could end up with Staley and Curtis Martin or something like that at RB. This may or may not be acceptable.

 

[UpFromTheAshes]

It seems to me like you don't really understand the concept of value. It doesn't really matter if you have the #1 ranked QB or the #8 ranked QB, what matters is how many points you score compared to your opponent, and the overriding factor in FF is that the pool of quality RBs is the smallest pool of any position. If you took Culpepper at 1.07, then yes you'll very likely score more points than anyone from your QB position. The problem is that everyone will outscore you from the RB position. Look at these two sample scenarios:rd 1 - Culpepper - #1 QB - 350 ptsrd 2 - Marshall Faulk - #14 RB - 200 ptstotal - 550 ptsrd 1 - Edgerrin James - #7 RB - 250 ptsrd 2 - Peyton Manning - #2 QB - 330 ptstotal - 580 ptsThe second pair would outscore the first pair by 2 pts per week. Note that I am not advocating drafting Peyton in the second round. I'm simply using him as an example of a QB-RB combo in the first two rounds. In reality it would even get worse for you as the 3rd and 4th rounds played out, because if Faulk is your #1 RB, then your #2 RB will be losing even more points to other teams' #2 RBs. Simply stated, unless your scoring rules greatly de-emphasize the role of RBs, drafting Culpepper at 1.07 would put you behind the 8-ball for the remainder of the draft.

 

[mojorizin]

I commish a league with HIGH performance scoring. QBs get 6 pts for short TDs up to 12 points for 50+ yarder, 1pt per 20yd, 1pt per carry, 1pt per 10 yd rush, and the TD points go up by 50% in each yardage category if its rushing.Even with Daunte-friendly scoring, I still wouldn't take him in the 1st. I WILL NOT scramble for running backs later.

 

[madviking10]

He's the one PLAYER that I must have on all of my fantasy squads. I love fantasy football however I've always been willing to work a little harder than the other teams in order to have the VIKING QB. (Gannon/Moon/Cunningham/George/CUlpepper etc.)I just cant stand the thought of watching VIKING games and not being anything other than excited when the Vikings SCORE!That being said I've never felt it was necessary to have any other Vikings on my FF teams. As long as I've got the field general everything is good!!Got to keep balance in FF and VIKINGS FOOTBALL !! :horns:

 

[mojorizin]

He's the one PLAYER that I must have on all of my fantasy squads. I love fantasy football however I've always been willing to work a little harder than the other teams in order to have the VIKING QB. (Gannon/Moon/Cunningham/George/CUlpepper etc.)I just cant stand the thought of watching VIKING games and not being anything other than excited when the Vikings SCORE!That being said I've never felt it was necessary to have any other Vikings on my FF teams. As long as I've got the field general everything is good!!Got to keep balance in FF and VIKINGS FOOTBALL !! :horns:

I have yet to see a draft in 12 years that DIDN'T have a Vikings addict....

 

[jurb26]

He's the one PLAYER that I must have on all of my fantasy squads. I love fantasy football however I've always been willing to work a little harder than the other teams in order to have the VIKING QB. (Gannon/Moon/Cunningham/George/CUlpepper etc.)I just cant stand the thought of watching VIKING games and not being anything other than excited when the Vikings SCORE!That being said I've never felt it was necessary to have any other Vikings on my FF teams. As long as I've got the field general everything is good!!Got to keep balance in FF and VIKINGS FOOTBALL !! :horns:

I hope your leaguemates don't know this.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

It seems to me like you don't really understand the concept of value. It doesn't really matter if you have the #1 ranked QB or the #8 ranked QB, what matters is how many points you score compared to your opponent, and the overriding factor in FF is that the pool of quality RBs is the smallest pool of any position. If you took Culpepper at 1.07, then yes you'll very likely score more points than anyone from your QB position. The problem is that everyone will outscore you from the RB position. Look at these two sample scenarios:rd 1 - Culpepper - #1 QB - 350 ptsrd 2 - Marshall Faulk - #14 RB - 200 ptstotal - 550 ptsrd 1 - Edgerrin James - #7 RB - 250 ptsrd 2 - Peyton Manning - #2 QB - 330 ptstotal - 580 ptsThe second pair would outscore the first pair by 2 pts per week. Note that I am not advocating drafting Peyton in the second round. I'm simply using him as an example of a QB-RB combo in the first two rounds. In reality it would even get worse for you as the 3rd and 4th rounds played out, because if Faulk is your #1 RB, then your #2 RB will be losing even more points to other teams' #2 RBs. Simply stated, unless your scoring rules greatly de-emphasize the role of RBs, drafting Culpepper at 1.07 would put you behind the 8-ball for the remainder of the draft.

The problem with your calculations in this instance is that many people seem to be forgetting that Culpepper put up his stats in 13.5 games, not 16. While durability is something that always has to be considered...on a per game basis, Manning & Culpepper's passing numbers are quite similar.Using a basic FF point calculation, Culpepper pretty much put up the same amount of point as Manning in 2.5 less games which means that he might be able to provide enough differentiation to warrant a later first round selection. In fact projecting Culpepper versus Manning in 2003 on a per game basis, Culpepper outscores him by 4.5 points/game.So in actuality, I don't think it's a bad idea, especially because I do think there are some later round values at RB this year, but there are fewer certainties elsewhere.

 

[Billy Bats]

Look at these two sample scenarios:rd 1 - Culpepper - #1 QB - 350 ptsrd 2 - Marshall Faulk - #14 RB - 200 ptstotal - 550 ptsrd 1 - Edgerrin James - #7 RB - 250 ptsrd 2 - Peyton Manning - #2 QB - 330 ptstotal - 580 ptsThe second pair would outscore the first pair by 2 pts per week.

I'm thinking about taking CPepper, last pick first round #10 along with Freddy Hamstring. I've taken your example to another round, check this out...Team CPrd 1 - Culpepper 350ptsrd 2 - Taylor 225ptsrd 3 - CBrown 195ptsvs two rb's at my positionrd 1 - Taylor 225ptsrd 2 - Barlow 223pts (james, prob. lewis, not available)rd 3 - Hasselback 305pts (who may not be available) or maybe Hines Ward 174ptsNow these players are soley based on what I think I will have available to me at these picks. Team CP comes in at 770 total points, Team RB comes in with 753pts with Hasselbeck, a weak 622 with a WR if the top QB's are taken.So it seems that taking Culpepper isn't always a bad idea.

 

[tietzjd]

It seems to me like you don't really understand the concept of value. It doesn't really matter if you have the #1 ranked QB or the #8 ranked QB, what matters is how many points you score compared to your opponent, and the overriding factor in FF is that the pool of quality RBs is the smallest pool of any position. If you took Culpepper at 1.07, then yes you'll very likely score more points than anyone from your QB position. The problem is that everyone will outscore you from the RB position. Look at these two sample scenarios:rd 1 - Culpepper - #1 QB - 350 ptsrd 2 - Marshall Faulk - #14 RB - 200 ptstotal - 550 ptsrd 1 - Edgerrin James - #7 RB - 250 ptsrd 2 - Peyton Manning - #2 QB - 330 ptstotal - 580 ptsThe second pair would outscore the first pair by 2 pts per week. Note that I am not advocating drafting Peyton in the second round. I'm simply using him as an example of a QB-RB combo in the first two rounds. In reality it would even get worse for you as the 3rd and 4th rounds played out, because if Faulk is your #1 RB, then your #2 RB will be losing even more points to other teams' #2 RBs. Simply stated, unless your scoring rules greatly de-emphasize the role of RBs, drafting Culpepper at 1.07 would put you behind the 8-ball for the remainder of the draft.

The problem with your calculations in this instance is that many people seem to be forgetting that Culpepper put up his stats in 13.5 games, not 16. While durability is something that always has to be considered...on a per game basis, Manning & Culpepper's passing numbers are quite similar.Using a basic FF point calculation, Culpepper pretty much put up the same amount of point as Manning in 2.5 less games which means that he might be able to provide enough differentiation to warrant a later first round selection. In fact projecting Culpepper versus Manning in 2003 on a per game basis, Culpepper outscores him by 4.5 points/game.So in actuality, I don't think it's a bad idea, especially because I do think there are some later round values at RB this year, but there are fewer certainties elsewhere.

I starting to tinker with this a litte bit too. With the chance of drafting Tjones,Westbrook,Tiki,Kjones,Brown and others all in the 3rd round or latter.Moss,Peeper Combo. Moss and Harrison, Moss and Owens or Holt. I even did Ant mock where I took Pepper at 16 and manning at 25. Man that team ended up to be nice becuse I took RB in 1st,4th and 5th got great vaule and then grab WR from 6-10 no need for backup qb. Vaule of players is precived in most leauges as RB-QB-WR you can always trade top notch QB for Backup QB and Good WR. Manning for Mason and Garica.

 

[Alias]

My strat this year is taking C-Pep with my 2nd round pick, we award 6 points for all TD's, and based on my calculations (aside from Manning) he should be good for 5 points per week above any other QB in our league.

 

[fightingillini]

I am considering him at #9 overall.....my league has one flex at any position and QBs get 6pts per passing TD and 8 pts per TD run.....QBs are a premium..... & Culpepper is huge, I have him scoring 30 more points than Manning and 50 points more than McNabb, my #3 ranked QB. I would get a 70 point advantage over anyone else's QB1. My league is 10 teams, so I can get OK RBs in the 3rd and 4th rounds. When using FBG's VBD workbook & my scoring system, the difference between the #11RB (Henry) and the #22RB (Staley) is only 2pts per game. There is a really large 3rd tier of RBs after the first 8-9 backs are gone.

 

[Eradicator]

Uhhhhh, I understand value. The options after #6-Edge: Too much 'Terrell Davis' Risk for my likingJamal: well documented riskMoss: a legit option, but there are so many WR's later on and even top WR's can leave you high & dry on any given week, while Culpepper will give it to you every week, almost g'teed.After that, it's a crapshoot. I'll take a DDavis/BWestbrook/Rudi in round 2, then CMartin/CBrown/Suggs/KJones in rd 3 & not feel like I've had much of a dropoff from taking RB's in the 1st 2 rounds.Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

 

[madviking10]

He's the one PLAYER that I must have on all of my fantasy squads. I love fantasy football however I've always been willing to work a little harder than the other teams in order to have the VIKING QB. (Gannon/Moon/Cunningham/George/CUlpepper etc.)I just cant stand the thought of watching VIKING games and not being anything other than excited when the Vikings SCORE!That being said I've never felt it was necessary to have any other Vikings on my FF teams. As long as I've got the field general everything is good!!Got to keep balance in FF and VIKINGS FOOTBALL !! :horns:

I hope your leaguemates don't know this.

The leagues that I participate in now are all at least partial keepers so keeping PEP is not a problem.It's never been really hard to get the VIKING QB because everyone in the FF universe is programed to get RB's or the STUD WR's in the first round.I've never had a problem paying the first round pick price. Once took Pep at 1.04.It makes drafting tougher and a better challenge however I've done OK. As a matter of fact I've won my league (the one that I commish) two years in a row. Trades and waiver wire pick-ups are the keys to overcoming my sickness. The bottom line is I still play this game for fun, not the $$$ !!

 

[KevT]

So it seems that taking Culpepper isn't always a bad idea.

Or Manning depending on your scoring system. For example, in my scoring system Manning is projected to get 413 points, with Culpepper projected to get 369. Deuce is projected at 206.So since Deuce is projected to be the #3 RB, that would mean that Manning at #3 would be a better pick. The drop off from Manning to Favre(#6 ranked QB in my scoring system) is larger than the dropoff of Deuce to Tyron Wheatley.

Manning               DeuceHolt                  HoltC. Brown              C. BrownT. Jones              Favre866 points            822 points

If that happened in my 10 team redraft at the #3 spot, I'd be better off going with Manning at the #3, but will I end up doing it? Most likely, you do whatever gives you the better chance of winning. In the example above Holt most likely won't be available for my second pick, but I was just trying to show the huge difference a scoring system makes. Also, in this same league last year, Favre went in the 2nd round, so the example above might not be a good one.

 

[Judge Smails]

Uhhhhh, I understand value. The options after #6-Edge: Too much 'Terrell Davis' Risk for my likingJamal: well documented riskMoss: a legit option, but there are so many WR's later on and even top WR's can leave you high & dry on any given week, while Culpepper will give it to you every week, almost g'teed.After that, it's a crapshoot. I'll take a DDavis/BWestbrook/Rudi in round 2, then CMartin/CBrown/Suggs/KJones in rd 3 & not feel like I've had much of a dropoff from taking RB's in the 1st 2 rounds.Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

I still don't think you do. The point isn't whether top WR's will leave you high and dry any given week, of course they will. But they will absolutely light it up, as will top RB's. The key is whether a guy drafted much later, like a Pennington, will give you a stronger overall team. My bet with most roster requirements (1QB, 2RB, 3WR) you are almost always better off getting RB/WR early and waiting on QB's.

 

[Eradicator]

I still don't think you do. The point isn't whether top WR's will leave you high and dry any given week, of course they will. But they will absolutely light it up, as will top RB's. The key is whether a guy drafted much later, like a Pennington, will give you a stronger overall team. My bet with most roster requirements (1QB, 2RB, 3WR) you are almost always better off getting RB/WR early and waiting on QB's.

in '03:Randy Moss: fantasy ppg- 16.7Any handful of 4th-5th round WR's- 8 ppgapproximately 8.5 ppg differenceDaunte Culpepper- 23.5 ppgChad Pennington- 16.3 ppgapproximately 7.2 ppg differenceI'm just saying that I feel Daunte is going to (perhaps dramatcically) increase that margin (between he and the field of other QB's) this year.Also, the consistent scoring element DOES matter. I can't see how you can say it doesn't.

 

[fsufan]

i draft him with the 2.01 pick and moss with the 1.10 pickgot luck and got henery(3.10) and rudi(4.01).i think Culpepper is worth a 2nd round pick. i like knowing i will get 20+ fantasy PTs every week.

 

[DuckStupid]

I took Daunte at #7 in one league this year. My RB's suffered because of this. Feel like I need a couple breaks to have a good year.

 

[UpFromTheAshes]

Let me give another example. Going by FBG latest projections, Daunte will average 22.2 ppg this year. In a 10 team redraft last weekend I drafted from the 7 slot. My first QB was Trent Green in the 8th round (many owners in that league wait on their QBs)FBG has Trent averaging 18.3 ppg. So my QB that cost me an 8th rd pick is scoring only 3.9 fewer points than your QB that you spent a precious first rounder on. My RBs will be better than yours, as will my WRs. I will more than make up the difference because I will be better than you at many different positions (RB1, RB2, WR1, etc) whereas you are better than me at only one position. Anyway, to answer your question:

Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

The answer is that it doesn't matter how good the QB's numbers are, in and of themselves. What matters is how good those numbers are compared to the other top 10-15 QBs in the league. If the top QB outscored every other QB by 75 or 100 pts over the course of the season, then yes, he'd be worth an early pick. However, Daunte isn't going to outscore the field by that margin.

 

[Seattle Hokie]

I'm thinking about taking CPepper, last pick first round #10 along with Freddy Hamstring. I've taken your example to another round, check this out...Team CPrd 1 - Culpepper 350ptsrd 2 - Taylor 225ptsrd 3 - CBrown 195ptsvs two rb's at my positionrd 1 - Taylor 225ptsrd 2 - Barlow 223pts (james, prob. lewis, not available)rd 3 - Hasselback 305pts (who may not be available)or maybe Hines Ward 174ptsNow these players are soley based on what I think I will have available to me at these picks. Team CP comes in at 770 total points, Team RB comes in with 753pts with Hasselbeck, a weak 622 with a WR if the top QB's are taken.So it seems that taking Culpepper isn't always a bad idea.

What this basically says is if absolutely must go QB in the 1st three rounds, taking culpepper isn't a bad idea. But your still almost always better off waiting to go QB.

 

[Unlucky]

I think Culpepper could be worth a pick in the 6 to 9 range. After these RBs, I have some serious questions: Holmes, LT2, Portis, Alexander, Edge, Green, and McAllister. So, I'm OK with drafting Moss or Culpepper.In many of the drafts I've seen lately, there is good RB value in rounds 3 and 4: Barber, Suggs, J. Jones, W. Dunn/Duckett, Wheatley, etc.I'd rather have a Culpepper, R. Johnson, Barber teamthan K. Barlow, R. Johnson, and a worse QB. Now, if you think you can get Culpepper in round 2, then by all means wait on him. But I have seen him go a lot in round 1 lately. We've seen some QB parity the last few years, but if you look farther back, there have been seasons where a QB has been in the top 2 or 3 in terms of overall value. Steve Young had 4 seasons in the top 3 in overall value: 1, 1, 2, and 3. With the improvements in the WRs around Moss, I could see a HUGE season from Culpepper where he really outdistances himself from other QBs.

 

[placeholder10391]

I was absolutely tickled when someone in my 12-team draft this past weekend took Daunte in the top-10 - allowing Fred Taylor to slide to me at #11, and allowing me to end up with Fred Taylor, Rudi Johnson, and Travis Henry as my RBs. The guy who took Daunte? He is not in such great shape...

 

[Judge Smails]

Let me give another example. Going by FBG latest projections, Daunte will average 22.2 ppg this year. In a 10 team redraft last weekend I drafted from the 7 slot. My first QB was Trent Green in the 8th round (many owners in that league wait on their QBs)FBG has Trent averaging 18.3 ppg. So my QB that cost me an 8th rd pick is scoring only 3.9 fewer points than your QB that you spent a precious first rounder on. My RBs will be better than yours, as will my WRs. I will more than make up the difference because I will be better than you at many different positions (RB1, RB2, WR1, etc) whereas you are better than me at only one position. Anyway, to answer your question:

Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

The answer is that it doesn't matter how good the QB's numbers are, in and of themselves. What matters is how good those numbers are compared to the other top 10-15 QBs in the league. If the top QB outscored every other QB by 75 or 100 pts over the course of the season, then yes, he'd be worth an early pick. However, Daunte isn't going to outscore the field by that margin.

We have a winner

 

[Da Moose]

Let me give another example. Going by FBG latest projections, Daunte will average 22.2 ppg this year. In a 10 team redraft last weekend I drafted from the 7 slot. My first QB was Trent Green in the 8th round (many owners in that league wait on their QBs)FBG has Trent averaging 18.3 ppg. So my QB that cost me an 8th rd pick is scoring only 3.9 fewer points than your QB that you spent a precious first rounder on. My RBs will be better than yours, as will my WRs. I will more than make up the difference because I will be better than you at many different positions (RB1, RB2, WR1, etc) whereas you are better than me at only one position. Anyway, to answer your question:

Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

The answer is that it doesn't matter how good the QB's numbers are, in and of themselves. What matters is how good those numbers are compared to the other top 10-15 QBs in the league. If the top QB outscored every other QB by 75 or 100 pts over the course of the season, then yes, he'd be worth an early pick. However, Daunte isn't going to outscore the field by that margin.

I think this is the crux of the question: differing porjections for Culpepper. The original poster has a pretty high opinion of him relaitive to the other QBs out there and thinks that he might outdistance them substantially. Thinking this isn't that crazy. Look back at the FBG QBBC article. In 1999 QB1 outidistanced QB5 by about 80 points of 5 per game. If, and it's a big if, he thinks Culpepper is going to outperfor the other quarterbacks by that much then this is a justified pick.Given the improvements in his situation that he cites it's certainly possible that a combination of:(1) RMoss as a reciever(2) Growing maturity and improvment as a passer(3) Maintaining running ability(4) A lack of injuriesLead to a great season for him where he is indeed head and shoulders above the other quarterbacks and is worth taking there.Do I agree, no. But it's a justifiable argument.

 

[jurb26]

Let me give another example. Going by FBG latest projections, Daunte will average 22.2 ppg this year. In a 10 team redraft last weekend I drafted from the 7 slot. My first QB was Trent Green in the 8th round (many owners in that league wait on their QBs)FBG has Trent averaging 18.3 ppg. So my QB that cost me an 8th rd pick is scoring only 3.9 fewer points than your QB that you spent a precious first rounder on. My RBs will be better than yours, as will my WRs. I will more than make up the difference because I will be better than you at many different positions (RB1, RB2, WR1, etc) whereas you are better than me at only one position. Anyway, to answer your question:

Question then for all you who think it's so preposterous- How good do a QB's #'s have to be to make him worthy of a first round pick (in terms of pts per week)?

The answer is that it doesn't matter how good the QB's numbers are, in and of themselves. What matters is how good those numbers are compared to the other top 10-15 QBs in the league. If the top QB outscored every other QB by 75 or 100 pts over the course of the season, then yes, he'd be worth an early pick. However, Daunte isn't going to outscore the field by that margin.

We have a winner

How many people actually caught this part of the original post:

My assertion- Given the current scenario: Vikes are the #1 offense, Duante seems to have rounded into form as a passer, RB woes should boost his running #'s, Duante should not only be the #1 QB in FF ppg this year, he should distance himself so much from the #2, that he is worthy of a 1st round selection after the 'Big 6' Rb's. You'll sleep easy at night w/ the lack of risk as well.

I think all but one post I have read in here thus far is ignoring this tid bit of information. If this holds true or you happen to fall into the group that believes this. Then yes by all means take Cpep in the 1st. Just don't take him any earlier than you NEED to. In other words, if you are certian he will be there in the 2nd for you don't waste a 1st. But I'm sure nobody needs me to tell them that.

 

[mbuehner]

I dont understand this at all. Why, under any circumstances, take Culpepper in the first when he will be available in the second? Thats just a flat out waste.

 

[Eradicator]

I dont understand this at all. Why, under any circumstances, take Culpepper in the first when he will be available in the second? Thats just a flat out waste.

Because he's the single most player I want on my team outside of the top 6 RB's and he even come close to being there for me at 2.05

 

[jurb26]

I dont understand this at all. Why, under any circumstances, take Culpepper in the first when he will be available in the second? Thats just a flat out waste.

How do you know he will be???In a lot of leagues both he and Manning are going late 1st or early 2nd. Not everyone waits on QBs.Actually in the league I play in this was the case right here. Cpep and Mianning to finish off the 1st rd.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

 

[LHUCKS]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

CuMar wont be going in the 6th.

 

[Eradicator]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

Curtis Martin in the 6th and McNair in the 7th doesn't sound like a very competitive league, or perhaps it's a really small legue.Oh yeah...... no offense.

 

[Alias]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

Curtis Martin (ADP late 3rd) in the 6th & Steve McNair (ADP late 5th) in the 7th, that is just crazy talk.

 

[jurb26]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

Curtis Martin in the 6th and McNair in the 7th doesn't sound like a very competitive league, or perhaps it's a really small legue.Oh yeah...... no offense.

Agreed

 

[mbuehner]

In a lot of leagues both he and Manning are going late 1st or early 2nd. Not everyone waits on QBs.Actually in the league I play in this was the case right here. Cpep and Mianning to finish off the 1st rd.

Can I join?

 

[placeholder10391]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

What do the other 3 team's rosters look like?

 

[jurb26]

In a lot of leagues both he and Manning are going late 1st or early 2nd. Not everyone waits on QBs.Actually in the league I play in this was the case right here. Cpep and Mianning to finish off the 1st rd.

Can I join?

Sure, and I will not allow you to see either the starting requirements nor the scoring system seeing that you already assume you are better than those that are in this league using it for 5 years now.

 

[mbuehner]

Sure, and I will not allow you to use either the starting requirements nor the scoring system seeing that you already assume you are better than those that are in this league using it for 5 years now.

Personally I dont comment using evidence based on my own leagues when they use weird scoring and lineups. I dont pimp Jason Elam as a reasonable first round pick just because my league gives 30 points per field goal.

 

[jurb26]

Sure, and I will not allow you to use either the starting requirements nor the scoring system seeing that you already assume you are better than those that are in this league using it for 5 years now.

Personally I dont comment using evidence based on my own leagues when they use weird scoring and lineups. I dont pimp Jason Elam as a reasonable first round pick just because my league gives 30 points per field goal.

Apparently you do, because the poster still has yet to provide his scoring and roster system. So it looks like you are posting based on "yours" (or at least what you assume to be basic), cause it certainly could not be his. On top of that, my league is not the only place you will find Cpep going in the 1st. I have seen other posters site this and Antsports has Cpep as a high pick of 1.5 over the last 20 days or so. FWIW though, I do not support the drafting a QB early strat. I typically take QBs very late. I took mine with rd 10 and 11 picks this year. However, I believe any well planed strat can work.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I love you guys who take QBs early.Here's my first 7 rounds this year:Randy MossFred TaylorChris BrownTodd HeapJimmy SmithCurtis MartinSteve McNairI guarantee I will destroy any team you field built around CPep in the first round.Oh yeah, no offense.

Curtis Martin in the 6th and McNair in the 7th doesn't sound like a very competitive league, or perhaps it's a really small legue.Oh yeah...... no offense.

No offense taken. The money is all the same to me.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

People who say that you should never take a QB early certainly haven't played FF very long or followed football closely. There have been a number of times in the last 15 years when taking a QB in the first was a very valid move. In fact, both Farve and Young were worthy of #1 overall consideration. As another poster has suggested, it comes down to how much you think the QB1 will outscore everyone. If the QBe will oustscore the rest of the league by enough, you take him at 1.1.Culpepper certainly could be one of the top 10 most valuable players in the FF.

 

[-OZ-]

People who say that you should never take a QB early certainly haven't played FF very long or followed football closely. There have been a number of times in the last 15 years when taking a QB in the first was a very valid move. In fact, both Farve and Young were worthy of #1 overall consideration. As another poster has suggested, it comes down to how much you think the QB1 will outscore everyone. If the QBe will oustscore the rest of the league by enough, you take him at 1.1.Culpepper certainly could be one of the top 10 most valuable players in the FF.

In the end, you have to go with your gut. The true "guppy" is the owner who drafts totally according to someone else's chart because it tells him to. (of course it's also the guy who wants to own all of his favorite players and takes Favre in the 1st, Eddie George in the 2nd...)IMO, Dante is a top 10-15 FF player, and I am VERY happy to have him on one of my teams. (I was able to land him in a trade though, and I'm not exactly hurting at the other positions in a 16 team league).

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Thought this was worth a bump.I have grown so weary of the " It is a guppy move to draft a QB early mantra." It is silly to have non fluid platitudes.People love to say ="Well FBG guys has so and so projected for X points". The problem is- it is very difficult to prject late first round running backs and it is relatively easy to predict that Manning and Culpepper will do very well.It could easily change, but the top 3 QB's (and Culpepper, Manning and McNabb were the first three gone) are destroying most of the later round qb's in points per game. That great late round value you were sure you had with Trent Green, McNair, Farve, Hasselhoff etc- hasn't been so dreamy.On the other hand, there have been a number of guys taken in the 3rd, fourth, and fifth rounds who are producing similar stats to many of the late first round running backs. If Jamal and Edge weren't there, or you simply didn't take them, you would have been better off with a QB. It is not like there was only one guy out there in the third round and later. You could easily have one of following group: Curtis Martin, Thomas Jones, Chris Brown, Tiki Barber, Warrick Dunn, Lee Suggs, Brian Westbrook and you would be in better shape than if you had taken Barlow, Taylor or Henry. For the first four games you would have better off with Duce Staley, Quentin Griffin, and even Emmit Smith than these guys.

 

[jurb26]

In a lot of leagues both he and Manning are going late 1st or early 2nd. Not everyone waits on QBs.Actually in the league I play in this was the case right here. Cpep and Mianning to finish off the 1st rd.

Can I join?

In case you were wondering, both of those teams are 3-1 at the moment.

 

[BassNBrew]

C-Pep is a FF God. Glad to have him paired with Portis.

 

[Warhound]

Well the guy in my league who took CPep in the first round and then came back with Torry Holt in second ended up with Staley as his top back and needless to say he is sitting at 0-4 with a terrible cast of characters around him. Now my team is 3-1 and I have plenty of depth so I'm gonna try and trade away some of my players to acguire CPep and pair him up with Alexander and AJohnson as the nucleus of my team.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Well the guy in my league who took CPep in the first round and then came back with Torry Holt in second ended up with Staley as his top back and needless to say he is sitting at 0-4 with a terrible cast of characters around him.

He is not in last because he drafted Culpepper, He is in last because he drafted the wrong guy at the top of the second and the wrong guy in the third, However, Staely would be no worse than Barlow, Henry or Fred Taylor at this point.

 

[jurb26]

The RBs that the 2 teams in my league have are:Manning, Dillon, S.Davis (worst ranked RBs in league at moment but still winning)Cpep, Barlow, Barber (8th RBs in league out of ten)They have the 1 and 2 ranked QBs though and my QBBC of Plummer, Lefty, Harrington ranks me at 3rd.