well not last yr it wasnt.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Mike vick #1 overal (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter hotboyz
- Start date
Vick didnt get drafted in the first round last year and even then the point im making was true then as well. Vick and a RB2 is still less points than Rivers (or any other QB1) and a RB1Either way the point is, a top 6 QB will have a very good chance of outscoring even the #1 RB but since you only start 1 QB its inherently worth less as a position. If you start 2 or more RBs/WRs the positional value is much higher.
Last edited by a moderator:
well, if you are starting an inactive vick on your fantasy team then i dont think its worth discussing.
Touchdown There
Footballguy
That does not make any sense.
Im all for it I would love to see numbers.Ive heard some convincing arguments in the past for drafting RB+RB vs RB+WR with the constant flux in the NFL affecting fantasy football. But I thought it was universally agreed that skill position core value is much more valuable than non skill position players.
Just hard for me to believe that even in the best of scenarios Vick+Turner+Mathews (5th pick in 10 team, obviously worse in 12 team) beats out Peterson+Mcfadden+Brady (from the 1 spot) ever.
kinglochness
Footballguy
Try having a discussion with you for 5 minutes pal. OK, I'll use little words. The comment was that vick could put up QB1 and RB2 numbers this year. If you draft him #1 overall with those expectations, you are going to be really hurting when/if he gets hurt. By the same logic that you used to draft him, you would lose an QB1 and RB2. Your point that the production is going to be very hard to replace is what I'm trying to tell you. Couple this with the fact that your RB1 is now somewhere in the Peyton Hillis range, I think it's a bad plan. I don't know how much plainer I can make it for you.Yeah, this makes no sense.Because that was the context in which it was posted.'Ignoratio Elenchi said:Better have a nice backup QB and plenty of RB depth to cover you the 3-4 games Vick will be hurt this year.
Of course I'll have a backup QB. Not sure why RB depth would be needed if my QB got injured. Besides, i think I'd rather have a QB play 12 games and score 360 fantasy points than have a QB play 16 games and score 400 fantasy points.
If you are going to draft him expecting those kinds of numbers, you should probably have strong depth at both.
Ok, so for those of you who think Vick should be taken #1 or at least very high, what do you think is a reasonable auction value in a $200 cap, 10-team, 16-player ESPN standard scoring format (4-pt passing TDs, 6-pt rushing TDs).
AP, Foster, and Johnson usually go anywhere from $57 to $70 (or more) in the mocks, while Vick can be had for no more than $45 to $50 usually. I even got him for $42 or $43 once. No-brainer at that price?
Scooter
AP, Foster, and Johnson usually go anywhere from $57 to $70 (or more) in the mocks, while Vick can be had for no more than $45 to $50 usually. I even got him for $42 or $43 once. No-brainer at that price?
Scooter
In an auction it obviously goes by overall opinion of that player.Why pay 40-50 for vick when you could pay 50-60 for ADP and then get literally any of the other elite QBs for less than 30.
kinglochness
Footballguy
It makes perfect sense. You start more RB's so there's less to go around. However, it is possible that a QB could overcome this value disadvantage by scoring that much more than anyone else at his position. You need the numbers to find that out. To say RB1's always automatically have more value than QB1's is not a true statement.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is also true, but I neglected to mention it because Vick would have to have a completely outrageous season for this to happen on top of the person drafting him lucking out with the rest of their team.
Because his ceiling is THAT MUCH higher than any other QB in the league. Do you realize he could potentially be over 100 points better than the next elite QB by end of season, which would make him more than worth spending the extra $15 bucks at the auction.
Touchdown There
Footballguy
He does not realize that.
Last edited by a moderator:
you make your own numbers. or use fbg. or whoever's projections. i havent made mine yet. then find a way to calculate vbd. if factored astutely, vbd will allow you to compare across positions.
It has everything to do with the supply of quality players at the various positions in a given year, as well as roster requirements. You can't put a value on a position until you know what is needed and what is available. Just because you have 32 starting QBs and only 10 or 12 fantasy starting slots to fill doesn't necessarily mean the position is worth less than others. How many of those are fantasy relevant? It may be that in order to avoid a huge dropoff in point production, you need to grab one of the top three at the QB position, at which point that becomes a very important position. It all depends on how much value can be derived from picking certain players at those positions. It's simply not as cut and dry as saying, "The QB position is inherently worth less because you only start 1."
Which at the QB1 spot is shallow but as a relative position is deep enough that the elite last until the early 4th, whereas the elite RB last until the end of the 1st round.Is there a system in place already for assigning this kind of value? A poster above mentioned something. Because I understand what your saying im just trying to imagine a situation in the NFL where the #1 QB and the #10 RB does so much better than the #1 RB and the #3-6 QB.
Last edited by a moderator:
kinglochness
Footballguy
kinglochness
Footballguy
I'm not sure that I totally understand your question. You are trying to figure the value of a combination of players vs. the value of another combination of players. I would say just adding their values together using a standard VBD would do this. Am I wrong?
Someone above mention VBD. Although I am unaware what that means.In short no, what im asking is how do you measure a group of players against another group of players, in regards to positional and overall team strength in regards to fantasy as opposed to singular player value.
Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.
This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670vs1.01
eterson(266) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Brady(280) = 747
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, and this is why it depends on the players you insert into those spots in a given year. This year, for instance, Vick's ceiling is way above 282, in my opinion. It would not be at all out of the realm of possibility to see him get 350-400, in which case grouping just about *anybody* with him is going to prove a better combination than your RB/RB/QB scenario. I would grant you that most of the time, it does not work out that way, but every so often it is the case, thus the reason you can't immediately say the QB position is *always* worth less. Not this year!Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670vs1.01
kinglochness
Footballguy
If you have never used a VBD approach before, get ready for your draft to improve 1000%. And for it to make a lot more sense. The draft dominator app uses VBD as it's backbone, but takes many, many other factors into consideration also. I recommend you check that out too.Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670vs1.01
Last edited by a moderator:
kinglochness
Footballguy
You are decribing a dVBD or Dynamic Value Based Draft in which your values change depending on needs and how many of each position have been taken. DD is what you need.Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670
vs
1.01
I have but Ive always manufactured my projections and weighted them positionally. Same thing but with a different name. To the other poster, I would love DD and a subscription to FBGs but atm I cant justify subscribing as im only in 4 leagues this year and they are all relatively low buy-in (highest being $50)So I come here for football discussion, listen to the audible and read my daily email.If you have never used a VBD approach before, get ready for your draft to improve %1000. And for it to make a lot more sense. The draft dominator app uses VBD as it's backbone, but takes many, many other factors into consideration also. I recommend you check that out too.Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670vs1.01
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
I know you really think you're making a great point here, but you're not. So save the arrogant shtick because you're embarrassing yourself, and that's not the way we have intelligent discussions here.
Yes.
Yes. Whenever you lose your #1 overall pick, you're going to be really hurting.
No. You lose your QB1.
I see alot of posters talking bout the value of qb 1 compared to RB 6 and vbd and the like my argument is Vick could have the type of season that throws traditional thinkin out the window a qb throwing for 4200 yds. And running for close to a 1000yds is unheard of if he pulls this off I'm willing to Bet 90% of his owners win titles
aimlessgun
Footballguy
I think Vick is a no brainer at 42$, considering that's Rodgers territory, and Brees is usually in the 30-40 range. Manning and Brady hang around 30$. 15$ for a upgrade of that potential size is completely reasonable, when ADP is a 60-70$ player (not 50-60 unless your draft room is entirely composed of penny pinchers).
Banger
Footballguy
I believe you're trying to show regression to the mean. I don't think that really applies here though.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Let's make it a multiple choice question:A) QBs are more likely to get injured following an exceptional year.B) It is possible for QBs to have record-breaking fantasy seasons without putting up big rushing totals.C) Due to "regression to the mean" QBs are unlikely to be the #1 QB two years in a row.D) A QB's yardage totals from year to year are subject to less variance than his TD totals.E) It's not relevant.
shadyridr
Footballguy
Huh? Not if Vick outscores that "different" QB by more pts than the top 5 RB outscores your RB by.
shadyridr
Footballguy
How does picking Vick affect anything else but one position? You can still take all those WRs & RBs later in the draft. No idea WTF youre talking about here.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Just skimming all the posts from last night, but for those who said RBs are more valuable than QBs because you start 2 RB and only 1 QB, that's not entirely true. Similar "common sense" would tell us that in leagues that start 1 QB / 2 RB / 3 WR (a pretty common format these days), WR would be the most valuable position, but it isn't.
In fact, there's little sense in discussing the "value" of one position vs. another position. Each individual player has some value, which is (a) dynamic, not static, and (b) determined by a lot of factors, including the position he plays but also his projected number of fantasy points, the value of replacement players at the same position, positional scarcity and roster needs, etc. After the advent of VBD it eventually became "obvious" to everyone that RBs are more valuable than QBs, but that's not always the case. Arguing that Vick isn't worthy of the #1 pick based on such a simple analysis is flawed. It might be true that Vick isn't worth the #1 pick, but it's not simply because of some notion that QBs aren't worth as much as RBs.
In fact, there's little sense in discussing the "value" of one position vs. another position. Each individual player has some value, which is (a) dynamic, not static, and (b) determined by a lot of factors, including the position he plays but also his projected number of fantasy points, the value of replacement players at the same position, positional scarcity and roster needs, etc. After the advent of VBD it eventually became "obvious" to everyone that RBs are more valuable than QBs, but that's not always the case. Arguing that Vick isn't worthy of the #1 pick based on such a simple analysis is flawed. It might be true that Vick isn't worth the #1 pick, but it's not simply because of some notion that QBs aren't worth as much as RBs.
shadyridr
Footballguy
Umm the point of this whole thread is people think Vick may out score the 2nd best QB by 100 pts or so. You're projections dont take that into account. Obviously, if Vick outscores Brady by 2 pts it would be really stupid to take him 1st. But if he outscores Brady by 100 pts (which alot of people seem to think is entirely possible then the pts swing to 770 vs 747. Im not sure you understand the point of this whole thread.Great link, this is what I was trying to say but I phrased it terribly.This is the point I was trying to make, except Ive always taken it further and measured it not only against his positional peers but the players that were available when I took whomever.1.01:Vick(282) + 2.10:Mcfadden(201) + 3.01:Fitzgerald(187) = 670vs1.01
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Just found out I got the #4 pick in my local 10-team superflex redraft. I'm definitely taking Vick there if he falls to me, but I'm worried that he won't.
Hipple Long Ware & Peete
Footballguy
with that scoring I wouldn't hesitate to take Vick 1.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
The biggest variable though, is his Y/A. He averaged 8.1 Y/A, but in Atlanta was at 6.7. He averaged 8.5 AY/A, with an Atlanta average of 6.1. Now his weapons are a lot better in Philadelphia and he appears to be a more mature QB. I would be very surprised if he averaged 8.5 AY/A again in 2011.
Banger
Footballguy
but SOOO much has changed for the better...a very good coach, a renewed attitude/film study as a result of a life altering situation, very good weapons and the perfect offense. Comparing him to his Atlanta days is like comparing him to a completely different QB.what is AY? adjusted yards? how does that 8.5 AY/A compare with other top qb's like Brees, Peyton, Brady, Rivers, Rodgers?
Last edited by a moderator:
His Atlanta situation is so far removed from Philly that it is not even comparable. Atlanta was a run first team with Vick throwing to Finneran, Crumpler, and Jenkins. Philly consistently throws a higher percentage of the time than most teams and to project 215 yards per game average is insane. In every full game he played, his lowest total was 218. He will somehow average less than his lowest game? Vick averaged 250 last year and that seems easily repeatable. That number is in line with what Philly historically does. Especially with that big play offense where D.Jax, McCoy, Celek, and Maclin who can all make huge plays. In an offense that throws 35 times a game, it will be virtually impossible for Vick to pass for less than 175 and he will have several 300+ yard games mixed in. The previous info was just about situation. Now Vick the player is much more focused and a much more consistent passer than in Atlanta. From a yardage standpoint to repeat last years numbers Vick needs to simply average about 250 passing and 55 rushing. I am truly confused by anyone who says these numbers arent repeatable and represent some kind of amazing season when taken individually.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Vick is clearly a different passer now, and in a different situation. He probably won't repeat an 8.5 but despite the relative sample sizes, I'd wager that his 2011 AY/A will be closer to last year's than to his years in Atlanta.
And of course a pure passing stat like AY/A doesn't fully account for Vick's value on the field. For example, his AY/A will be deflated by low passing TD numbers, but I don't particularly care about that if he's just pulling the ball down and running it in (in fact, in a 4pt passing TD league, I'd prefer that).
And of course a pure passing stat like AY/A doesn't fully account for Vick's value on the field. For example, his AY/A will be deflated by low passing TD numbers, but I don't particularly care about that if he's just pulling the ball down and running it in (in fact, in a 4pt passing TD league, I'd prefer that).
Banger
Footballguy
Agree completely. It's not as if he just threw for 5000 and 50 after averaging 4000 and 30 for 5 years. His passing improved a ton from his historical stats but there are a lot of things that have changed to indicate that this wasn't a blip on the radar screen or one year anomoly. He wasn't near the top of the league, his passing tds weren't out whack, his rushing was essentially a little less than his career average although his rushing Tds were high (and I'd expect those to drop a bit).
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
In 1998, Randall Cunningham played in 12 full games for the Vikings. Using a scoring system of 1/20, 5, -2, 1/10, 6, he averaged scored an absurd 347 fantasy points in those 12 games. Vick last year scored 366 points in 12 games, which was also absurd.
Cunningham's '98 season -- as a passer -- was a huge outlier from the rest of his career. But there were reasons for that. He was more mature, and reformed his life after time away from football. More importantly, he finally had awesome weapons -- Cris Carter and Randy Moss were unstoppable, especially on that turf and in that dome.
The '98 Vikings set the NFL record for points, and that was with Cunningham only playing in 12 games. And Cunningham was a massive bust in '99.
I think the Vick fans are way too optimistic about his floor. I don't disagree with their arguments about his ceiling, but I'm not ready to dismiss the fact that he might have been a one year wonder. I would consider Young to be a necessary handcuff to Vick; but I will say that I'd be pretty bullish on Young's fantasy prospects if he plays. If you handcuff Young to Vick, you remove a lot of the risk there.
Cunningham's '98 season -- as a passer -- was a huge outlier from the rest of his career. But there were reasons for that. He was more mature, and reformed his life after time away from football. More importantly, he finally had awesome weapons -- Cris Carter and Randy Moss were unstoppable, especially on that turf and in that dome.
The '98 Vikings set the NFL record for points, and that was with Cunningham only playing in 12 games. And Cunningham was a massive bust in '99.
I think the Vick fans are way too optimistic about his floor. I don't disagree with their arguments about his ceiling, but I'm not ready to dismiss the fact that he might have been a one year wonder. I would consider Young to be a necessary handcuff to Vick; but I will say that I'd be pretty bullish on Young's fantasy prospects if he plays. If you handcuff Young to Vick, you remove a lot of the risk there.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Yes, because 250 passing yards per game and 55 rushing yards per game is so common to see in the annals of NFL history: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=1920&year_max=2010&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&draft_round_min=0&draft_round_max=99&league_id=&team_id=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos_is_qb=Y&pos_is_rb=Y&pos_is_wr=Y&pos_is_te=Y&pos_is_rec=Y&pos_is_t=Y&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_ol=Y&pos_is_dt=Y&pos_is_de=Y&pos_is_dl=Y&pos_is_ilb=Y&pos_is_olb=Y&pos_is_lb=Y&pos_is_cb=Y&pos_is_s=Y&pos_is_db=Y&pos_is_k=Y&pos_is_p=Y&c1stat=pass_yds_per_g&c1comp=gt&c1val=250&c2stat=rush_yds_per_g&c2comp=gt&c2val=50&c3stat=g&c3comp=gt&c3val=11&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=year_id
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
AY/A is adjusted yards per attempt; it takes passing yards and adds a factor for passing TDs and subtracts a factor for interceptions. It attempts to account for the fact that a 10 yard pass at the 50 yard line isn't as valuable as a 10 yard pass at your opponent's 10 yard line and is more valuable than a 10 yard pass to the opponent. I think the elite QBs typically have AY/A above 8, but the elite QBs are almost entirely judged by their passing ability. In other words, AY/A might be a useful metric to compare Manning to Brady to Rivers to Brees, but I don't think it really captures what Vick brings on the field (since much of his "value" as a QB is tied to his running ability).
T with T
Footballguy
this post is funny considering the same time last year he was waiver fodder.. i traded this guy for a 2nd round pick and then the guy I traded him to cut him so I picked him up.. that was one of the leagues Frank gibson commished tho, so its non existent but it is just funny to see his value skyrocket. He actually avg the most fantasy points per game so if you go by that and think he will play 16 why not. I never take Qbs first and tend to wait to get one later.. my latest start up I got Romo 8.9 and kolb 13.4.
Banger
Footballguy
In your comparison the Vikings set a record for points...the Eagles or Vick didn't come close to setting any records on a team or personal level. They were 3rd in the league in scoring but they were 5th the year before and 6th the year prior so it's not as if it was a tremendous outlier in terms of their historical averages/expectations. What are your projections for him? and also how did Vicks 8.5 AY/A compare with the other top QBs? Was it out of range or was it just "out of range" in comparison to HIS historical passing figures.'Chase Stuart said:
Last edited by a moderator:
montanagold
Footballguy
I've got tough decisions myself on keeping 2 keepers. Rodgers, Vick, Foster, Mendenhall, McFadden, Blount. Most are late round. Damn tempted to go all hype and punch Foster and Vick.
It's easy for me to see the statistical arguments for taking Vick #1. A couple observations: Will the Eagles play a more balanced game in an effort to keep him up right and be focused on a Superbowl run? I would love to see the lights out play (he was playing for pride and position), very possible we could see a balanced throttle back.
Obviously your other choice and considered safer by others is Aaron Rodgers. What if he goes off and puts up 40+ touchdowns this season? I think it's very possible to see him step to a new level. He has all pieces back and I have to say that opportunity is really there.
MG
It's easy for me to see the statistical arguments for taking Vick #1. A couple observations: Will the Eagles play a more balanced game in an effort to keep him up right and be focused on a Superbowl run? I would love to see the lights out play (he was playing for pride and position), very possible we could see a balanced throttle back.
Obviously your other choice and considered safer by others is Aaron Rodgers. What if he goes off and puts up 40+ touchdowns this season? I think it's very possible to see him step to a new level. He has all pieces back and I have to say that opportunity is really there.
MG
Team ROFLCOPTERS
Footballguy
I'd rather have Arian Foster and Phillip Rivers than Vick and Blount.
In my league I expect 6 Qbs to go 1st 2 RSS u would never get Foster and rivers but u could get Vick nicks and blount!
shadyridr
Footballguy
and what about your second rd pick?
Similar threads
