Peyton Manning (1 Viewer)

[ScottNorwood]

I am curious as to how well teams that took Manning in the first (especially early in the first) are doing.

In my cut throat shark leagues where Manning went early, the Manning owners are struggling. It may be just a coincidence, but I'm not so sure . . .

I took Peyton 2nd overall. 12 team league. I'm 8-2. RBs I drafted were S Jackson, Cadillac, Barlow (traded for Wayne), Larry Johnson, Moore. Also picked up Gado as a FA. I always end up with a logjam at RB so I wanted to grab a QB early... knowing that I'd be loading up on RBs later. It's worked out fine for me.

But you would have had a better team not drafting Manning.

Not if I had an awful QB.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I think this year, it comes down to "Where did you take Manning in the first round?" rather than "Did you take Manning in the first round?".Both turned out to be mistakes, and we can argue that all day long, but that's not the point here. If you drafted Manning in the top 4 (remember, his ADP was 1.04 for much of the preseason, if not all), that turned out to be a mammoth mistake. To do that, you would have had to pass up on LT, SA, Edge, or Priest, if not all four. LT, SA, and Edge all are obviously much, much, much better than Manning right now, but if you would have wisely handcuffed Priest, it was a mammoth mistake as well. Priest was 6th among RBs in PPG until he got hurt, and now, LJ will most likely be 3rd or 4th in PPG for the rest of the season among RBs.Late in the first round turned out to be a lesser mistake, because like every year, the second half of the first round produces busts. It can actually be argued here that Manning might be the safe option, because he's never gotten hurt or had a below top 5 QB season.

 

[Bri]

I am curious as to how well teams that took Manning in the first (especially early in the first) are doing.

In my cut throat shark leagues where Manning went early, the Manning owners are struggling.  It may be just a coincidence, but I'm not so sure . . .

It's not a coincidence.Drafting a QB in the top 3 rounds is fundamentally flawed when drafting the best overall team (not just looking at VBD at a specific point in time).

your post is fundamentally flawed.it's as if you didn't read anything in this thread about teams doing well with Peyton

 

[bagger.]

I think this year, it comes down to "Where did you take Manning in the first round?" rather than "Did you take Manning in the first round?".

Both turned out to be mistakes, and we can argue that all day long, but that's not the point here. If you drafted Manning in the top 4 (remember, his ADP was 1.04 for much of the preseason, if not all), that turned out to be a mammoth mistake. To do that, you would have had to pass up on LT, SA, Edge, or Priest, if not all four.

LT, SA, and Edge all are obviously much, much, much better than Manning right now, but if you would have wisely handcuffed Priest, it was a mammoth mistake as well. Priest was 6th among RBs in PPG until he got hurt, and now, LJ will most likely be 3rd or 4th in PPG for the rest of the season among RBs.

Late in the first round turned out to be a lesser mistake, because like every year, the second half of the first round produces busts. It can actually be argued here that Manning might be the safe option, because he's never gotten hurt or had a below top 5 QB season.

Favre has never gotten hurt and has been 6th or higher 10 of the last 13 years, and never below 11th.Combine that with his ADP compared to Manning (and what you can get at other positions for Manning's pick compared to the Manning owner) Favre is the better play every day in the week, including Tuesday.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I think this year, it comes down to "Where did you take Manning in the first round?" rather than "Did you take Manning in the first round?".

Both turned out to be mistakes, and we can argue that all day long, but that's not the point here. If you drafted Manning in the top 4 (remember, his ADP was 1.04 for much of the preseason, if not all), that turned out to be a mammoth mistake. To do that, you would have had to pass up on LT, SA, Edge, or Priest, if not all four.

LT, SA, and Edge all are obviously much, much, much better than Manning right now, but if you would have wisely handcuffed Priest, it was a mammoth mistake as well. Priest was 6th among RBs in PPG until he got hurt, and now, LJ will most likely be 3rd or 4th in PPG for the rest of the season among RBs.

Late in the first round turned out to be a lesser mistake, because like every year, the second half of the first round produces busts. It can actually be argued here that Manning might be the safe option, because he's never gotten hurt or had a below top 5 QB season.

Favre has never gotten hurt and has been 6th or higher 10 of the last 13 years, and never below 11th.Combine that with his ADP compared to Manning (and what you can get at other positions for Manning's pick compared to the Manning owner) Favre is the better play every day in the week, including Tuesday.

I'm not arguing that point at all.I'm saying that for his ADP, Manning was a *huge* mistake to draft that early.

If he was drafted late in the first round, it was still a mistake, but much, much less of one.

 

[bagger.]

I am curious as to how well teams that took Manning in the first (especially early in the first) are doing.

In my cut throat shark leagues where Manning went early, the Manning owners are struggling.  It may be just a coincidence, but I'm not so sure . . .

It's not a coincidence.Drafting a QB in the top 3 rounds is fundamentally flawed when drafting the best overall team (not just looking at VBD at a specific point in time).

your post is fundamentally flawed.it's as if you didn't read anything in this thread about teams doing well with Peyton

Please expound. While teams may have very well done fine with Peyton, they did not maximize what they could have done.In one league last year some goofball took Peyton 1st, TJ Ducket in the 2nd, and Lamont Jordan in the 3rd. Remember this is LAST YEAR. He won the whole thing by getting Emmitt and the Bus off the WW early.

By this example I could say that taking Peyton and 2 RBs who aren't even the starters on their team is a great strategy by the above result.

You are falling victim to results-oriented thinking. It is not the results that matter, but rather the strategy that is the underpinning of your draft.

Results are a deadly cocktail of strategy and variance, which encompasses all forms of luck such as injuries, projection variance, when you play teams who have their best players on byes, and head to head matchups throughout the season (scoring 2nd most but playing the top scorer).

To say that there have been teams that have done well with Peyton does not address the issue we are discussing. People that drafted Peyton made a fundamental mistake with their 1st round draft pick.

This mistake may have been mitigated by superior drafting throughout the rest of the draft, trades, waiver wire pickups, or good ole variance.

But make no mistake, drafting Manning in the first was an error.

 

[ScottNorwood]

It wasn't a mistake on the magnitude of drafting Faulk in the 1st 2 years ago, or drafting Barlow in the 1st last year.

 

[Bri]

I am curious as to how well teams that took Manning in the first (especially early in the first) are doing.

In my cut throat shark leagues where Manning went early, the Manning owners are struggling.  It may be just a coincidence, but I'm not so sure . . .

It's not a coincidence.Drafting a QB in the top 3 rounds is fundamentally flawed when drafting the best overall team (not just looking at VBD at a specific point in time).

your post is fundamentally flawed.it's as if you didn't read anything in this thread about teams doing well with Peyton

Please expound. While teams may have very well done fine with Peyton, they did not maximize what they could have done.In one league last year some goofball took Peyton 1st, TJ Ducket in the 2nd, and Lamont Jordan in the 3rd. Remember this is LAST YEAR. He won the whole thing by getting Emmitt and the Bus off the WW early.

By this example I could say that taking Peyton and 2 RBs who aren't even the starters on their team is a great strategy by the above result.

You are falling victim to results-oriented thinking. It is not the results that matter, but rather the strategy that is the underpinning of your draft.

Results are a deadly cocktail of strategy and variance, which encompasses all forms of luck such as injuries, projection variance, when you play teams who have their best players on byes, and head to head matchups throughout the season (scoring 2nd most but playing the top scorer).

To say that there have been teams that have done well with Peyton does not address the issue we are discussing. People that drafted Peyton made a fundamental mistake with their 1st round draft pick.

This mistake may have been mitigated by superior drafting throughout the rest of the draft, trades, waiver wire pickups, or good ole variance.

But make no mistake, drafting Manning in the first was an error.

nice posttoo extreme, too right or wrong IMO but ...thanks

 

[bagger.]

How was it too extreme/too right/too wrong?

I do readily admit that taking Manning in the first does give you a certain amount of safety, and there is value in that. However, this is a question of risk/reward and in the first round the point differential of RBs here compared to the rest of the draft is so great I just think you are overpaying for the safe play (assuming you aren't trading down).

In one draft this year I took Alexander with the 2nd pick over Priest (LT went first). I had Priest projected over Alexander. However, Alexander was the safer play historically than Priest and I gave up some limited upside to protect myself from a large amount of downside risk.

Drafting Peyton is more of an extreme example of this. However, the flaw is that there are QBs late in the draft that will be top 10 every single year. It is extremely rare for a RB to achieve this from this draft slot.

Peyton is a sexy QB pick. However, ask your girlfriend/wife about having to pay for the trendy outfit. There is no discount. There is no value. You overpay to be in style, just like you overpay to get the hot QB.

Figuring out how much of my fantasy winnings will go towards what I am going to get my girlfriend for her birthday.

 

[coolnerd]

I am curious as to how well teams that took Manning in the first (especially early in the first) are doing.

In my cut throat shark leagues where Manning went early, the Manning owners are struggling.  It may be just a coincidence, but I'm not so sure . . .

It's not a coincidence.Drafting a QB in the top 3 rounds is fundamentally flawed when drafting the best overall team (not just looking at VBD at a specific point in time).

your post is fundamentally flawed.it's as if you didn't read anything in this thread about teams doing well with Peyton

Please expound. While teams may have very well done fine with Peyton, they did not maximize what they could have done.In one league last year some goofball took Peyton 1st, TJ Ducket in the 2nd, and Lamont Jordan in the 3rd. Remember this is LAST YEAR. He won the whole thing by getting Emmitt and the Bus off the WW early.

By this example I could say that taking Peyton and 2 RBs who aren't even the starters on their team is a great strategy by the above result.

You are falling victim to results-oriented thinking. It is not the results that matter, but rather the strategy that is the underpinning of your draft.

Results are a deadly cocktail of strategy and variance, which encompasses all forms of luck such as injuries, projection variance, when you play teams who have their best players on byes, and head to head matchups throughout the season (scoring 2nd most but playing the top scorer).

To say that there have been teams that have done well with Peyton does not address the issue we are discussing. People that drafted Peyton made a fundamental mistake with their 1st round draft pick.

This mistake may have been mitigated by superior drafting throughout the rest of the draft, trades, waiver wire pickups, or good ole variance.But make no mistake, drafting Manning in the first was an error.

IMO, the results are all that matter. A strategy is no better than the results that they produce.On the 2nd bold point, if a player is confident in his ability to spot talent that others don't, or trade more efficiently may factor into in his decision to take Manning earlier understanding that he expects more from Thomas Jones or Santana Moss than the general public.

The problem with stud RB theory, never draft QB before round 6 or any other general theory, is just that they are "general." We all play in specific leagues with a variety of sizes, rules, personalities, etc. There is no always right or always wrong.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I'm surprised this is turning out to be such a discussion being that FBGs is the home of VBD. It should be obvious that no matter what the rest of your team is doing, Manning was not worth his top 3-5 draft pick as of today's date.

 

[bagger.]

IMO, the results are all that matter. A strategy is no better than the results that they produce.

On the 2nd bold point, if a player is confident in his ability to spot talent that others don't, or trade more efficiently may factor into in his decision to take Manning earlier understanding that he expects more from Thomas Jones or Santana Moss than the general public.

The problem with stud RB theory, never draft QB before round 6 or any other general theory, is just that they are "general." We all play in specific leagues with a variety of sizes, rules, personalities, etc. There is no always right or always wrong.

Results-oriented thinking is a huge flaw for many people that play poker. Sometimes the right decision does not make you money in that one instance, but over the long run it will.Essentially drafting Manning in the first would not be considered a +EV play in poker terms, but many people win pots by making -EV plays. However, if you draft the best QB in the first round every year, in the long run your teams will suffer.

Furthermore, the thought that someone expects more from Jones or Moss in later rounds has nothing to do with your first round draft pick. You don't fret away value in the first round because you know you can get additional value later in the draft.

While you may think general theories never get you to a right or wrong answer, what we are discussing here is scoring in a "typical" league. And I can certainly tell you that in a typical league drafting Manning in the first is wrong.

RBs and WRs are the only two positions that you cannot draft with certainty past the 7th round. Every other position there will be top 10 performers. As such, you need to maximize drafting these positions while the players of greater certainty are there, while taking late round flyers later on.

There is no impetus for anyone to draft players other than RBs and WRs early in a draft, and by doing so you are limiting team point production at the expense of some VBD baseline telling you that Tony Gonzalez is the best pick in the 3rd round. What that does not tell you is that your team as a whole will suffer by drafting in this manner as there are always top 5 TEs in the 9th and 10th rounds of typical 12 team drafts.

Between bye weeks and injuries, drafting 3 RBs and 4 WRs in the first 7 rounds of your draft still won't cover you, but you will be in a much better spot than your competition being able to grab top QBs and TEs in the 8-10 rounds while they bob for marginal RBs and WRs.

Thankful that people pull the trigger early on QBs and TEs.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Results-oriented thinking is a huge flaw for many people that play poker. Sometimes the right decision does not make you money in that one instance, but over the long run it will.

Essentially drafting Manning in the first would not be considered a +EV play in poker terms, but many people win pots by making -EV plays. However, if you draft the best QB in the first round every year, in the long run your teams will suffer.

That is a very good analogy. You completely nailed it and hopefully that brings some people around to understand that just because you had a good result doing something, doesn't mean what you did was a good idea to begin with.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Results-oriented thinking is a huge flaw for many people that play poker. Sometimes the right decision does not make you money in that one instance, but over the long run it will.

Essentially drafting Manning in the first would not be considered a +EV play in poker terms, but many people win pots by making -EV plays. However, if you draft the best QB in the first round every year, in the long run your teams will suffer.

That is a very good analogy. You completely nailed it and hopefully that brings some people around to understand that just because you had a good result doing something, doesn't mean what you did was a good idea to begin with.

My sentiments EXACTLY!!

 

[mbuehner]

I suspect a lot of teams that took Manning in the first round are struggling to make the playoffs. It obviously entirely depends on the rest of the draft, but Manning certainly isnt putting up the kind of 'win-the-game single handedly' points you look for when you risk a QB in the 1st round. Maybe he turns it on and takes his teams to fantasy SB glory, then-again I suspect a fair number of teams will miss the playoffs making the point moot.

 

[Reaper]

I suspect a lot of teams that took Manning in the first round are struggling to make the playoffs. It obviously entirely depends on the rest of the draft, but Manning certainly isnt putting up the kind of 'win-the-game single handedly' points you look for when you risk a QB in the 1st round. Maybe he turns it on and takes his teams to fantasy SB glory, then-again I suspect a fair number of teams will miss the playoffs making the point moot.

Interesting - Looking at stats from a league where QB TD's are worth more for longer TDs, I'd guess Manning would be more valuable... BUT, In this league Manning is ranked 4th and there are TWELVE QB's all within 14 points of his total..... In a start 10 league....PaTD - Passing TD 4 points

Plus 1 point for a PaTD of 35 to 49 Yds

Plus 2 points for a PaTD of 50 to 69 Yds

Plus 3 points for a PaTD of 70+ Yds

PaYd - Passing Yards 0+ PaYds = .04 points for every 1 PaYd

Plus a 1.5 point bonus @ 300+ PaYd

Plus a 2.5 point bonus @ 400+ PaYd

Basically in this scoring format Peyton Manning as a 1st round pick is an undisputed collasal DISASTER........

But, yeah, As said above - the answer to this whole thread should simple be VBD - Read it.

On one hand I can see VBD people getting frustrated when people don't grasp it and continue to throw a small sample of results at it - But, on the other hand it's still nice to see people out there who you can have the advantage of VBD over....

McNabb, Donovan QB PHI DUH 178.48

Palmer, Carson QB CIN 169.5

Brady, Tom QB 159

Manning, Peyton QB 153.66

Bledsoe, Drew QB 153.3

Favre, Brett QB 152.94

Collins, Kerry QB 151.08

Brunell, Mark QB 144.78

Plummer, Jake QB 139.86

Manning, Eli QB 139.78

Delhomme, Jake 137.88

Hasselbeck, Matt QB 137.8

Brees, Drew QB SD 133.96

Bulger, Marc QB STL 132.92

Vick, Michael QB 130.3

Leftwich, Byron QB 127

 

[Bri]

How was it too extreme/too right/too wrong?

In your leagueeyton was picked in what round in 2004?What round in 2005?those are largely different "values" for a QB picked early and somewhat early. Maybe he's no real value like everyone else in the first round because they're all supposed to be great but in 2004 geesh was he a sweet pick in almost any round.We could say the same about Daunte and I could reply to your assumed rebuttal of injury with Priest or lack of productivity with Jamal or Corey. Stuff happens, as you know.The extreme tone/theme whatever in your post is simply inaccurate. Have I won tons with stud RB theory type drafts? sure and you probably have too but that doesn't mean other theories won't work.As was discussed, often times the early RB folks take a "hidden gem" QB late almost planning on this valuable pick. Now if someone drafts Peyton and feels strongly about some late RB or WR(like with the QB in the other method) well then that evens things out.I feel like a draft is predictable but yet isn't predictable. You do enough mocks+reading you pretty much know how it'll play out BUT if you're not ready to adjust as things go along it won't be as good a draft as it could have been. You thinking things are so cut and dry or right/wrong is close to being true but inaccurate due to this.Hope that made some sense

 

[bagger.]

As was discussed, often times the early RB folks take a "hidden gem" QB late almost planning on this valuable pick. Now if someone drafts Peyton and feels strongly about some late RB or WR(like with the QB in the other method) well then that evens things out.

The difference between the QB in the 8th round and the RB in the 8th round, is that the QB is a starting QB who is pretty much a top 10 lock. The RB is truly a flyer with significant RBBC risk or risk in terms of proven performance. Brooks, Delhomme, Palmer, Plummer were all QBs that could be had in (or around) the 8th round. I will take a stud RB in the first and one of these QBs versus Peyton and a RB available in the 8th.

I feel like a draft is predictable but yet isn't predictable. You do enough mocks+reading you pretty much know how it'll play out BUT if you're not ready to adjust as things go along it won't be as good a draft as it could have been. You thinking things are so cut and dry or right/wrong is close to being true but inaccurate due to this.

Hope that made some sense

Nowhere do I argue against being flexible in a draft. However, if you took a bucket and filled each bucket with "startable" players, by the time you get to the 8th round your buckets for RBs and WRs are virtually empty. The bucket for every other position is close to full.Think of it as a multi-round VBD strategy, but using ADP and projected fantasy points scored, not a baseline to determine your picks from round to round.

Will there be surprises where people you did not have in each positional bucket will end up being "startable"? Without a doubt. However, hopefully you grab those players in addition to your players you grabbed in the first 7 rounds.

I discussed the concept of drafting Manning in the first round in the pre-season as well. I said while you can do it, you need to be almost perfect the rest of the draft to pull it off. I do not see the need to put that kind of pressure on your draft.

We discussed drafting Manning in the 1st and Gonzo in the 3rd. I said there was no way that strategy would work as you would be killed at your RB and your WR positions. I imagine that the people that did this strategy paid the price, and it did not take that much to see why.

The "value" you got expecting Manning to replicate historically high stats as well as some static VBD baseline telling you that Gonzo was the correct pick in the 3rd absolutely cripples your team's point production as your injury and bye week fill-ins will be brutal.

If you can get depth early in the draft at the RB and WR positions, while sacrificing little on waiting to draft QBs and TEs (and obviously DTs and PKs) you will have a better overall team throughout the year. VBD does not even capture this.

In your draft, you should never be the first to draft a PK, DT, TE, or QB.

Let the positional runs come to you, not the other way around.

 

[coolnerd]

IMO, the results are all that matter.  A strategy is no better than the results that they produce.

On the 2nd bold point,  if a player is confident in his ability to spot talent that others don't, or trade more efficiently may factor into in his decision to take Manning earlier understanding that he expects more from Thomas Jones or Santana Moss than the general public.

The problem with stud RB theory, never draft QB before round 6 or any other general theory, is just that they are "general." We all play in specific leagues with a variety of sizes, rules, personalities, etc.  There is no  always right or always wrong.

Results-oriented thinking is a huge flaw for many people that play poker. Sometimes the right decision does not make you money in that one instance, but over the long run it will.Essentially drafting Manning in the first would not be considered a +EV play in poker terms, but many people win pots by making -EV plays. However, if you draft the best QB in the first round every year, in the long run your teams will suffer.

Furthermore, the thought that someone expects more from Jones or Moss in later rounds has nothing to do with your first round draft pick. You don't fret away value in the first round because you know you can get additional value later in the draft.

While you may think general theories never get you to a right or wrong answer, what we are discussing here is scoring in a "typical" league. And I can certainly tell you that in a typical league drafting Manning in the first is wrong.

RBs and WRs are the only two positions that you cannot draft with certainty past the 7th round. Every other position there will be top 10 performers. As such, you need to maximize drafting these positions while the players of greater certainty are there, while taking late round flyers later on.

There is no impetus for anyone to draft players other than RBs and WRs early in a draft, and by doing so you are limiting team point production at the expense of some VBD baseline telling you that Tony Gonzalez is the best pick in the 3rd round. What that does not tell you is that your team as a whole will suffer by drafting in this manner as there are always top 5 TEs in the 9th and 10th rounds of typical 12 team drafts.

Between bye weeks and injuries, drafting 3 RBs and 4 WRs in the first 7 rounds of your draft still won't cover you, but you will be in a much better spot than your competition being able to grab top QBs and TEs in the 8-10 rounds while they bob for marginal RBs and WRs.

Thankful that people pull the trigger early on QBs and TEs.

Poker proves my point. You are saying that it ALWAYs a bad idea to draft Manning. there is not an activity where ALWAYS doing anything gets you beat more the poker. My idea is that you think about situation more than the theory. I go into a draft armed with an idea of what I want to from the start to finish, but if Manning drops to me at 10th overall, depending on other factors I may deviate from it. Thank you for having a predictable system that many follow like sheep.

 

[podunker]

I took Manning 2nd overall in Unlucky's Omega League. I am going to make the playoffs with a 7-3 record. I started out slow like most Manning owners, but am riding a 5 game win streak right now. If I would have taken Cpep in the 2nd or McNabb in the third, I would be crying the blues right now. Jordan and Westbrook are may main backs. The bottom line is that there is a lot of luck involved in fantasy football, no matter who you take when!

 

[bagger.]

Poker proves my point. You are saying that it ALWAYs a bad idea to draft  Manning. there is not an activity where ALWAYS doing anything gets you beat more the poker.  My idea is that you think about situation more than the theory.  I go into a draft armed with an idea of what I want to from the start to finish, but if Manning drops to me at 10th overall,  depending on other factors I may deviate from it. 

Thank you for having a predictable system that many follow like sheep.

It is always a bad idea (aka -EV) to play 72o under the gun. If you do you are doing it for deception purposes to regain the money you lose by playing it (and more) by mixing up your style.Unfortunately in a fantasy football draft, you can't bluff. I don't care if people know that I will draft only RBs and WRs in the first 7 rounds of the draft. They do not know which position in each round I will take, nor will they know who I will take. It is not my goal to be tricky in these rounds. It is to draft the best player available that also represents the most value in each round. First 7 rounds of a draft should be ABC drafting, nothing weird, funky or cute.

If Manning drops to you at 10th overall and you take him you are passing up players like Tiki Barber, Westbrook, Lamont Jordan. You are essentially saying that you would rather have Manning and Marshall Faulk than Jordan and Palmer.

What duo scores more points?

 

[bagger.]

I took Manning 2nd overall in Unlucky's Omega League. I am going to make the playoffs with a 7-3 record. I started out slow like most Manning owners, but am riding a 5 game win streak right now. If I would have taken Cpep in the 2nd or McNabb in the third, I would be crying the blues right now. Jordan and Westbrook are may main backs. The bottom line is that there is a lot of luck involved in fantasy football, no matter who you take when!

You got 2 RBs who typically went late 1st and early 2nd in most drafts this year, in the late 2nd and early 3rd.Your fellow drafters didn't make you pay the price for drafting Manning early, so shame on them.

Neither of those backs should have been available to you.

In WCOFF we drafted Westbrook and Jordan at 1.09 and 2.04.

You are correct that there is a lot of luck in fantasy football, but drafting Manning that early makes you rely on it.

Not a good strategy.

 

[Ralph Furley]

Payton owner here. 8-2, 12 team perfomance league 6 points per td.I don't see how it is a given that the team who drafted Payton is most likely struggling or missing the playoffs when many first round running backs were either busts or injured.My feeling, when I drafted Manning (3 overall), was that at a minimum I was going to get consistency. Outside of LT,SA & Edge, I don't see it coming from any first round picks.Also, its not as much the first round as it is the ENTIRE draft. I drafted well, wouldn't have change much, if anything. I still love throwing out Manning and knowing he can single handidly win me a game. My only concern with Manning right now is the success of the Colts, which one could never have predicted they would be 9-0 at this point. Ohter than that, I am very satisfied with my pick.VBD is great and all, but you need to have consistency and other intangibles which VBD can't measure, which I feel Manning provides quite well.

 

[bagger.]

My feeling, when I drafted Manning (3 overall), was that at a minimum I was going to get consistency. Outside of LT,SA & Edge, I don't see it coming from any first round picks.

So at 3rd overall why did you pass on one of the RBs you mentioned above?

 

[coolnerd]

Poker proves my point. You are saying that it ALWAYs a bad idea to draft  Manning. there is not an activity where ALWAYS doing anything gets you beat more the poker.  My idea is that you think about situation more than the theory.  I go into a draft armed with an idea of what I want to from the start to finish, but if Manning drops to me at 10th overall,  depending on other factors I may deviate from it. 

Thank you for having a predictable system that many follow like sheep.

It is always a bad idea (aka -EV) to play 72o under the gun. If you do you are doing it for deception purposes to regain the money you lose by playing it (and more) by mixing up your style.Unfortunately in a fantasy football draft, you can't bluff. I don't care if people know that I will draft only RBs and WRs in the first 7 rounds of the draft. They do not know which position in each round I will take, nor will they know who I will take. It is not my goal to be tricky in these rounds. It is to draft the best player available that also represents the most value in each round. First 7 rounds of a draft should be ABC drafting, nothing wierd, funky or cute.

If Manning drops to you at 10th overall and you take him you are passing up players like Tiki Barber, Westbrook, Lamont Jordan. You are essentially saying that you would rather have Manning and Marshall Faulk than Jordan and Palmer.

What duo scores more points?

I know these are just examples, but the Jordans, Westbrooks and Barbers of the world are matched with Manning all the place. Actually, Most of the time (2/3rds) I draft RB/RB or RB/WR or something that probably looks no different than what you do. Heck, i have even waited until the 9th or 10th to draft a QB. I am not talking about the guy who blindly drafts Manning and does not know that he is taking a chance and deviating from solid play. There are sometimes people take calculate risks understanding how this move effects the rest of their game. No different than bluffing that off suit 2-7 because people think you are tight player.

 

[shakeybarn]

Peyton once again proving why he is a no brainer to be the number 1 qb selected for the next long while. Where are all those nay sayers yelling bust??? This guy is a lock every season to throw close to 4000 yards and 30 TD's.

He is proving why he should be a first round selection based on consistency alone. He never gets hurt and is guaranteed to finish top 5 every single year. He is someone you have on your roster and feel good about every time you submit your line up for the week.

He will once again out produce all of those RB's like McGahee who were more then likely drafted ahead of him.

I hate starting another Manning thread, but I have to laugh at all of those who were labelling this guy a bust.

you win.

 

[Keys Myaths]

My feeling, when I drafted Manning (3 overall), was that at a minimum I was going to get consistency. Outside of LT,SA & Edge, I don't see it coming from any first round picks.

So at 3rd overall why did you pass on one of the RBs you mentioned above?

 

[Muahahaha]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/102. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/83. RB Priest Holmes, KC/54. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/85. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/86. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUSTOf the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out. In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB? At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt." You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt. RBs get hurt. And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot. Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton. But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones. Bet it's worse. I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

 

[FF Dude]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out. In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB? At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt." You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt. RBs get hurt. And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot. Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton. But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones. Bet it's worse. I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

 

[David Yudkin]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out. In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB? At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt." You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt. RBs get hurt. And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot. Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton. But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones. Bet it's worse. I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

It still doesn't change the math. There are 32 starting NFL QB for 12 starting fantasy QB = surplus of 20 QB (obviously in a start 1 QB, 12-team league).At the start of the season, there were roughly 24 starting NFL RB (roughly 8 teams were penciled in for RBBC) = surplus of 0.

You can always come up with starting NFL QB on the waiver wire if you had to. That normally is not the case for RB. There may be one here or there, but getting those guys is often difficult.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

He picked Martin at 2.02, when Barber was still avialable, now lets ALL laugh in his face for missing out.  

That was definitely a rookie move.

GUPPY This May need it's own thread...

"I LAUGH AT THE FOOLS THAT DRAFTED MARTIN IN THE 2ND ROUND"

What were they desperate after using a 1st round pick on a QB that they could have had similar value from in round 6?

Honestly - the ONLY guppy / rookie moves are trying to point a spotlight on Yourself while laughing at others as if you have the perfect draft every single time.....

LOL, I hope you are joking. Part of the fun of message boards is bragging about the good decisions you make and taking your stance on a given draft move, good trade moves etc etc. You can also harmlessely laugh at people who make mistakes and ball calls by claiming P. Manning a bust as he has clearly not been a bust player this year. Another good characteristic to have is laughing at yourself when you make dumb mistakes as well, which I have done on this message board before and am not afraid to admit those.While it is clear to see what stance you have taken on this circumstance, you are offering you own opinion and I applaud that. Even though I normally draft with the RB theory I think you are wrong in saying you could have had a better team (especially this year) with the RB theory. Although you may be partially correct in your RB theory there is no way it stands pact all of the time. IMO there have been so many injuries and underperforming RB's this season that were drafted in the first round that your theory has major holes (not saying it is not a good theory, but it is definitely not going to be the only one that will win FF championships this year).

 

[Reaper]

He picked Martin at 2.02, when Barber was still avialable, now lets ALL laugh in his face for missing out.  

That was definitely a rookie move.

GUPPY This May need it's own thread...

"I LAUGH AT THE FOOLS THAT DRAFTED MARTIN IN THE 2ND ROUND"

What were they desperate after using a 1st round pick on a QB that they could have had similar value from in round 6?

Honestly - the ONLY guppy / rookie moves are trying to point a spotlight on Yourself while laughing at others as if you have the perfect draft every single time.....

LOL, I hope you are joking. Part of the fun of message boards is bragging about the good decisions you make and taking your stance on a given draft move, good trade moves etc etc. You can also harmlessely laugh at people who make mistakes and ball calls by claiming P. Manning a bust as he has clearly not been a bust player this year. Another good characteristic to have is laughing at yourself when you make dumb mistakes as well, which I have done on this message board before and am not afraid to admit those.While it is clear to see what stance you have taken on this circumstance, you are offering you own opinion and I applaud that. Even though I normally draft with the RB theory I think you are wrong in saying you could have had a better team (especially this year) with the RB theory. Although you may be partially correct in your RB theory there is no way it stands pact all of the time. IMO there have been so many injuries and underperforming RB's this season that were drafted in the first round that your theory has major holes (not saying it is not a good theory, but it is definitely not going to be the only one that will win FF championships this year).

1) I don't think a good part of the message board is laughing at others or even poking fun at yourself or "Bragging" in any way - I think it's best to raise questions without looking like your patting yourself on the back... As a matter of fact I wanted to link this thread as an example of what's wrong with the boards these days. How can you laugh at others unless you basically win every league you're in? Really, don't you think a new thread about how stupid people were to Draft Martin would be off the wall ridiculous? But, this one isn't? The Jordan thread?I was just as right as you on Jordan - Maybe moreso since I've owned him in dynasty for a while - I was a fan since Maryland. Why start a posts patting myself on the back or laughing at others? As a matter of fact That Jordan post you bump shows a poll where MOST of the people agreed that Jordan was top 10!!!!!

Then THIS post is a post where a FBG laughs at others while what he states and the way he explains himself flys in the face of VBD - the basic premise of understanding Fantasy Football at this site - WHAT"S FUNNIER THAN THAT? - Someone laughing at others while showing a lack of grasping the theory of winning FF at FBG?

To me, the irony is the funniest thing going right now....

From reading this thread, I'll tell ya, if I wanted to make some money at FF, I wouldn't go knocking down BAGGER'S door - He's got a great grasp of this stuff and can communicate it extemely well.

2) It's not "My RB Theory" - It's called VBD.

 

[Muahahaha]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out. In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB? At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt." You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt. RBs get hurt. And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot. Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton. But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones. Bet it's worse. I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

It still doesn't change the math. There are 32 starting NFL QB for 12 starting fantasy QB = surplus of 20 QB (obviously in a start 1 QB, 12-team league).At the start of the season, there were roughly 24 starting NFL RB (roughly 8 teams were penciled in for RBBC) = surplus of 0.

You can always come up with starting NFL QB on the waiver wire if you had to. That normally is not the case for RB. There may be one here or there, but getting those guys is often difficult.

The math is flawed. Your math needs to accomodate the huge forecasting error in RB performance along with injury potential. 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust. Peyton won't. The fact remains that Peyton was a better pick than about eight RBs in the preseason top 24. What complicates this issue is that it is virtually impossible to know precisely which RB will bust.Let's use VBD to look at this.

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

You play the RB lotto with all these RBs. Manning has not missed a start since he came into the NFL. He is a good, safe pick. You need to develop a mathematical way of incorporating risk into your analysis.

 

[bagger.]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10  INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3  INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3  OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3  BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7  INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3  BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out.  In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB?  At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt."  You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt.  RBs get hurt.  And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot.  Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton.  But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones.  Bet it's worse.  I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

Hold on. ADP is not their rankings. So unless you were drafting off ADP alone and not their actual projected rankings (or your own), this is not a good top 12 list for an apples to apples comparison of who your alternatives were in the first round.My projections were as follows:

I had Tiki, Rudi Johnson, and Westbrook in my top 12 (removing Manning, Jones, and Lewis).

I had a 5/7 shot of not busting out in the late first round by not taking Manning. That's not a crapshoot.

Again, I say if your standard is so low that you consider drafting Manning in the first round a success because he is not on IR, you might want to re-evaluate the level of the bar you set.

Every point of production lost for your team makes you that much more likely to lose each and every week. I would estimate that drafting Manning in the first round over a productive late round back is a leak of about 5-6 points per game out of your production. If you drafted him over SA, LT, or Edge it is a huge leak of about 13 points per game.

Even a 5 point per game leak in your draft is pretty tough to recover from when you consider that it is only in the first round. If you don't draft perfect from there on out there will most likely be further production leaks in your draft. These leaks of 1 PPG, 2 PPG, 5 PPG add up to big numbers. It's the rule of multiples. A bunch of small numbers that don't seem significant, when combined, represent a major issue.

Even if we assume that Manning was the only mistake you made, if the Manning owners are averaging 5-13 PPG less than the owners who didn't take him (removing injuries from the equation as that was not predictable, though Manning's lack of replicating his 2004 production was) they stand to be behind the 8 ball much more so than the owners who didn't draft him.

Very happy that people don't learn from their mistakes.

 

[bagger.]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10  INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3  INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3  OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3  BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7  INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3  BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out.  In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB?  At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt."  You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt.  RBs get hurt.  And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot.  Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton.  But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones.  Bet it's worse.  I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

It still doesn't change the math. There are 32 starting NFL QB for 12 starting fantasy QB = surplus of 20 QB (obviously in a start 1 QB, 12-team league).At the start of the season, there were roughly 24 starting NFL RB (roughly 8 teams were penciled in for RBBC) = surplus of 0.

You can always come up with starting NFL QB on the waiver wire if you had to. That normally is not the case for RB. There may be one here or there, but getting those guys is often difficult.

The math is flawed. Your math needs to accomodate the huge forecasting error in RB performance along with injury potential. 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust. Peyton won't. The fact remains that Peyton was a better pick than about eight RBs in the preseason top 24. What complicates this issue is that it is virtually impossible to know precisely which RB will bust.Let's use VBD to look at this.

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

You play the RB lotto with all these RBs. Manning has not missed a start since he came into the NFL. He is a good, safe pick. You need to develop a mathematical way of incorporating risk into your analysis.

Define better.Score more points than 8 of the 24 RBs? OK.

Him and your alternative RB in the 8th round scoring more than your RB in the 1st and your QB in the 8th round? Not a chance.

Favre has not missed a game either and you can get him in the 7th or 8th round. Why overpay to mitigate risk when you have the ultimate riskless QB (in terms of injury) in Favre waiting for you late in the draft?

Also, is there really a larger forecasting error with RBs than Peyton? Not talking in terms of games missed but in terms of fantasy production. I doubt it.

Even if there is with RBs in general, individual players like Tiki or Westbrook, while not top 3 material, were sure to have a greater point differential than Manning compared to their alternatives later in the draft.

If you want to draft Manning in the first round because he is safe, you don't want to miss on a RB you are not sure how they will do (I would suggest learning to do projections better if that is the case), and you don't mind not only not maximizing your first round points, but willingly leaving a lot on the table, that's your prerogative.

But know that from a total team points point of view, you are willingly and intentionally putting yourself at a major disadvantage in terms of potential points scored all in the name of risk management. I am all for managing risk, but drafting Manning in the first is like investing in bonds when you are 22.

You're not going to lose your money, but you won't get rich either.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

RB10?Who were you drafting with that you could get Peyton at 1.10?

From AntSports.com, Manning's ADP:

ADP: 1.02.11 High: 1.01 Low: 1.06

So, at the low end, you're picking him at 1.06, instead of RB6...NOT at RB 10. There's always going to be a HUGE difference between RB6 and RB10.

Here's the problem with your argument...if you stretch the draft and the numbers, of course you can find something that says Manning might have been a decent pick. However, you're really stretching at this point.

 

[Muahahaha]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out. In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB? At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt." You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt. RBs get hurt. And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot. Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton. But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones. Bet it's worse. I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

Hold on. ADP is not their rankings. So unless you were drafting off ADP alone and not their actual projected rankings (or your own), this is not a good top 12 list for an apples to apples comparison of who your alternatives were in the first round.My projections were as follows:

I had Tiki, Rudi Johnson, and Westbrook in my top 12 (removing Manning, Jones, and Lewis).

I had a 5/7 shot of not busting out in the late first round by not taking Manning. That's not a crapshoot.

Again, I say if your standard is so low that you consider drafting Manning in the first round a success because he is not on IR, you might want to re-evaluate the level of the bar you set.

Every point of production lost for your team makes you that much more likely to lose each and every week. I would estimate that drafting Manning in the first round over a productive late round back is a leak of about 5-6 points per game out of your production. If you drafted him over SA, LT, or Edge it is a huge leak of about 13 points per game.

Even a 5 point per game leak in your draft is pretty tough to recover from when you consider that it is only in the first round. If you don't draft perfect from there on out there will most likely be further production leaks in your draft. These leaks of 1 PPG, 2 PPG, 5 PPG add up to big numbers. It's the rule of multiples. A bunch of small numbers that don't seem significant, when combined, represent a major issue.

Even if we assume that Manning was the only mistake you made, if the Manning owners are averaging 5-13 PPG less than the owners who didn't take him (removing injuries from the equation as that was not predictable, though Manning's lack of replicating his 2004 production was) they stand to be behind the 8 ball much more so than the owners who didn't draft him.

Very happy that people don't learn from their mistakes.

I don't know where to start.1. I'm using ADP as a good, generic, unbiased way to look at this. If you can forecast better than ADP, you will always do better. Congratulations on your nice calls. The majority of the community, as measured by ADP, did worse.

2. I don't disagree that Manning should not have gone in the first round. If someone drafted him there, they probably overpaid for him. I concede that. You also could have done far worse than him. Oh, I don't mean you, since YOU have perfect forecasts, but the general community, BASED ON ADP.

3. My point is that it is far better to overpay for somebody, then for your first round pick to be a complete bust. Obviously, if I can pick the exact best RB in round one that is the way to go. I concede your point. However, the community, based on ADP, didn't do a very good job of that. You are missing my point completely, which is that it is difficult for the community as a whole to pick the correct RBs consistently. You are kind of saying that it is better to have accurate forecasts. Duh. My point is that these forecasts are difficult.

 

[Muahahaha]

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

RB10?Who were you drafting with that you could get Peyton at 1.10?

From AntSports.com, Manning's ADP:

ADP: 1.02.11 High: 1.01 Low: 1.06

So, at the low end, you're picking him at 1.06, instead of RB6...NOT at RB 10. There's always going to be a HUGE difference between RB6 and RB10.

Here's the problem with your argument...if you stretch the draft and the numbers, of course you can find something that says Manning might have been a decent pick. However, you're really stretching at this point.

It was a hypothetical example, Keys. I was just trying to prove a point. These VBD numbers that get bandied about are all compiled with 20-20 hindsight.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

RB10?Who were you drafting with that you could get Peyton at 1.10?

From AntSports.com, Manning's ADP:

ADP: 1.02.11 High: 1.01 Low: 1.06

So, at the low end, you're picking him at 1.06, instead of RB6...NOT at RB 10. There's always going to be a HUGE difference between RB6 and RB10.

Here's the problem with your argument...if you stretch the draft and the numbers, of course you can find something that says Manning might have been a decent pick. However, you're really stretching at this point.

It was a hypothetical example, Keys. I was just trying to prove a point. These VBD numbers that get bandied about are all compiled with 20-20 hindsight.

Well, you're proving a point by using bad data.RB10 *every* year is going to be much, much lower than RB6.

I understand your argument, and I somewhat agree with it if you somehow get Peyton in the very low first round. However, that just didn't happen in drafts this year.

 

[Reaper]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10  INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3  INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3  OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3  BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7  INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3  BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out.  In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB?  At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt."  You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt.  RBs get hurt.  And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot.  Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton.  But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones.  Bet it's worse.  I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

It still doesn't change the math. There are 32 starting NFL QB for 12 starting fantasy QB = surplus of 20 QB (obviously in a start 1 QB, 12-team league).At the start of the season, there were roughly 24 starting NFL RB (roughly 8 teams were penciled in for RBBC) = surplus of 0.

You can always come up with starting NFL QB on the waiver wire if you had to. That normally is not the case for RB. There may be one here or there, but getting those guys is often difficult.

The math is flawed. Your math needs to accomodate the huge forecasting error in RB performance along with injury potential. 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust. Peyton won't. The fact remains that Peyton was a better pick than about eight RBs in the preseason top 24. What complicates this issue is that it is virtually impossible to know precisely which RB will bust.Let's use VBD to look at this.

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

You play the RB lotto with all these RBs. Manning has not missed a start since he came into the NFL. He is a good, safe pick. You need to develop a mathematical way of incorporating risk into your analysis.

How about if we agree that RB's get injured a lot and yeah, maybe it's a little bit more of a crapshoot than Manning..... Fine...Now how about the fact that if you take Manning in round 1 you won't have the same DEPTH at RB...... Talk about setting yourself up to be crushed by injuries... You now BETTER hit on those RB's and now, of course, your choices are much lower ranked.

If you take Manning at 1 - you're STILL praying on healthy RB's - Yet less of em and/or less quality.

I have never had a season become a disaster cuz I couldn't find a servicable QB through draft depth and or WW..... But, I've had many seasons collapse due to RB injuries and/or lack of depth..... Basically, I'm not only getting my RB1 where you get Manning, I'm getting RB2 where you get RB1 - And in my eyes I'm STILL getting a QB that will compete with Manning fantasy wise - Odds are incredible for you to get a RB to compete with my RB 1 or 2 Where I get a QB.

VBD and DEPTH are key here.

 

[David Yudkin]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:

1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/10

2. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/8

3. RB Priest Holmes, KC/5

4. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/8

5. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/8

6. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK

7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10  INJ

8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3  INJ

9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3  OK

10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3  BUST

11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7  INJ

12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3  BUST

Of the 7 RBs taken in the first round after Peyton, 2 panned out.  In the late first round, would you rather play the RB lotto at 2/7 odds or take the sure thing top 5 QB?  At worst you overpaid for Peyton, but you still have a fighting chance unlike with some of the RBs.

[And please don't say, "Well, they got hurt."  You draft Peyton because he doesn't get hurt.  RBs get hurt.  And after the first 4 or 5, it's a crapshoot.  Peyton is as sure a thing as you can get...]

It would be interesting to see the records of those who took Peyton.  But it would also be interesting to see the records of those who took Deuce, DD, JLew, Dillon, or Jones.  Bet it's worse.  I am not advocating taking him, but it really wasn't a bad pick, unless the league/draft is RB-crazy.

It still doesn't change the math. There are 32 starting NFL QB for 12 starting fantasy QB = surplus of 20 QB (obviously in a start 1 QB, 12-team league).At the start of the season, there were roughly 24 starting NFL RB (roughly 8 teams were penciled in for RBBC) = surplus of 0.

You can always come up with starting NFL QB on the waiver wire if you had to. That normally is not the case for RB. There may be one here or there, but getting those guys is often difficult.

The math is flawed. Your math needs to accomodate the huge forecasting error in RB performance along with injury potential. 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust. Peyton won't. The fact remains that Peyton was a better pick than about eight RBs in the preseason top 24. What complicates this issue is that it is virtually impossible to know precisely which RB will bust.Let's use VBD to look at this.

Let's say that with 20-20 hindsight, Mannings VBD is 40. The VBD for RB10 is 60. The problem is that I don't have a clue who RB10 will end up being. I do know that about 40% of the RBs in the preseason top 24 are gonna bust, tho. Manning, however, is a virtual lock for top 3-5. So, Manning VBD(adjusted) = 40; RB10 VBD(adjusted) = 60 x (1-.40) = 36.

You play the RB lotto with all these RBs. Manning has not missed a start since he came into the NFL. He is a good, safe pick. You need to develop a mathematical way of incorporating risk into your analysis.

Even if we give Manning his guarantee of a value score of 40 AND we still say that 8 of the Top 24 RB will not pan out . . . guess what? In taking Manning you still have no RB yet. So now you have a lot fewer RB to choose from and will be trolling for RB later on. And if the guy you annoint busts, you are WAY behind the 8-ball.As I mentioned in doing the math, there will not only be great QB option MUCH later on, there will be potentially NFL starters (even fantasy starters) ON THE WAIVER WIRE (Brunnell for example).

So it boils down to this. You either take a RB early (and with Manning being a consistent Top 5 pick this year don't say that there were no solid RB available) and fish for a decent QB much later (and the odds are pretty good on that front) and hope that your stud RB doesn't get hurt and gets his 100 value points.

Or you take Manning and his 40 value points from Manning and feel secure in that you have a QB, yet then you have to go fishing for a stud RB1.

IMO, I feel a lot more secure in fishing in the 6th, 7th, 8th, or later rounds for a playable QB (when there are plenty to chose from) over fishing for a stud RB after 20 have been drafted and still needing two of them.

The math alone shows that in a start 1 QB league, there will be twice as many QB to go around than RB. And with no NFL team really set on a QBBC (where there are such teams using RBBC), there are even more QB to go around than RB.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

You can talk theory, VBD, ADP or LMNOP. All that matters to me is that in every league that I am in, the owner who took Payton MAnning in the first round is mathematically eliminated right now.

 

[Bri]

I will take a stud RB in the first and one of these QBs versus Peyton and a RB available in the 8th.

that's cool I'm only saying that it's not the only method one can use

In your draft, you should never be the first to draft a PK, DT, TE, or QB.

Let the positional runs come to you, not the other way around.

I completely disagree. Not just because again you made it so cut N dry "you should never" but because I regularly draft the first TE and have done so for years and years and have an excellent FF record. In fact if I don't I'll often take the 2nd and 3rd best TE back to back.I am never shy about taking the best K or D either.

If I'm extremely comfy with my RBs, TE, WRs, QB there's nothing wrong with getting the best K and D. I really can't imagine in re-reading what you posted that you think there's something wrong with takng the best D or K.

 

[Bri]

to add something in here.I think you could search and I'd said a while back that(generally) only an experienced drafter could make drafting Manning work well. I see Yudkin, Bagger, Peep, and some other experienced folks here stating that they're against it. That's their prerogative but you guys COULD have made it work. I think that's what is being missed by most here is that you could have made it work.

 

[Keys Myaths]

to add something in here.

I think you could search and I'd said a while back that(generally) only an experienced drafter could make drafting Manning work well. I see Yudkin, Bagger, Peep, and some other experienced folks here stating that they're against it. That's their prerogative but you guys COULD have made it work. I think that's what is being missed by most here is that you could have made it work.

I could make Jay Feely work in the first round if my other rounds went well enough.Doesn't mean I should try it, though.

 

[Reaper]

I really can't imagine in re-reading what you posted that you think there's something wrong with takng the best D or K.

I can... What D was "The Best" The Ravens?What Kicker was the best? Vinitieri.....

Both are blown out of the water in all my leagues by Waiver wire pickups......

Those are simply wasted picks were other owners grabbed backups and depth - or heck, maybe even a QUARTERBACK that is performing as well as Manning!!!!

 

[David Yudkin]

I remember in the offseason when I suggested that using AVT the over/under for Manning TD passes this year would be 35 (average of his past 3 seasons). People thought that that was absolutle lunacy, as he was a LOCK to get that. If that was the over/under at Vegas, they'd bet their house on the over.

Well here we are through Week 10 and Manning is barely on track to hit 30 (and if the Colts clinch homefield early I doubt he'll get that many).

I tried to point this out in an article I wrote on Top 25 fantasy seasons and how rare it is for players to follow up a Top 25 season with another Top 25 season (especially at QB), and Manning needed to be in that range again to merit where his ADP was.

While he may be all of the things people have said in this thread (reliabile, dependable, healthy, security blanket, etc.), the bottom line is that in many leagues he was not a good investment. Paying $4 a gallon for gas was worth it when the price was that high (Manning = 50 TD) but paying $4 a gallon when gas is only $2 now is not a great thing to do (Manning = 25 TD).

 

[ScottNorwood]

FBG pre-season ADP from the Forecast Section:1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson, SD/102. RB Shaun Alexander, Sea/83. RB Priest Holmes, KC/54. RB Edgerrin James, Ind/85. QB Peyton Manning, Ind/86. RB Willis McGahee, Buf/9 OK7. RB Deuce McAllister, NO/10 INJ8. RB Domanick Davis, Hou/3 INJ9. RB Clinton Portis, Was/3 OK10. RB Jamal Lewis, Bal/3 BUST11. RB Corey Dillon, NE/7 INJ12. RB Kevin Jones, Det/3 BUST

This is valid. Everyone wants to know how the Manning owner is doing. How's the Priest owner doing? How's the Deuce owner doing? How's the Dom D owner doing? How's the Jamal Lewis, Dillon, K Jones, J Jones, A Green owner doing? Almost half of the top ranked RBs have gotten hurt or been ineffective. That's what makes Peyton a legit 1st rounder. Admittedly I expected him to be closer to last years #s than he has been (since he basically had the same supporting cast coming back this year), but with Culpepper losing Moss, Peyton looked like he was going to be the top QB by a large margin. My 1st 3 picks were Manning, Chad Johnson, and Steven JacksonWould I rather have Shaun Alexander and then taken Carson Palmer much later? Of course. Would I rather have Jamal Lewis and Aaron Brooks? No way. You can't win your league in the 1st round, but you can lose it.

 

[bagger.]

I don't know where to start.

1. I'm using ADP as a good, generic, unbiased way to look at this. If you can forecast better than ADP, you will always do better. Congratulations on your nice calls. The majority of the community, as measured by ADP, did worse.

OK, I guess ADP is essentially a consensus ranking in a way so ADP isn't really that bad of a way to look at it. That's fine.

2. I don't disagree that Manning should not have gone in the first round. If someone drafted him there, they probably overpaid for him. I concede that. You also could have done far worse than him. Oh, I don't mean you, since YOU have perfect forecasts, but the general community, BASED ON ADP.

Good to see that we agree on that drafting Manning in the first was overpaying for him. I also agree that drafting Manning in the first is better than drafting a RB who went on IR. However, I could not predict which RB would go on IR, but I could predict that barring injury, any first round RB would outperform Manning.My forecasts are far from perfect. I missed on my fair share of players like everyone else.

3. My point is that it is far better to overpay for somebody, then for your first round pick to be a complete bust. Obviously, if I can pick the exact best RB in round one that is the way to go. I concede your point. However, the community, based on ADP, didn't do a very good job of that. You are missing my point completely, which is that it is difficult for the community as a whole to pick the correct RBs consistently. You are kind of saying that it is better to have accurate forecasts. Duh. My point is that these forecasts are difficult.

Yes, Manning is better than a complete bust due to injury, but that's not the point. By that logic you might as well draft a TE in the second, a defense in the third, and a kicker in the fourth since you can pick the #1 player (or close to it) at each position rather than dealing with the uncertainty of any RB ranked lower than Edge.I am not missing your point at all. You think that after the first 3 RBs taken it is such a crapshoot, you shouldn't even try to grab a RB and just go after the sure fire QB. What I say to that is that if you (in general not you specifically) have such low confidence in your ability to project players beyond the sure-fire studs, you either have a major issue projecting players, or have such a low risk tolerance you shouldn't be playing a hobby that deals with all sorts of uncertainty (which at its very essence is risk).

 

[Bri]

to add something in here.

I think you could search and I'd said a while back that(generally) only an experienced drafter could make drafting Manning work well. I see Yudkin, Bagger, Peep, and some other experienced folks here stating that they're against it. That's their prerogative but you guys COULD have made it work. I think that's what is being missed by most here is that you could have made it work.

I could make Jay Feely work in the first round if my other rounds went well enough.Doesn't mean I should try it, though.

wimp no but seriously, that point's totally missed here