Peyton Manning in round 1? (1 Viewer)

[Noahs Troopers]

First off, i'm not a fan of either, no like or dislike, too expensive for my tastes at QB.I don't understand why Manning is a 1st rounder? C-Pep is not?I'd assume most people think Manning will not repeat last year, and at the same time Culpepper will repeat last year. Two league I'm in:Manning 381 Fantasy pointsCulpepper 402 Fantasy pointsOther league:Manning 505 pointsCulpepper 499 pointsThe first was a 4 pt per pass TD, the 2nd was a 6 pt per pass TD. Why exactly is Manning a must have 1st rounder again?

 

[jurb26]

With out getting this whole debate in an uproar again, the answer is really this simple:Randy Moss

 

[Colin Dowling]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.:end:Colin

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

I'm with you completly, I worded that a bit poor. I wouldn't draft any QB in round 1 either.

 

[LHUCKS]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Although, I will say that if I'm in a guppy league and I know there will be an early run on QBs I may be tempted to take Manning in the second half of the first round...I don't compete in those leagues though.

 

[Marc Levin]

you are both preaching to this choir - Manning won't be on any of my teams.I would actually take one or two WRs BEFORE Manning if I was drafting late in the first round as I find a top-3 WR more enticing than the top QB.

 

[jurb26]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Cpep and Manning were the #1 and #2 OVERALL players in more fatasy leagues than any other player last year. They most certainly WERE worth 1st round picks and COULD be worth them again.

 

[Peyton Marino]

First off, let me just say that I don't agree with taking either in the first round. However, taking Culpepper in the first round is a lot worse than taking a flier on Manning. Your fantasy points numbers from last year are useless due to the fact that Culpepper will not throw for 4700 yards and 39 TDs again this year. Moss or no Moss. 4000 yards and 30 TDs is a much more reasonable projection for Culpepper IMO. You can get production pretty close to that out of Bulger, Favre, McNabb, Collins and Green, only a few rounds later.

 

[LHUCKS]

First off, let me just say that I don't agree with taking either in the first round. However, taking Culpepper in the first round is a lot worse than taking a flier on Manning. Your fantasy points numbers from last year are useless due to the fact that Culpepper will not throw for 4700 yards and 39 TDs again this year. Moss or no Moss. 4000 yards and 30 TDs is a much more reasonable projection for Culpepper IMO. You can get production pretty close to that out of Bulger, Favre, McNabb, Collins and Green, only a few rounds later.

I also agree with this.Culpepper = Risk

 

[Colin Dowling]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Cpep and Manning were the #1 and #2 OVERALL players in more fatasy leagues than any other player last year. They most certainly WERE worth 1st round picks and COULD be worth them again.

And if you think they'll post those numbers again, please feel free to pick them.

 

[jurb26]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Cpep and Manning were the #1 and #2 OVERALL players in more fatasy leagues than any other player last year. They most certainly WERE worth 1st round picks and COULD be worth them again.

And if you think they'll post those numbers again, please feel free to pick them.

That is not the point in the least.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Cpep and Manning were the #1 and #2 OVERALL players in more fatasy leagues than any other player last year. They most certainly WERE worth 1st round picks and COULD be worth them again.

And if you think they'll post those numbers again, please feel free to pick them.

That is not the point in the least.

That is ENTIRELY the point.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Where did VBD tell you to pick Manning?

 

[ChromeWeasel]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Depends on the league. I think more and more leagues are made up under realistic scoring and roster systems.If you play in an archaic league with 2RB, 1QB, 2WR, then you are stuck with the same old crappy draft boards. If your league is more modern with 1 or 2 QB, 1 RB, 3 WR, then you dont have the same limitations on draft order.

There's a lot of arrogance here that every league is the same. Different rosters make for different draft values, and more leagues realize that now. I would think any 'shark' would want to organize a league where it's not 'smart' to pick a RB for 3 straight rounds.

 

[Colin Dowling]

In my main redraft league using our scoring system, my current sheet has him 13th. He's the only non-RB in the top 22.Colin

 

[Z-Men]

First off, i'm not a fan of either, no like or dislike, too expensive for my tastes at QB.

I don't understand why Manning is a 1st rounder? C-Pep is not?

I'd assume most people think Manning will not repeat last year, and at the same time Culpepper will repeat last year.

Two league I'm in:

Manning 381 Fantasy points

Culpepper 402 Fantasy points

Other league:

Manning 505 points

Culpepper 499 points

The first was a 4 pt per pass TD, the 2nd was a 6 pt per pass TD.

Why exactly is Manning a must have 1st rounder again?

Manning should NOT be a first rounder. Instead of regurgitating click here:http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=peyton+manning

-z-

 

[jurb26]

Manning is a first rounder because despite all of our chest-beating about how competitive our own leagues are, there is at least 1 dope in every group of 12 that doesn't understand the relative values of different positions.

The answer isn't that Culpepper should be in the 1st round too; its that Manning shouldn't be in the first round either.

:end:

Colin

Cpep and Manning were the #1 and #2 OVERALL players in more fatasy leagues than any other player last year. They most certainly WERE worth 1st round picks and COULD be worth them again.

And if you think they'll post those numbers again, please feel free to pick them.

That is not the point in the least.

That is ENTIRELY the point.

No, actually the point is this: Somehow the masses of FF intellect have brain washed the majority into thinking that anything other than a RB in the 1st is a cataclysmic error in drafting. You say it as if it is an absolute that drafting Manning or any QB in the 1st is a mistake of mammoth proportions. Well, last year and others before it have disproved this absolute premise. You can go on in thinking that the only way to draft is to go RB and guess what, you will probably be right most of the time. The problem is you will not be right all of the time and that is the manor in which this premise is always presented.For the record, I happen to agree with your drafting stance and I never seem to go QB early. It is not because I don’t see value in it though, because often times it is clearly there. Manning happens to be one of those times. I just happen to be very adept at running QBBCs and finding later round QBs that perform well. Not everyone likes to have to do this nor happens to run them successfully though. If there is one thing I hate it is this notion that everyone has to do it one way and that way is only through RBs.

 

[wannabee]

There's no arrogance ... my league is better than your league

There's a lot of arrogance here that every league is the same. Different rosters make for different draft values, and more leagues realize that now. I would think any 'shark' would want to organize a league where it's not 'smart' to pick a RB for 3 straight rounds.

 

[David Yudkin]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times. His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years. But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first. His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

In my main redraft league using our scoring system, my current sheet has him 13th. He's the only non-RB in the top 22.

Colin

What do you mean by "sheet"? If that where the FBG VBD app puts him in your scoring system? Are your projections for Manning similar to FBGs?Also, for many of us, 13th IS in the first round.

I'm no big Manning or QB fan myself, and it would depend heavily on the scoring system etc, but I'd be hard pressed to pass on Manning at the bottom of the 1st and would pass on CPep in a heartbeat.

It's not necessarily that I think Mannning will repeat last year's numbers or that he will outperform Cpep significantly, but the benefit to Manning is that he is virtually guaranteed to be in the top 3 or so unless there is an injury. Not too many people you can say that about, inlucing Culpepper with Moss gone. I'm not saying no Moss WILL kill Culpper, but I'm not 100% confident that he won't either. Manning doesn't have those issues - everybody's back.

 

[Colin Dowling]

No, actually the point is this: Somehow the masses of FF intellect have brain washed the majority into thinking that anything other than a RB in the 1st is a cataclysmic error in drafting. You say it as if it is an absolute that drafting Manning or any QB in the 1st is a mistake of mammoth proportions. Well, last year and others before it have disproved this absolute premise. You can go on in thinking that the only way to draft is to go RB and guess what, you will probably be right most of the time. The problem is you will not be right all of the time and that is the manor in which this premise is always presented.

Mathematically, using the principles of value based drafting, a QB has to be EXPECTED to put up near record numbers to justify a top-12 selection in most scoring systems. Last year didn't disprove anything - it showed that from time to time there is a Glitch In the Matrix. For the purposes of this year, unless you think that Manning will get close to his record again or Daunte will rush in 10 TDs plus pass proficiently (for example) there is no way that the principles of VBD would dictate they be selected in the first round. Now, if you expect RBs 5-12 to not be very good or something in that regard, then its possible a QB would sneak in to the late 1st round. Your comment about the brainwashed masses is sort of true. However, you and I (and many here) are smart enough to understand the factual basis behind the statement "RB in Round 1 Always!" more then just taking that comment at face value.Colin

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Its this simple, in my league (qbs get pts for rushing) it looked like this:Last year in games with Moss, Cpep averaged 68.91 pts per gameWith out Moss Cpep averaged 9.6 pts per game. Defenses will no longer have to roll double and triple teams to any player on the Vikes offense. That sure will change things for Cpep.

 

[B-Deep]

Manning is as close to a sure thing as you can get in fantasy football, and has been for 6 years. Compare this to how many of the first round RBs taken last year ended up being complete busts. This is part of the reason he goes early.

 

[CapGuru]

This thinking on Manning and CPep is especially difficult for me when the guppy in our 2QB league draft at the end of the first took BOTH Manning and CPep last year and rode them to the Championship while all the Sharks swam in circles. We all chalked this up to luck and it never will happen again as Manning and CPep will both go higher this year and not wind up on the same team.

 

[Bloom]

in leagues with 6 pts per passing TD, manning is a solid first rounder.

 

[Marc Levin]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times. His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years. But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first. His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

That's the end of this conversation.Good posting David

 

[cobalt_27]

Are you all assuming a 1QB, 2RB, 3WR lineup when talking about ignoring Manning, C'Pepp, et al. until the 2nd round and beyond?

 

[Marc Levin]

This thinking on Manning and CPep is especially difficult for me when the guppy in our 2QB league draft at the end of the first took BOTH Manning and CPep last year and rode them to the Championship while all the Sharks swam in circles. We all chalked this up to luck and it never will happen again as Manning and CPep will both go higher this year and not wind up on the same team.

What the F??A start 2-QB league full of SUPPOSED SHARKS allowed C-Pepp and Mannign to fall past pick #6?

START 2??

You need some new sharks. In ANY start-2 QB league, both C-Pepp and Manning are not only first round picks - but they are TOP of the first round picks. Manning is a serious contendor for #1 overall, and shoud be gone by pick #3 or 4. Even last year, neither should have lasted past the #6 or #7 pick.

 

[Marc Levin]

Are you all assuming a 1QB, 2RB, 3WR lineup when talking about ignoring Manning, C'Pepp, et al. until the 2nd round and beyond?

well, 1 QB, 2 RB anyway.

 

[jurb26]

Mathematically, using the principles of value based drafting, a QB has to be EXPECTED to put up near record numbers to justify a top-12 selection in most scoring systems. Last year didn't disprove anything - it showed that from time to time there is a Glitch In the Matrix. For the purposes of this year, unless you think that Manning will get close to his record again or Daunte will rush in 10 TDs plus pass proficiently (for example) there is no way that the principles of VBD would dictate they be selected in the first round.

This is the part I disagree with here. A guy like Manning does not HAVE to finish in the top 12 players overall for all drafters to VALUE him there. What Manning offers is unique in that he offers BOTH the highest degree of performance (at his position) and the LOWEST level of risk of any position or player on the board. He is a Cornerstone and rock to which some drafters love to build a team around. How many times do we hear the phrase "you don't win the league with yoru #1 pick, but you can loose it."? Manning should be one of the most appealing options for people like this. He never misses games and always performs at a high level. Your risk of a wasted pick with Manning is as low as it can possible get in FF. In a year such as this, where there seems to be an abundance of RB value in the 2nd and 3rd tier I don't know how anyone can scold those you would take Manning in the 1st. I wouldn't, but still I think the value he presents is obvious. While owners like you and I are gobbling up QBs in the 7-10 rounds, he has the liberty to take flyers on WRs/RBs with big risk/upside (the whole while knowing that QB is 99% locked down by a stud). It's simply a diferent phylosophy to drafting and what works for them and us is just that, different.

 

[jurb26]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times. His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years. But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first. His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

That's the end of this conversation.Good posting David

Umm, no it really isn't.

 

[NYG Endzone]

in leagues with 6 pts per passing TD, manning is a solid first rounder.

How many top safe and consistant picks have there been over the past 5 years? This also frees up some bench spot(s) because there is no need for a backup at all (except bye week) or your piling up on sleepers/late round value to trade away. QBBC you have to choose a QB that will *likely* produce well for that specific week. When you have Manning you start him 15/16 weeks without thinking twice.

Currently (of course depends on scoring systems) I have about 5-8 RB's, Moss/TO, then Peyton.

 

[Bloom]

What Manning offers is unique in that he offers BOTH the highest degree of performance (at his position) and the LOWEST level of risk of any position or player on the board.  He is a Cornerstone and rock to which some drafters love to build a team around.  How many times do we hear the phrase "you don't win the league with yoru #1 pick, but you can loose it."?  Manning should be one of the most appealing options for people like this.  He never misses games and always performs at a high level.  Your risk of a wasted pick with Manning is as low as it can possible get in FF. 

you can say the exact same thing about gonzo, except the debate is about 3rd round, not 1st round.

 

[Marc Levin]

Now, if you expect RBs 5-12 to not be very good or something in that regard, then its possible a QB would sneak in to the late 1st round.

Don't forget WRs - if you, like me, believe Harrison is the #1 fantasy WR this year, then you, like me, may decide that come #10/#11 overall selection, it is time to take the #1 WR instead of the #1 QB.That said, I think I will be able to get Harrisonm in the second in almost every non-pt/rec. league so I would go RB in the first and wait for the second to swing around for Harrison (if that was where I wanted to go).Either way, for me, there is no way either Manning or C-Pepp end up on my team, nor do I feel either are "worth" a first round selection in a start-1 QB, 12-team league.

 

[Marc Levin]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times.  His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years.  But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first.  His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

That's the end of this conversation.Good posting David

Umm, no it really isn't.

but it should be - he's pretty much said it all. right back at you

 

[jurb26]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times. His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years. But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first. His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

That's the end of this conversation.Good posting David

Umm, no it really isn't.

but it should be - he's pretty much said it all. right back at you

...and apperantly you didn't, maybe you should read my post which directly addresses this right here before speaking in absolutes.

 

[NYG Endzone]

What Manning offers is unique in that he offers BOTH the highest degree of performance (at his position) and the LOWEST level of risk of any position or player on the board. He is a Cornerstone and rock to which some drafters love to build a team around. How many times do we hear the phrase "you don't win the league with yoru #1 pick, but you can loose it."? Manning should be one of the most appealing options for people like this. He never misses games and always performs at a high level. Your risk of a wasted pick with Manning is as low as it can possible get in FF.

you can say the exact same thing about gonzo, except the debate is about 3rd round, not 1st round.

6pt tds VBD puts Peyton #3 Overall. Gonzo #28. Manning outscores his position by much more so I dont think Gonzo should be in this 1st round debate we have here.

 

[LHUCKS]

The Manning proponents are staring at his VBD value and not looking at the overall effect that taking a QB in round 1 can have. This a shortcoming of many ff'ers IMHO, they use VBD as the Bible when it should only be used as a tool to assist.

In competitive leagues if you take Manning in the first round you're going to have fairly risky Runningbacks and WRs and you'll probably be fairly shallow at the positions as well. You're better off targeting value at QB in the fourth round then targeting value at RB in the fourth IMHO. (This applies to FBG standard scoring and format.)

Last year I took Culpepper in a semi-competitive league in the second round and won the league because of it...but there is a huge difference between waiting until the second and jumping on a QB in the first.

An interesting upside strategy I've seen is to take Manning in the first and then take Bell in the second...a sort of all or nothing approach. I think I can win without taking on that much risk, but if you want to roll the dice I can see why people may take this avenue.

I guess for me it comes down to that I do very well in all of my leagues without taking on the risk that comes with a QB in the first...Manning isn't the risk, the RBs and WRs you end up with are the risk.

 

[cobalt_27]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times. His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years. But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first. His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

David, I don't know where you came up with Manning's overall rankings. Can you please provide scoring system? Based on the following system...* 1 point every 10 yards rushing

* 1 point every 10 yards receiving

* 1 point every 25 yards passing

* 4 points for each touchdown pass

* 6 points for each touchdown run

* -1 point for each interception

* 1 point for each extra point

* 3 points for each field goal

...I get the following OVERALL rankings for Manning:

Year Tm Pos Player Points O-Rank

2004 clt qb ManningPeyton1 372.08 2.000

2003 clt qb ManningPeyton1 279.08 6.000

2002 clt qb ManningPeyton1 283.80 8.000

2001 clt qb ManningPeyton1 285.94 5.000

2000 clt qb ManningPeyton1 311.12 6.000

1999 clt qb ManningPeyton1 273.70 6.000

1998 clt qb ManningPeyton1 231.76 16.000

 

[Colin Dowling]

Mathematically, using the principles of value based drafting, a QB has to be EXPECTED to put up near record numbers to justify a top-12 selection in most scoring systems.  Last year didn't disprove anything - it showed that from time to time there is a Glitch In the Matrix.  For the purposes of this year, unless you think that Manning will get close to his record again or Daunte will rush in 10 TDs plus pass proficiently (for example) there is no way that the principles of VBD would dictate they be selected in the first round. 

This is the part I disagree with here. A guy like Manning does not HAVE to finish in the top 12 players overall for all drafters to VALUE him there. What Manning offers is unique in that he offers BOTH the highest degree of performance (at his position) and the LOWEST level of risk of any position or player on the board. He is a Cornerstone and rock to which some drafters love to build a team around. How many times do we hear the phrase "you don't win the league with yoru #1 pick, but you can loose it."? Manning should be one of the most appealing options for people like this. He never misses games and always performs at a high level. Your risk of a wasted pick with Manning is as low as it can possible get in FF. In a year such as this, where there seems to be an abundance of RB value in the 2nd and 3rd tier I don't know how anyone can scold those you would take Manning in the 1st. I wouldn't, but still I think the value he presents is obvious. While owners like you and I are gobbling up QBs in the 7-10 rounds, he has the liberty to take flyers on WRs/RBs with big risk/upside (the whole while knowing that QB is 99% locked down by a stud). It's simply a diferent phylosophy to drafting and what works for them and us is just that, different.

So you would spend a top-12 pick on a player you didn't exepct to finish in the top-12?Curious.

Colin

 

[B-Deep]

The Manning proponents are staring at his VBD value and not looking at the overall effect that taking a QB in round 1 can have.

In competitive leagues if you take Manning in the first round you're going to have fairly risky Runningbacks and you'll probably be fairly shallow at the position as well. You're better off targeting value at QB in the fourth round then targeting value at RB in the fourth IMHO.

This applies to FBG standard scoring and format.

Last year I took Culpepper in a semi-competitive league in the second round and won the league because of it...but there is a huge difference between waiting until the second and waiting until the first.

An interesting upside strategy I've seen is to take Manning in the first and then take Bell in the second...a sort of all or nothing approach. I think I can win without taking on that much risk, but if you want to roll the dice I can see why people may take this avenue.

I guess for me it comes down to that I do very well in all of my leagues without taking on the risk that comes with a QB in the first...Manning isn't the risk, the RBs and WRs you end up with are the risk.

BUTIf your round 1 runningback pulls an A.Green or a D. Mcallister from last year, then suddenly you are even more shallow at RB then you would have been with manning, AND you have questions at QB.

I am not saying taking him is a great idea, or even the right thing to do. But, it helps you manage risk by locking in one position with the safest player there is.

 

[LHUCKS]

The Manning proponents are staring at his VBD value and not looking at the overall effect that taking a QB in round 1 can have. 

In competitive leagues if you take Manning in the first round you're going to have fairly risky Runningbacks and you'll probably be fairly shallow at the position as well.  You're better off targeting value at QB in the fourth round then targeting value at RB in the fourth IMHO.

This applies to FBG standard scoring and format.

Last year I took Culpepper in a semi-competitive league in the second round and won the league because of it...but there is a huge difference between waiting until the second and waiting until the first.

An interesting upside strategy I've seen is to take Manning in the first and then take Bell in the second...a sort of all or nothing approach.  I think I can win without taking on that much risk, but if you want to roll the dice I can see why people may take this avenue.

I guess for me it comes down to that I do very well in all of my leagues without taking on the risk that comes with a QB in the first...Manning isn't the risk, the RBs and WRs you end up with are the risk.

BUTIf your round 1 runningback pulls an A.Green or a D. Mcallister from last year, then suddenly you are even more shallow at RB then you would have been with manning, AND you have questions at QB.

I am not saying taking him is a great idea, or even the right thing to do. But, it helps you manage risk by locking in one position with the safest player there is.

You can lock down safe QBs in round 4 or 5 in most drafts.

 

[David Yudkin]

On an analytical basis, it would better served to compare what options would be available by draft slot.If we conceptually agreed that the players were drafted in the order they would ultimately rank at their respective (which I know is impossible), we would have to look at things differently.So if you had say the 11th pick, the options might be the 9th RB, the 2nd QB, or the 2nd WR.To answer the question at hand about taking Manning in the first round, if the person selecting him projects him to have a season silimiar to last year, then yes, it makes sense to draft Manning in the first.We can all debate if the PROJECTION is inaccurate, but the logic would not be faulty. If someone were to predict a repeat of last year's performance, then yes, Manning should be a first round pick.

 

[Marc Levin]

The Manning proponents are staring at his VBD value and not looking at the overall effect that taking a QB in round 1 can have. 

In competitive leagues if you take Manning in the first round you're going to have fairly risky Runningbacks and you'll probably be fairly shallow at the position as well.  You're better off targeting value at QB in the fourth round then targeting value at RB in the fourth IMHO.

This applies to FBG standard scoring and format.

Last year I took Culpepper in a semi-competitive league in the second round and won the league because of it...but there is a huge difference between waiting until the second and waiting until the first.

An interesting upside strategy I've seen is to take Manning in the first and then take Bell in the second...a sort of all or nothing approach.  I think I can win without taking on that much risk, but if you want to roll the dice I can see why people may take this avenue.

I guess for me it comes down to that I do very well in all of my leagues without taking on the risk that comes with a QB in the first...Manning isn't the risk, the RBs and WRs you end up with are the risk.

BUTIf your round 1 runningback pulls an A.Green or a D. Mcallister from last year, then suddenly you are even more shallow at RB then you would have been with manning, AND you have questions at QB.

I am not saying taking him is a great idea, or even the right thing to do. But, it helps you manage risk by locking in one position with the safest player there is.

You can lock down safe QBs in round 4 or 5 in most drafts.

EXACTLY!

 

[David Yudkin]

I won't say that I would NEVER take a QB in the first round, as there are some pretty whacky scoring systems out there.

However, in the FBG scoring system, taking a QB int he first historically has not been a great thing to do.

Culpepper has been the #1 QB 4 times.  His OVERALL ranking in those years has been 3, 13, 25, 1.

Manning has been a Top 5 QB for 6 straight years.  But his OVERALL ranking has been 14, 11, 16, 24, 30, and 2.

As good as these guys have both been over the years, taking them in the first round could net you the #1 QB but not necessarily get you any value.

I also am inclined to wonder about taking Moss in the first.  His OVERALL ranking has been 8, 10, 16, 19, 19, 5, 49.

A lot would depend at what point in the first round these guys would be coming off the board to really have a sense if they should go there or not.

David, I don't know where you came up with Manning's overall rankings. Can you please provide scoring system? Based on the following system...* 1 point every 10 yards rushing

* 1 point every 10 yards receiving

* 1 point every 25 yards passing

* 4 points for each touchdown pass

* 6 points for each touchdown run

* -1 point for each interception

* 1 point for each extra point

* 3 points for each field goal

...I get the following OVERALL rankings for Manning:

Year Tm Pos Player Points O-Rank

2004 clt qb ManningPeyton1 372.08 2.000

2003 clt qb ManningPeyton1 279.08 6.000

2002 clt qb ManningPeyton1 283.80 8.000

2001 clt qb ManningPeyton1 285.94 5.000

2000 clt qb ManningPeyton1 311.12 6.000

1999 clt qb ManningPeyton1 273.70 6.000

1998 clt qb ManningPeyton1 231.76 16.000

Sorry. I should have been more clear. I got the info from Doug's PFR stite.Manning

Culpepper

The overall ranking is actually an overall VALUE ranking, so it it based on comparative value of players at the same position.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

When I see Manning go #2 overall in a Shark infested dynasty league, standard scoring, I get the same feeling when someone takes Vinateri in the top of the 7th round and comments "Best player available". In the next few rounds I take Mason, Shelton, Brooks, Rogers and A. Smith. Manning in the top 3 overall is a bad, bad move.

 

[Marc Levin]

When I see Manning go #2 overall in a Shark infested dynasty league, standard scoring, I get the same feeling when someone takes Vinateri in the top of the 7th round and comments "Best player available". In the next few rounds I take Mason, Shelton, Brooks, Rogers and A. Smith.

Manning in the top 3 overall is a bad, bad move.

unless you are in a start-2 QB league.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

It's a start 1, with up to 3RB just to make it worse.

 

[jurb26]

The Manning proponents are staring at his VBD value and not looking at the overall effect that taking a QB in round 1 can have.

In competitive leagues if you take Manning in the first round you're going to have fairly risky Runningbacks and you'll probably be fairly shallow at the position as well. You're better off targeting value at QB in the fourth round then targeting value at RB in the fourth IMHO.

This applies to FBG standard scoring and format.

Last year I took Culpepper in a semi-competitive league in the second round and won the league because of it...but there is a huge difference between waiting until the second and waiting until the first.

An interesting upside strategy I've seen is to take Manning in the first and then take Bell in the second...a sort of all or nothing approach. I think I can win without taking on that much risk, but if you want to roll the dice I can see why people may take this avenue.

I guess for me it comes down to that I do very well in all of my leagues without taking on the risk that comes with a QB in the first...Manning isn't the risk, the RBs and WRs you end up with are the risk.

BUTIf your round 1 runningback pulls an A.Green or a D. Mcallister from last year, then suddenly you are even more shallow at RB then you would have been with manning, AND you have questions at QB.

I am not saying taking him is a great idea, or even the right thing to do. But, it helps you manage risk by locking in one position with the safest player there is.

You can lock down safe QBs in round 4 or 5 in most drafts.

You can? Here is the list of 4-5 round QBs based on current ADPs:Bulger

Green

Collins

Bulger is nowhere near as safe as Manning, look at the injury history. Green I would say is, but with much lower upside and performance. Collins, Please tell me we are not serious that this guy is in the same classs as Manning. I have been backing Collins all offseason and hardly anyone has been agreeing with me, but even I know darn well he does not match up with Manning in a FF sense.

To extend it out past round 5, 6-7:

Vick, Please....

Hassy, ummm

Favre, don't think so

Brady, great for real NFL

Plummer, egh maybe

Palmer, come on now

 

[cobalt_27]

When I see Manning go #2 overall in a Shark infested dynasty league, standard scoring, I get the same feeling when someone takes Vinateri in the top of the 7th round and comments "Best player available". In the next few rounds I take Mason, Shelton, Brooks, Rogers and A. Smith.

Manning in the top 3 overall is a bad, bad move.

unless you are in a start-2 QB league.

Which, maybe, would reflect reality a little more accurately than leagues where Dom Davis and Rudi Johnson are selected above a guy who's among the top 2 or 3 prolific passers of all-time.But, I understand how dead-set you guys are to have 2 RBs in the lineup and only 1 QB...hey all NFL teams do this, so why shouldn't we?