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!
You are being obstinant.If they were "as safe as" or "as good as" or "in the same class as" THEY'D be first round selections.
Well, cobalt, aren't we dealing with "fantasy" anyway?In a fantasy world, you might want to start your team with DD or Rudi over Manning - if this were a new NFL League, I'd hazard to guess (of offensive players) Manning would be the #1 overall selection.
After reading both your and lhucks posts, it's obvious that you must have missed this post I made earlier:
There is only one other player that offers the same kind of value as Manning and his name is Gonzo. It's a shame that some people can only see things "their" way though. For the 3rd time now in this thread, I do not agree with the idea of drafting Manning in the 1st, but I can certainly see the value in it to others. I just happen to choose and perform other stratagies better, but not everyone is the same.
I'd hazard to guess that Brady would be #1 overall. But that's another topic.
Wow. But FOR SURE it will improve now that he's with a new team, in a new scheme, with a QB who completes 55% of his passes, right? Right?OVERRATED.
Now you are REALLY being obstinant - you replied (harshly I might add) to LHUCKS comment that you can get a safe QB in the fourth or fifth when he was NOT responding to YOUR comment above, jurb.He was responding to this post:
Neither LHUCKS nor I missed your earlier post - we weren't reponding to it. Neither of us were debating that Manning is the safest QB out there - or that he is one of the safest fantasy picks period. But, if all you care about is managing risk, you can STILL manage risk at QB by taking BUlger and/or Green in the 4th or 5th.
you can still get a quality #1 RB like cumar, rudi, or tiki in the early-mid 2nd and an good gamble like jordan, bell, arrington or caddy in the early 3rd. more interesting gambles like foster , bennett, barlow, and suggs are also there for the taking the 3rd/4th.
)The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.ColinI stand by what I said. All the exceptions that have been pointed out are not contrary to my point.
- Some people like that Manning is low-risk and can be counted on week in and week out. Agreed. That doesn't mean he'll be a top-12 overall player nor does it mean that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
- Some people think that Manning will produce at an amazingly high level and will finish in the top-12 overall in scoring. Fair enough. In such a case he might be worth a round 1 selection except for the fact that even a top-12 finish doesn't ensure that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
(Yes, I can have it both ways.
The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.
For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.
Colin
I don't really know why you are not seeing this, but it does not just come down to security. It's the fact that Manning is not only one of the safest if not THE safest player(s) in FF, but that he combines that with top tier performance. You and lhucks are only taking half the equation (if that)... which is why I directed you again to that previous post. I know what you and him were responding to. It just doesn't cover the complete picture in regards to why Manning is valued in the 1st to some. His performace is better than any other QB on a consistent basis (Cpep being the exception but he has no Moss) and there is an abundance of quality RBs it would seem this year. You can very easily follow up a 1st round pick of Manning with RBs such as: K.Jones, Barber, J.Jones, Dillon, Green, Rudi, Jackson, Westy, Jordan, Martin, Bell. Any combo of these 2.You said it yourself earlier in this very thread:
Is this right here not justifying Manning in the 1st?
With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about?"Safety" aside, Manning's current projections (not previous performance, PROJECTIONS) put him in the 1st for VBD purposes.I stand by what I said. All the exceptions that have been pointed out are not contrary to my point.
- Some people like that Manning is low-risk and can be counted on week in and week out. Agreed. That doesn't mean he'll be a top-12 overall player nor does it mean that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
- Some people think that Manning will produce at an amazingly high level and will finish in the top-12 overall in scoring. Fair enough. In such a case he might be worth a round 1 selection except for the fact that even a top-12 finish doesn't ensure that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
(Yes, I can have it both ways.
The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.
For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.
Colin
First, in most 12 team shark leagues you're not going to find K. Jones and Barber in the 2nd round. Now let's look at the other Runningbacks you've mentioned:
Well, call them guppy if you want, but this is the current ADPs like it or not:http://www.antsports.com/adp.aspx
Exactly. There things to like and dislike about nearly every back out there. Holmes, as good as he is, has pretty big health question marks around him. Until very recently, SA has threatened to hold out. I might even dare to say LT has a few minor questions about him. Will he continue to catch the ball as frequently as he has in the past? Will all of those touches start to effect him at some point? Why was his YPC so crappy last year? Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have him and he's a clear #1, but even he's not the fantasy God that Faulk once was.
I get the strong feeling that anyone who values a player slightly differently than you do is a "guppy".If you don't like those ADPs, what do you like? Heck, throw out your own rankings and we'll go from there. In ANY set of rankings, there are very promising backs to be had in the 2nd round.
With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about?"Safety" aside, Manning's current projections (not previous performance, PROJECTIONS) put him in the 1st for VBD purposes.I stand by what I said. All the exceptions that have been pointed out are not contrary to my point.
- Some people like that Manning is low-risk and can be counted on week in and week out. Agreed. That doesn't mean he'll be a top-12 overall player nor does it mean that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
- Some people think that Manning will produce at an amazingly high level and will finish in the top-12 overall in scoring. Fair enough. In such a case he might be worth a round 1 selection except for the fact that even a top-12 finish doesn't ensure that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
(Yes, I can have it both ways.
The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.
For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.
Colin
You really CAN'T have it both ways. You talk about "VBD" points but igonore the fact that Manning has a 1st round VBD ranking. How do you explain this? Is the VBD model flawed in some way that you'd care to share? Are his projections too high? Where's the discrepancy?
You can stand by your statements if you want to, but as they stand right now, they just don't make sense. You are double-talking.
And the 3rd round! Heck lets just take the FBG top 36LT
You just proved a good point Jurb. At 1.8 you get Manning in this example. At 2.5 you get Dominick Davis(very good, or Rudi or C-Mart), then at 3.8 you get your pick of:Gonzo
(I wish there was an "excellent posting" smilie) What a perfectly concise and clear explanation of DVBD.I also don't think there is a better argument for why Manning should be selected in the first round. The counter arguments against Manning in the first must come down to league rules that devalue QBs OR individual projections well below what most see. I, personally, have a low enough projection for Manning to keep him out of the first round - based on VBD/DVBD concepts - but I definitely understand why he will be selected in the first in a lot of drafts.
Maybe so - and you might be better off grabbing that 4th round QB of Bulger/Green.One thing overlooked here, though, arethe RBs not listed that you might value higher than FBGuys.com does - missing from the list are Duce Staley, Warrick Dunn, Fred Taylor, and Michael Bennett. Some of them I, personally, would take above Arrington, and some of them I would be comfortable with at RB2 if I had Manning and DD/Rudi/CuMar.I know I wouldnt' be comfortable with Arrington as my RB #2. Manning, DD, Arrington =
I'd much rather go Mcgahee in 1, Julius Jones in 2 and then either grab bell, arrington or maybe grab Walker.
Yes, projections. Projections that are too high.With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about?"Safety" aside, Manning's current projections (not previous performance, PROJECTIONS) put him in the 1st for VBD purposes.I stand by what I said. All the exceptions that have been pointed out are not contrary to my point.
- Some people like that Manning is low-risk and can be counted on week in and week out. Agreed. That doesn't mean he'll be a top-12 overall player nor does it mean that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
- Some people think that Manning will produce at an amazingly high level and will finish in the top-12 overall in scoring. Fair enough. In such a case he might be worth a round 1 selection except for the fact that even a top-12 finish doesn't ensure that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
(Yes, I can have it both ways.
The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.
For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.
Colin
You really CAN'T have it both ways. You talk about "VBD" points but igonore the fact that Manning has a 1st round VBD ranking. How do you explain this? Is the VBD model flawed in some way that you'd care to share? Are his projections too high? Where's the discrepancy?
You can stand by your statements if you want to, but as they stand right now, they just don't make sense. You are double-talking.
I believe Manning went in the first round of 3 or 4 No Mercy leagues. Guppies?
I'm working on comparing them.They're not as far apart as you might think, at least from my first glance. Maybe it will get worse.
While I disagree with LHUCK on this issue, you are making an unjustified characterization of his comment.
And THAT I completely agree with - I rely on antsports' ADP numbers all the time and find them to be perfectly acceptable - and find them to be generally in line with FBGuys.com's ADP determinations.
That's basically what it comes down to. - How high do you have Manning projected at
The only rankings I trust are my own. There are others that I pay close attention to, some of them FBG staff, but I do my own analysis for every player.When you compare Antsports to No Mercy make sure they are using the same scoring and have the same starting requirements etc. etc.
FBG "free" projections were 4511 and 42. You can drop those numbers a fair amount before the VBD app would yield anything other than a 1st round selection for Manning.Again, I'm not saying that I think you HAVE to take Manning in the first, or that it is definitely the best thing to do. I'm just saying using VBD as a reason to AVOID taking Manning in the first doesn't make any sense.Yes, projections. Projections that are too high.With all due respect, what the heck are you talking about?"Safety" aside, Manning's current projections (not previous performance, PROJECTIONS) put him in the 1st for VBD purposes.I stand by what I said. All the exceptions that have been pointed out are not contrary to my point.
- Some people like that Manning is low-risk and can be counted on week in and week out. Agreed. That doesn't mean he'll be a top-12 overall player nor does it mean that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
- Some people think that Manning will produce at an amazingly high level and will finish in the top-12 overall in scoring. Fair enough. In such a case he might be worth a round 1 selection except for the fact that even a top-12 finish doesn't ensure that his VBD baseline will make him valuable enough to justify being a round 1 pick.
(Yes, I can have it both ways.
The point of all of this is that only in the rarest circumstances can I envision a "first round pick Peyton Manning" offering enough value RELATIVE TO HIS ON-FIELD POSITION to be worth more then a RB. As I said, you may find that you like the safety of Manning just as someone might like the safety of Curtis Martin over the upside/risk of Tatum Bell in round 2. But "safety" is its own characteristic.
For every scenario I can think of, when I look at ADP compared to expectations/projections, nowhere does drafting Peyton Manning in Round 1 pan out to get me more VBD points.
Colin
You really CAN'T have it both ways. You talk about "VBD" points but igonore the fact that Manning has a 1st round VBD ranking. How do you explain this? Is the VBD model flawed in some way that you'd care to share? Are his projections too high? Where's the discrepancy?
You can stand by your statements if you want to, but as they stand right now, they just don't make sense. You are double-talking.
Using VBD alone is a mistake in the first place, you should be taking a more holistic risk averse approach.
Team A w/Peyton after six rounds vs. team B without Peyton after six rounds.LOFL
I have never said, nor do I believe in, using VBD the way you describe. If fact, I look at the output for the app to check out any interesting situations (like the Manning ranking for example) and apply the results of that thinking to my overall strategy (which, even though I am a serious numbers-geek, would be better described as the "gut" approach than anything else).Where we differ is that I'm not convinced Team A is better than Team B at all. Even without monster projections for Manning (which I don't have either), a fairly reliable top 3 performance from your QB WITH UPSIDE, is worth more than you are giving it credit for.Using VBD alone is a mistake in the first place, you should be taking a more holistic risk averse approach.
If the draft goes as should, I like the non-Peyton team every time. That's based on my projection of 4400/39 for Manning.
still laughingjust throwing Culpepper in with Frerotte, George and Cunningham.
Laugh all you want, but I'll own your sig space by the end of this season: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=152854
Look, this will happen when you double the starters at one position over the other. QBs score more than RBs across rankings 1-25 (QB1 v. RB1, QB2 v. RB2, QB3 v. RB3, etc.; if you'd like the data, I'd be happy to share), but even that's not enough to make up for the fact that you're starting 2 RBs and only 1 QB. In this setup of 1QB and 2RB, the function of "value" in your leagues isn't tied to the production of the guy at his position--it's tied to the lineup requirements. Not sure why some of you guys aren't terribly bothered by this. Not sure of any GM that would select Rudi Johnson over Manning or Culpepper. But, in your leagues, this is precisely what happens; you've set it up to penalize whomever selects the best player available (i.e., the sucker who gets Manning).
I presume that the same logic applies to Super Flex League (start 1 qb, 2 rb, 3 wr, 1 Flex (can be qb, wr, rb, te, def).
at "sharks". C'mon, if you can't see the supply/demand problem in 2 QB leagues and let Manning and Culpepper slip that far, you aren't a shark.
