Overweighted QB Points (1 Viewer)

[jagerbomb]

I'm in a league with a pretty unconventional scoring system. It's PPR and also QBs also get 1 point per completion - this means the top QBs will score about 2-3x more points than the top RBs or WRs.

Normally I would never take a QB before round 5, but does this scoring system pretty much mean I have to take a QB very early? It seems like getting the top QB pretty much means a championship and I'm assuming the 4 or 5 likely candidates for the top QB at the end of the year will be gone by in the first 15 picks.

To show the affect of this, here are the point projections at various spots using some standard projections:

QB1: 556 points

QB6: 456 points

QB12: 414 points

RB1: 230 points

RB13: 169 points

RB24: 132 points

WR1: 187 points

WR13: 143 points

WR25: 116 points

WR36: 98 points

TE1: 127 points

TE12: 74 points

Do I need to throw out everything I know about getting RBs and WRs early?

Also, please save the "get out of the league" comments... I already paid my fees.

EDIT: Also, QBs lose .5 points per incompletion - edited points

 

[a_troll00]

I'm in a point per completion league and all I can say is it's completely insane... yet, insanely fun.

When to pick a QB in that style league? In reality it's still not that different from any other league. Yes, you want a good QB, yet you also need strong RBs and WRs to win.

Last year I won the league with Kurt Warner as my QB1, I got him off the WW right after Leinart threw his third int against Oakland. The year before I didn't win but still did very well with Romo whom was drafted in the sixth round. This year I drafted Brady at 1.08, IMO a no brainer in this scoring format.

You just gotta see how the draft goes. If QBs are flying off the board in the first two rounds, don't reach for a lesser QB. Take that opportunity to grab top RB and WR talent. You could still do very well with a Cutler or a Schaub in a later round. If your competition is going after RBs and WRs in the first two rounds, you may want to consider drafting Brady, Brees, or Manning especially if you're drafting late near the turn. Rodgers could also be a steal in the third round.

 

[renesauz]

Looking at the point projections (if they're accurate)...I don't see the big deal. In the end, the spread between #1 and last starter is equivalent to the spreads at the other positions.

I would say it's more important to have a SOLID QB...you can't gamble and end up with QB's 14 and 15...but it's not necessarily a big deal to wait until the 6/7 QB's.

I've played scoring systems like this before...you do also wanna make sure your backup is a steady player.

 

[Jman]

We went through this in my league.

Some people thought it was necessary for all positions to score a similar amount of points.

Fact is, it doesn't matter.

QBs are never matched up against RBs or WRs. Their "worth" is based on how many points they score relative to other QBs, not any other position. Even if you gave 50 points per passing TD, it wouldn't matter because the parameters are set for EVERY QB. Everyone has the chance to score those points because everyone has a QB on their starting roster. Like every other position, there are players that perform better than others, but there's no need to inflate the value of QBs based on how many points they score. Now if you could start Drew Brees in a flex or RB spot, then you'd have the problem of inequity.

 

[jagerbomb]

We went through this in my league. Some people thought it was necessary for all positions to score a similar amount of points.Fact is, it doesn't matter.QBs are never matched up against RBs or WRs. Their "worth" is based on how many points they score relative to other QBs, not any other position. Even if you gave 50 points per passing TD, it wouldn't matter because the parameters are set for EVERY QB. Everyone has the chance to score those points because everyone has a QB on their starting roster. Like every other position, there are players that perform better than others, but there's no need to inflate the value of QBs based on how many points they score. Now if you could start Drew Brees in a flex or RB spot, then you'd have the problem of inequity.

Thanks for the input but this doesn't make sense to me, if there's 50 points per passing TD then each week will typically boil down to who gets the most passing TDs. If my QB throws 3 TDs and yours throws 1TD, you would basically have no chance of making up the 100 points deficit with your other positions.

 

[elshagon]

My league weights QB's scoring higher also as we use 10pts for all TD's, yardage falls in line with traditional scoring. I just go by what VBD and Draft Dominator tell me to do....draft QB's early!!! Another thing to consider is where owners typically draft QB's in your league. If they also draft early, then taking a Brady or Brees early in the first round makes sense. You figure by the time the draft gets back to you quite a few of your leaguemates will also have taken a QB, just not as good as the one you've drafted!

 

[boubucarow]

We went through this in my league. Some people thought it was necessary for all positions to score a similar amount of points.Fact is, it doesn't matter.QBs are never matched up against RBs or WRs. Their "worth" is based on how many points they score relative to other QBs, not any other position. Even if you gave 50 points per passing TD, it wouldn't matter because the parameters are set for EVERY QB. Everyone has the chance to score those points because everyone has a QB on their starting roster. Like every other position, there are players that perform better than others, but there's no need to inflate the value of QBs based on how many points they score. Now if you could start Drew Brees in a flex or RB spot, then you'd have the problem of inequity.

It does matter.The more points you give for each stat benchmark the more the gap widens between the players. You must look at every situation specifically to see the effect and the resulting tiers of players at each position. It can have a minimal impact but some even subtle scoring changes can have huge impacts.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

I thought this was going to be a thread about Jared Lorenzen and JaMarcus Russell.

You win this time.

 

[jon_mx]

Last year I won the league with Kurt Warner as my QB1, I got him off the WW right after Leinart threw his third int against Oakland.

Last year Leinart did not even throw 3 int's all year. Perhaps you meant 2007. Last year Warner should never have been on a waiver wire.

 

[lod01]

The QB should score always more than any other position. He is the most valuable player. Just ask Josh McDaniels as he is currently finding that out.

You can find a capable RB much easier than a capable starting QB.

 

[Ksquared]

Last year I won the league with Kurt Warner as my QB1, I got him off the WW right after Leinart threw his third int against Oakland.

Last year Leinart did not even throw 3 int's all year. Perhaps you meant 2007. Last year Warner should never have been on a waiver wire.

I am guessing he picked him up after the preseason game vs the Raiders. Leinart was still supposed to be the starter up to that point. In fact the coaching staff was doing everything they could to have Leinart be the QB even though Warner was easily out playing him in practice and the preseason games.

 

[a_troll00]

Last year I won the league with Kurt Warner as my QB1, I got him off the WW right after Leinart threw his third int against Oakland.

Last year Leinart did not even throw 3 int's all year. Perhaps you meant 2007. Last year Warner should never have been on a waiver wire.

I am guessing he picked him up after the preseason game vs the Raiders. Leinart was still supposed to be the starter up to that point. In fact the coaching staff was doing everything they could to have Leinart be the QB even though Warner was easily out playing him in practice and the preseason games.

Yup, this is exactly what happened. Some people seem to have very short memories. Anyways, here is the exact game, Arizona's third preseason game against Oakland.http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=280823013

Before this game, Whisenhunt was just itching to give the starting job to Leinart.

 

[Jman]

The 50 pt. TD thing was a bad example.

I guess the crux of the issue is that good QBs are valuable no matter what the scoring dictates. Relative differences between the positions (not the total, but the discrepancies) being similar is what's important.

 

[puckalicious]

We went through this in my league. Some people thought it was necessary for all positions to score a similar amount of points.Fact is, it doesn't matter.QBs are never matched up against RBs or WRs. Their "worth" is based on how many points they score relative to other QBs, not any other position. Even if you gave 50 points per passing TD, it wouldn't matter because the parameters are set for EVERY QB. Everyone has the chance to score those points because everyone has a QB on their starting roster. Like every other position, there are players that perform better than others, but there's no need to inflate the value of QBs based on how many points they score. Now if you could start Drew Brees in a flex or RB spot, then you'd have the problem of inequity.

Thanks for the input but this doesn't make sense to me, if there's 50 points per passing TD then each week will typically boil down to who gets the most passing TDs. If my QB throws 3 TDs and yours throws 1TD, you would basically have no chance of making up the 100 points deficit with your other positions.

This. If your QB gets injured during a game (or just has a bad game) you have NO chance to make up for it at other positions. Sure you could say that about regular leagues but it is magnified 2x in a league like this.

I thought this was going to be a thread about Jared Lorenzen and JaMarcus Russell.You win this time.

I was going to post the same thing.