Official Subscriber Contest (2 Viewers)

[Das Boot]

Congrats to everyone still kicking and clawing in the contest! We've made it past over 2/3 of the field. I remember orientation like it was yesterday. Look to your left and right. Two of you won't be here after 7 weeks.

Same principle remains true, only now it's only 3 weeks to trim another 2/3s of the field Week 1 trim to 12,000 teams (all advance if we have less entries)

Week 2 trim to 10,000 teams

Week 3 trim to 8,500 teams

Week 4 trim to 7,250 teams

Week 5 trim to 6,100 teams

Week 6 trim to 5,000 teams

Week 7 trim to 4,000 teams

Week 8 trim to 3,100 teams

Week 9 trim to 2,300 teams

Week 10 trim to 1,600 teams

Week 11 trim to 1,000 teams

Week 12 trim to 500 teams

Week 13 trim to 250 teams

 

[jon_mx]

Preliminary week 8 sim

Just-for-fun power rankings

bumping...always cool to see the sim

 

[elcohiba]

Eliminated this week. Was fun and good luck to the survivors. Rice was on Bye and Westbrook and Leon were hurt. Hines 1 for 3 yds. And my 3 kickers produced 4 points. Missed the cut by 6.

 

[LHUCKS]

I know this doesn't mean anything, but just for s&g, here are cumulative totals for the remaining teams:

LINK

Top scoring team is avg'ing 185 pts per week.

#387

Good luck next week without Palmer, R. Moss, and Chris Henry.....Perhaps Hasselbeck can do something at QB for you. You are going to have to get good days out of 4 remaining WR's...DeSean Jackson, Vincent Jackson, Derrick Mason, Robert Meachem. I think you only get 2 good weeks there. It will be interesting what chances the sim gives you, i think you maybe around 50-60%.

Yeah, this is my last rough bye week, but really it's not too bad...I'm guessing I'll be more like 80%.

You came in at 61%.....

wow, lower than I though.

 

[John Mamula]

39.4%

 

[Anthony Borbely]

19.8% :(

And I think I should be single digits. No Brady and Hill got benched. Leon, Cooley went to IR. I have S Jax and then a bunch of scrubs at RB. Only Celek at TE. Maroney on a bye.

Heaven help me.

 

[jon_mx]

19.8% And I think I should be single digits. No Brady and Hill got benched. Leon, Cooley went to IR. I have S Jax and then a bunch of scrubs at RB. Only Celek at TE. Maroney on a bye. Heaven help me.

As bad as you have it, there are 70 teams worse than you. Perhaps S Jax can put up 40 against Detroit.

 

[jon_mx]

Wow, simulation shows the cutoff around 140....everyone needs to perform. Tough week. I am at 80.5%, but don't feel that good with only be projected at 148. I need a good week out of everyone.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Wow, simulation shows the cutoff around 140....everyone needs to perform. Tough week. I am at 80.5%, but don't feel that good with only be projected at 148. I need a good week out of everyone.

The cut looks to be 128-129.

 

[jon_mx]

Wow, simulation shows the cutoff around 140....everyone needs to perform. Tough week. I am at 80.5%, but don't feel that good with only be projected at 148. I need a good week out of everyone.

The cut looks to be 128-129.

I was just looking at the average score of the people around the cutoff line, which looks to be 140. Not sure how else to figure it.

 

[joffer]

57.4%

 

[gianmarco]

#207 in sim prediction (96.9%)

#235 in power ranking



Of course, those rankings + this post = me being gone this week.

That's ok, I like to tempt fate.

 

[ctriopelle]

Wow, simulation shows the cutoff around 140....everyone needs to perform. Tough week. I am at 80.5%, but don't feel that good with only be projected at 148. I need a good week out of everyone.

The cut looks to be 128-129.

I was just looking at the average score of the people around the cutoff line, which looks to be 140. Not sure how else to figure it.

at the top, DD has the percentile ranks of the cutoff number. 60th percentile is 131, 40th is 126, 50th, and therefore the average predicted is the middle of that, which is between 128 and 129. That's been relatively close for a preliminary estimate over the past few weeks

 

[redaddy25]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

 

[jon_mx]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

19.8% And I think I should be single digits. No Brady and Hill got benched. Leon, Cooley went to IR. I have S Jax and then a bunch of scrubs at RB. Only Celek at TE. Maroney on a bye. Heaven help me.

Perhaps S Jax can put up 40 against Detroit.

Coincidentally, that was my first thought when I went searching for the possibility of a miracle week for my team.One other thing I thought of is that this needs to be one of those huge Devery Henderson weeks. He usually has a couple of them every year and that is the only reason I picked him.

 

[Doug Drinen]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

Keep in mind that the power rankings (arbitrarily) double-weight the current week, on the theory that those projections are a little more certain than the future projections. So if you are more hurt by byes this week than last, that can cause a big drop. Also, there's just a lot of parity among the remaining teams, so even something as minor as losing a backup QB can drop you a fair bit.

 

[Sinn Fein]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

Keep in mind that the power rankings (arbitrarily) double-weight the current week, on the theory that those projections are a little more certain than the future projections. So if you are more hurt by byes this week than last, that can cause a big drop. Also, there's just a lot of parity among the remaining teams, so even something as minor as losing a backup QB can drop you a fair bit.

This is where I see a flaw in the power rankings. At this stage of the contest, backups do not matter nearly as much as they did during the bye weeks. If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

 

[WisWolvrns]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

Keep in mind that the power rankings (arbitrarily) double-weight the current week, on the theory that those projections are a little more certain than the future projections. So if you are more hurt by byes this week than last, that can cause a big drop. Also, there's just a lot of parity among the remaining teams, so even something as minor as losing a backup QB can drop you a fair bit.

This is where I see a flaw in the power rankings. At this stage of the contest, backups do not matter nearly as much as they did during the bye weeks. If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I'd have to say that is an incorrect assumption. Having a stud qb just increases your probability of a decent game. Say a stud QB will score well and be used in 80% of the games and a backup QB would only be used in 10% of your games. If it happens your stud throws one of his bad games and you no longer have a backup QB to possibly pick up the slack, the Turk will come visiting. Pretty much th same logic as the 20/24 team debate really...

 

[GloryDaze]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

 

[jon_mx]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

It really depends on the stud. Both Brees and Brady have been inconsistent, having huge games and a couple so-so games, while Manning has been super consistent. Ryan and Garrard would have improved on Manning score in weeks 4 and 5 by some points, when they had big weeks, but that is about it.

 

[GloryDaze]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

It really depends on the stud. Both Brees and Brady have been inconsistent, having huge games and a couple so-so games, while Manning has been super consistent. Ryan and Garrard would have improved on Manning score in weeks 4 and 5 by some points, when they had big weeks, but that is about it.

Thank you for validating my point.

 

[Frank Costanza's Lawyer]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

Keep in mind that the power rankings (arbitrarily) double-weight the current week, on the theory that those projections are a little more certain than the future projections. So if you are more hurt by byes this week than last, that can cause a big drop. Also, there's just a lot of parity among the remaining teams, so even something as minor as losing a backup QB can drop you a fair bit.

This is where I see a flaw in the power rankings. At this stage of the contest, backups do not matter nearly as much as they did during the bye weeks. If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

Im not sure flaw is the right word here, but I do agree its a limitation. Im not sure how DD could correct it though. To generate his power rankings, he needed to come up with a common method to compare teams constructed using different strategies.The way the power rankings are calculated will discount any team that doesnt have 4 QBs, 6 RBs, 7 WRs, 4 TEs, 3 PK, and 3 Ds. And since no team could have all those (it adds up to 27 players), all teams take a hit. QB is probably the biggest hit because they are, in general, high scoring players. If you took a calculated risk and went with one stud and a backup like Leftwich, your power rank will suffer.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

17th for the week, 46th going forward... Thought I would drop a good bit with the Leon injury and lack of overall depth a RB going forward. Good luck everyone...

I dropped 1000 spots and am not sure why. All I did was lose Shaun Hill, is a backup QB really that important after your bye week? I've had two very good weeks in a row. At least I am still alive, and have a good chance this week to make it again.

Keep in mind that the power rankings (arbitrarily) double-weight the current week, on the theory that those projections are a little more certain than the future projections. So if you are more hurt by byes this week than last, that can cause a big drop. Also, there's just a lot of parity among the remaining teams, so even something as minor as losing a backup QB can drop you a fair bit.

This is where I see a flaw in the power rankings. At this stage of the contest, backups do not matter nearly as much as they did during the bye weeks. If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

The backups matter to me this week because I have Brady and the backups were Hill and Leftwich. :(

 

[jon_mx]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

It really depends on the stud. Both Brees and Brady have been inconsistent, having huge games and a couple so-so games, while Manning has been super consistent. Ryan and Garrard would have improved on Manning score in weeks 4 and 5 by some points, when they had big weeks, but that is about it.

Thank you for validating my point.

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

 

[tomarken]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

It really depends on the stud. Both Brees and Brady have been inconsistent, having huge games and a couple so-so games, while Manning has been super consistent. Ryan and Garrard would have improved on Manning score in weeks 4 and 5 by some points, when they had big weeks, but that is about it.

Thank you for validating my point.

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

So the Ryan/Garrard combo outscored Manning five of the seven weeks so far. What was the point again?

 

[Caveman_Nick]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

I don't know if I agree with your assumption here, but I do know that youa re pointing out only one kind of scenarin my team I have Rodgers and Ryan, which means I have2 good chances of putting up a good game on a weekly basis instead of one very good chance at a good game and a low to mediocre chance for my back-up to have a good game.At this point the idea is still to not lose. Getting a very high score on any given week doesn't help that much right now.

 

[Moniker]

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

Total points means nothing at this point in the contest. The Ryan/Gerrard combo outscored Manning in 4 of those 6 weeks.

 

[GloryDaze]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

I don't know if I agree with your assumption here, but I do know that youa re pointing out only one kind of scenarin my team I have Rodgers and Ryan, which means I have2 good chances of putting up a good game on a weekly basis instead of one very good chance at a good game and a low to mediocre chance for my back-up to have a good game.At this point the idea is still to not lose. Getting a very high score on any given week doesn't help that much right now.

My assumption is that it's better to have 2 possible scores than 1. I just typed the first two 'average' QBs that popped into my head. I'm sure if I dug around enough, there's a better combination.

 

[jon_mx]

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

Total points means nothing at this point in the contest. The Ryan/Gerrard combo outscored Manning in 4 of those 6 weeks.

Total points does mean a lot. That is how you win the competition, total points in three weeks. Besides 2 of those weeks that they outscored Manning was by 1 point. I would take the extra $5 and Manning.

 

[GloryDaze]

Total points does mean a lot. That is how you win the competition, total points in three weeks. Besides 2 of those weeks that they outscored Manning was by 1 point. I would take the extra $5 and Manning.

Can you calculate the other 'stud' QBs also to see how they measure up?

 

[Moniker]

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

Total points means nothing at this point in the contest. The Ryan/Gerrard combo outscored Manning in 4 of those 6 weeks.

Total points does mean a lot. That is how you win the competition, total points in three weeks. Besides 2 of those weeks that they outscored Manning was by 1 point. I would take the extra $5 and Manning.

You win the competition by making it to the last three weeks and then hoping for some luck because everyone left should have very good teams. As of now, total points means nothing.

 

[GloryDaze]

I'm changing from Ryan and Garrard to Schaub and Roethlisberger for 39. Please recalculate jonxm

 

[jon_mx]

If you have a stud QB, and no back-up, you should score better than a team with two average QBs.

I think it's far more likely for Brees to put up a 200 yard, 1TD game than Matt Ryan and David Garrard both putting up less than that.

I don't know if I agree with your assumption here, but I do know that youa re pointing out only one kind of scenarin my team I have Rodgers and Ryan, which means I have2 good chances of putting up a good game on a weekly basis instead of one very good chance at a good game and a low to mediocre chance for my back-up to have a good game.At this point the idea is still to not lose. Getting a very high score on any given week doesn't help that much right now.

My assumption is that it's better to have 2 possible scores than 1. I just typed the first two 'average' QBs that popped into my head. I'm sure if I dug around enough, there's a better combination.

You picked a good combo. Unless you want to include Schaub as an average QB, even though he is pretty much a stud at this point. What made this year tough is there was really not much value at below the $14 level. Stafford and Sanchez and now Smith are the only playable ones. This year you had to pay for a QB. Schaub was the best value to date at $20.S Rosenfels MIN - 13C Pennington MIA - 12J Russell OAK - 12S Hill SF - 11M Bulger STL - 11M Stafford DET - 11K Collins TEN - 10M Sanchez NYJ - 9B Quinn CLE - 9L McCown JAX - 8K Clemens NYJ - 5A Smith SF - 4D Anderson CLE - 4D Culpepper DET - 4M Leinart ARI - 4B Leftwich TB - 4

 

[ctriopelle]

Week 4 10.3% 9097

Week 5 19.2% 17037

Week 6 10.8% 9519

Week 7 18.1% 16043

Week 8 15.5% 13695

Week 9 18.2% 16069

Week 10 8.0% 7067

Here's the players on bye distribution for the remaining 4001 teams. This week is another high bye week, but not as big as last week or next week. It will be interesting to see how things change from this week to next week.

Turk still has me around 90% odds of living this week, but I'm getting seriously thin at RB/QB. Bad week by a couple of those guys when others blow up could be my end.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm changing from Ryan and Garrard to Schaub and Roethlisberger for 39. Please recalculate jonxm

At this point, neither of those are 'average'. Schaub is the #1 QB right now, and Ben is top 5. But those two were the best values.

 

[tomarken]

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

Total points means nothing at this point in the contest. The Ryan/Gerrard combo outscored Manning in 4 of those 6 weeks.

Total points does mean a lot. That is how you win the competition, total points in three weeks. Besides 2 of those weeks that they outscored Manning was by 1 point. I would take the extra $5 and Manning.

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

 

[GloryDaze]

I'm changing from Ryan and Garrard to Schaub and Roethlisberger for 39. Please recalculate jonxm

At this point, neither of those are 'average'. Schaub is the #1 QB right now, and Ben is top 5. But those two were the best values.

No different than picking Manning for the Stud QB as he is the best value. At the start of the contest they were average priced.

 

[jon_mx]

Not counting Manning's bye week..... You spent $5 more on those two and have 16 less points.Manning - $32 Week 1 - 20.05Week 2 - 27.45Week 3 41.95Week 4 28.55Week 5 32.45Week 7 28.90 179.35Ryan/Gerrard - $37 Week 1 23.45Week 2 28.30Week 3 19.60Week 4 37.95Week 5 33.75Week 7 20.50 163.55

Total points means nothing at this point in the contest. The Ryan/Gerrard combo outscored Manning in 4 of those 6 weeks.

Total points does mean a lot. That is how you win the competition, total points in three weeks. Besides 2 of those weeks that they outscored Manning was by 1 point. I would take the extra $5 and Manning.

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

I am not advocating a one QB strategy, i just think you better make sure you have ONE if you want to win. I am betting the winner will have Schaub, Brees, Manning, or Brady. You want to have a QB who can blow up for three weeks.Besides, for $5 you can upgrade S. Jackson or Forte to MJD or ADP.

 

[Frank Costanza's Lawyer]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

 

[GloryDaze]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

It has been officially changed to Manning + $7 vs. Roethlisberger/Schaub.

 

[Frank Costanza's Lawyer]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

It has been officially changed to Manning + $7 vs. Roethlisberger/Schaub.

I think you missed my *official* comment about hindsight.

 

[GloryDaze]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

It has been officially changed to Manning + $7 vs. Roethlisberger/Schaub.

I think you missed my *official* comment about hindsight.

Well the original stud QB was Brees, and jonxm changed it to manning in hindsight in a failed attempt to validate the 1QB strat. I'm changing the two averaged priced QBs for comparison in hindsight to Ben and Matt.

 

[Marauder]

I'm changing from Ryan and Garrard to Schaub and Roethlisberger for 39. Please recalculate jonxm

At this point, neither of those are 'average'. Schaub is the #1 QB right now, and Ben is top 5. But those two were the best values.

You hand-picked your stud so you should let Glory hand-pick his best combo. Manning is actually one of the least-owned studs. It is far more likely that a team who went with the two "average" QB theory took Schaub as one of their QB's than it is for a team who went with the stud QB theory to have taken Manning.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm changing from Ryan and Garrard to Schaub and Roethlisberger for 39. Please recalculate jonxm

At this point, neither of those are 'average'. Schaub is the #1 QB right now, and Ben is top 5. But those two were the best values.

You hand-picked your stud so you should let Glory hand-pick his best combo. Manning is actually one of the least-owned studs. It is far more likely that a team who went with the two "average" QB theory took Schaub as one of their QB's than it is for a team who went with the stud QB theory to have taken Manning.

The idea is in theory, is two average QB's (10-16 scoring QB) better than a Top 5 stud. Hindsight is easy to pick values. I played Warner as my stud last year and spent less than $20 on my QB position total. I say the winner will have a Top 5 QB and not a couple of 'average' QB's.

 

[GloryDaze]

I say the winner will have two overperforming lower priced QBs and not one 'stud' with Leftwich and Pennington as backups.

Of course I have Rodgers and Peyton as my only 2 QBs.

 

[jon_mx]

I say the winner will have two overperforming lower priced QBs and not one 'stud' with Leftwich and Pennington as backups.Of course I have Rodgers and Peyton as my only 2 QBs.

Of course the key to winning is finding those under-priced studs. Then with the money you save, pick up some sure fire studs. It was harder to do this year at QB. Schaub is the one that stands out, but still was $20. But to win, you need stud performers at every positions, and a some depth to fill in. Lots of average depth is nice, but it does not win. You have to hit home runs.

 

[GloryDaze]

I say the winner will have two overperforming lower priced QBs and not one 'stud' with Leftwich and Pennington as backups.Of course I have Rodgers and Peyton as my only 2 QBs.

But to win, you need stud performers at every positions, and a some depth to fill in.

According to your previous posts you do not need any depth.

 

[tomarken]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

Because no one would advocate taking just one QB as a viable strategy. At the very least you want your bye week covered. Therefore saying Manning at $32 is better value than Ryan/Garrard at $37 not only completely disregards (a) that Ryan/Garrard have actually out performed Manning most of the year and (b) Manning was handpicked in hindsight anyway, but you still need to get a backup for Manning's bye week. Everything about the argument is wrong.

 

[jon_mx]

So you would you buy with the $5? You said yourself there was no QB value at that price range this year.Ryan/Garrard is a better strategy than Manning. They've scored more points in five of the seven weeks so far. I'm not sure anything is more important than that.

Why does the $5 have to be spent on a QB?IMO, looking at this strictly from a QB perspective is a mistake. The correct comparison is Manning + $5 upgrade/new player(s) vs. Ryan/Garrard. And since we have the luxury of hindsight, identifying the $5 upgrade/new player(s) isnt particularly helpful.

Because no one would advocate taking just one QB as a viable strategy. At the very least you want your bye week covered. Therefore saying Manning at $32 is better value than Ryan/Garrard at $37 not only completely disregards (a) that Ryan/Garrard have actually out performed Manning most of the year and (b) Manning was handpicked in hindsight anyway, but you still need to get a backup for Manning's bye week. Everything about the argument is wrong.

We were debating having a Stud post bye week versus having two average QB's. So no it was not wrong. I am not advocating one QB. I have three. Shaun Hill worked fine covering the bye, but now is worthless. I also have Leinart as a flyer. But at this point it is down to one stud effectively. Now would you have one stud at this point, or two average guys? I would rather have one stud.