Philip Rivers Discussion (1 Viewer)

[Tau837]

I have him at #21 and I'm sticking with this.

Looked to see if Jeff came to his senses yet, and found that he now has Rivers ranked #22. It called for a bump.

I was as big a Rivers fan as you could find last year, but he underperformed IMO. I was expecting top ten numbers, but he really didn't produce that way. Sure he finished top ten, but only due to the injury of other QBs.

Doesn't this happen every year? That is, isn't it typical for one or more QBs to finish top 10 who wouldn't have if other QBs had not been injured? So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

The San Diego Team QB ranked 16th last season. Is that bad? Of course not...but I was expecting more out of Rivers.

IMO you should look a bit deeper than that. I don't think anyone can dispute that Marty/Cam were overly conservative to start the season and held Rivers back during games 1 and 3 last season. In game 1, he played well but was allowed to attempt only 11 passes. In game 3, he played well again early - 8/10 for 82 yards, 1 TD, 1 interception in the first quarter - but Marty/Cam went into a shell, attempting only 5 more passes before the 4th quarter. The difference is that they won game 1, but the overly conservative play cost them a win in game 3. So after that they opened up the offense a bit. Rivers averaged 22.7 attempts per game in the first 3 games last year, 30.2 per game the rest of the way.Anyway, the San Diego team QB ranked #11 in the remaining 13 games of the season. IMO that is more indicative of his Rivers' performance last season. I am pretty sure some will disagree and say you can't exclude games. Fine... I just don't expect him to be held back this season like he was early last year, which IMO limits the predictive value of those first few games last year.

Maybe he'll improve (a lot) as a fantasy QB this year, but I don't think Jeff's off base ranking him 22nd. Would I put him there? No. But I can see reasons why.

I actually applaud Jeff for avoiding groupthink and sticking to his guns. But as I have made clear in this thread, I think he is very wrong. I think it is interesting that FBG posts rankings from 14 staff members, and Jeff's ranking is such an outlier. Right now, the lowest ranking other than Jeff's is 17, and Rivers' average rank is 12.6, with 8 staff members ranking him between 8 and 12. Jeff has certainly explained his basis thoroughly... why aren't any of the other staff members agreeing?

He's got the QB of 14 of the 15 teams (Baltimore) that scored more FPs than San Diego ahead of Rivers, which seems at least justifiable. He's got Delhomme ahead of him, which isn't: in the 11 games that Delhomme and Steve Smith played together last season, Delhomme averaged 16.5 FP/G, which is better than what Rivers did last year. If you're projecting a healthy Delhomme and Steve Smith, I can't arguing with ranking Delhomme ahead of Rivers.Jay Cutler is ranked ahead of Rivers, which is understandable because of how well Cutler did when he played last year -- he had a higher FP/G average than Rivers. Eli is also ranked ahead of Rivers, which isn't outlandish especially if Toomer or Steve Smith are productive. The loss of Barber should make Eli throw a lot more, and one reasonable expectation is that will improve his fantasy stats. He's got Favre ahead of Rivers, but Favre actually finished with more FPs last year, too. Grossman and Losman are tougher sells, I think. Alex Smith is an impossible sell. Matt Schaub is hard to predict, but I can't fault someone for being high on him. Would I have Rivers ranked 22nd? No. But I think outside of those last four QBs, you can make a reasonable case for ranking those other QBs ahead of Rivers. If you want to project improvement, maybe significant improvement, from Rivers, that's perfectly acceptable. But it's important to recognize that Rivers was fairly pedestrian as a fantasy QB last year. If you want to give him a break because it was his first year starting, I wholeheartedly understand that. But the lack of any rushing statistics will hold Rivers down as long as he's only throwing for 212 yards per game.I think Rivers is one of the best 10 QBs in the NFL. But he's not one of the best 10 (or 12) fantasy QBs. And maybe he's not even top 15.

Agree with you on Grossman, Losman, Smith, and Schaub.Yes, Cutler averaged more fppg, but according to your own article he had the easiest schedule of any QB in the league, while Rivers had the 10th hardest. I think some people are hypocritical in their views of Cutler and Rivers.I disagree with a lot of others ranked higher, but at least for those who might rank Rivers in the 15-17 area, they probably aren't predicting much of a fantasy point spread between him and the top 12.Now, let me just say, I think Chase's post was not his view, but just trying to see Jeff's argument. But as such, it assumes worst case for Rivers and not worst case for many other QBs. I think that is the biggest problem I have had with Jeff's analysis all along. He is giving other QBs the benefit of the doubt in some areas, but he is assuming no improvement, and indeed probably regression, from Rivers.

 

[Tau837]

The 2 QBs I re-thought about...Delhomme - Yes, he's not doing well right now, but with Steve Smith it's hard not to like him to start for you a few times fantasy-wise as a QB2. If he continues to have bad outings (and I do expect Carr to take over at some point this year) I might lower him more.Schaub - Jury is way out on him, but I think Houston has to throw. WR2 bothers me (AJ and ODaniels still solid), but the run game impresses me even less.I could see Rivers up two ticks before the season starts, but regardless he doesn't belong in the Top 12 at all and I see many ?s about him being your #2 fantasy QB.

at Rivers not being worthy of being someone's QB2. I guess that *might* be true if you play in 6 team, start 1 QB leagues.Jeff, your comment about Delhomme hints that you do your rankings a bit differently. I gather that you are not necessarily ranking players by (1) expected total points or (2) expected points per game, but rather perhaps by the number of times you could see yourself starting them...? Can you please elaborate on this? I'd like to get it on the record so we can revisit later.

 

[LHUCKS]

I gather that you are not necessarily ranking players by (1) expected total points or (2) expected points per game, but rather perhaps by the number of times you could see yourself starting them...? Can you please elaborate on this?

Real sharks don't rank players on year end projections...they rank players closer to PPG projections. That is why you overrate Rivers and subsequently rank him incorrectly.

 

[Tau837]

I gather that you are not necessarily ranking players by (1) expected total points or (2) expected points per game, but rather perhaps by the number of times you could see yourself starting them...? Can you please elaborate on this?

Real sharks don't rank players on year end projections...they rank players closer to PPG projections. That is why you overrate Rivers and subsequently rank him incorrectly.

Is that so? Here is how I ranked him last season:

Many here know that I'm driving the Philip Rivers bandwagon, so it should be no surprise that I watched his whole N.C. State career and project him around top 15. For perspective, note that last season QB15 was Steve McNair, with these statistics:292/476 for 3161 passing yards, 16 TDs, 11 interceptions, and 32/139/1 rushing - total of 231 fantasy pointsGiven Rivers' likelihood of starting all 16 games (incredible durability shown in college, no quality backups), that is less than 15 fantasy points per game. Rather than speculate about his likely rank, I'll just say that I expect him to score at least 240 fantasy points, which is 15 per game for 16 games.

He actually scored 254.1 fantasy points, or 15.88 per game. So I was pretty close, but slightly underrated him. He finished #14 in ppg, but #12 if you look only at QBs with 200+ attempts. To be fair, scanning the FBG final PPG list, I think this ranking shorts Romo, so that might bump Rivers down a notch...And as I already posted in this thread, his ppg went up after the first 3 games when the Chargers opened up the offense (12.2 ppg in first 3 games; 16.7 fppg the rest of the season). 16.7 fppg in 13 games... those are top 10 PPG numbers.Please remind me where you had Rivers ranked last season. Did you rank him correctly?And also, please post where you have him ranked this year, in PPG, since that is how sharks do it. FYI, I'd rank him in the 8-10 range in PPG. And, since I view him as likely to play 16 games, that puts him top 10 in total points as well.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I have him at #21 and I'm sticking with this.

Looked to see if Jeff came to his senses yet, and found that he now has Rivers ranked #22. It called for a bump.

I was as big a Rivers fan as you could find last year, but he underperformed IMO. I was expecting top ten numbers, but he really didn't produce that way. Sure he finished top ten, but only due to the injury of other QBs.

Doesn't this happen every year? That is, isn't it typical for one or more QBs to finish top 10 who wouldn't have if other QBs had not been injured? So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

The San Diego Team QB ranked 16th last season. Is that bad? Of course not...but I was expecting more out of Rivers.

IMO you should look a bit deeper than that. I don't think anyone can dispute that Marty/Cam were overly conservative to start the season and held Rivers back during games 1 and 3 last season. In game 1, he played well but was allowed to attempt only 11 passes. In game 3, he played well again early - 8/10 for 82 yards, 1 TD, 1 interception in the first quarter - but Marty/Cam went into a shell, attempting only 5 more passes before the 4th quarter. The difference is that they won game 1, but the overly conservative play cost them a win in game 3. So after that they opened up the offense a bit. Rivers averaged 22.7 attempts per game in the first 3 games last year, 30.2 per game the rest of the way.Anyway, the San Diego team QB ranked #11 in the remaining 13 games of the season. IMO that is more indicative of his Rivers' performance last season. I am pretty sure some will disagree and say you can't exclude games. Fine... I just don't expect him to be held back this season like he was early last year, which IMO limits the predictive value of those first few games last year.

Maybe he'll improve (a lot) as a fantasy QB this year, but I don't think Jeff's off base ranking him 22nd. Would I put him there? No. But I can see reasons why.

I actually applaud Jeff for avoiding groupthink and sticking to his guns. But as I have made clear in this thread, I think he is very wrong. I think it is interesting that FBG posts rankings from 14 staff members, and Jeff's ranking is such an outlier. Right now, the lowest ranking other than Jeff's is 17, and Rivers' average rank is 12.6, with 8 staff members ranking him between 8 and 12. Jeff has certainly explained his basis thoroughly... why aren't any of the other staff members agreeing?

He's got the QB of 14 of the 15 teams (Baltimore) that scored more FPs than San Diego ahead of Rivers, which seems at least justifiable. He's got Delhomme ahead of him, which isn't: in the 11 games that Delhomme and Steve Smith played together last season, Delhomme averaged 16.5 FP/G, which is better than what Rivers did last year. If you're projecting a healthy Delhomme and Steve Smith, I can't arguing with ranking Delhomme ahead of Rivers.

Jay Cutler is ranked ahead of Rivers, which is understandable because of how well Cutler did when he played last year -- he had a higher FP/G average than Rivers. Eli is also ranked ahead of Rivers, which isn't outlandish especially if Toomer or Steve Smith are productive. The loss of Barber should make Eli throw a lot more, and one reasonable expectation is that will improve his fantasy stats. He's got Favre ahead of Rivers, but Favre actually finished with more FPs last year, too.

Grossman and Losman are tougher sells, I think. Alex Smith is an impossible sell. Matt Schaub is hard to predict, but I can't fault someone for being high on him.

Would I have Rivers ranked 22nd? No. But I think outside of those last four QBs, you can make a reasonable case for ranking those other QBs ahead of Rivers. If you want to project improvement, maybe significant improvement, from Rivers, that's perfectly acceptable. But it's important to recognize that Rivers was fairly pedestrian as a fantasy QB last year. If you want to give him a break because it was his first year starting, I wholeheartedly understand that. But the lack of any rushing statistics will hold Rivers down as long as he's only throwing for 212 yards per game.

I think Rivers is one of the best 10 QBs in the NFL. But he's not one of the best 10 (or 12) fantasy QBs. And maybe he's not even top 15.

Agree with you on Grossman, Losman, Smith, and Schaub.Yes, Cutler averaged more fppg, but according to your own article he had the easiest schedule of any QB in the league, while Rivers had the 10th hardest. I think some people are hypocritical in their views of Cutler and Rivers.

I disagree with a lot of others ranked higher, but at least for those who might rank Rivers in the 15-17 area, they probably aren't predicting much of a fantasy point spread between him and the top 12.

Now, let me just say, I think Chase's post was not his view, but just trying to see Jeff's argument. But as such, it assumes worst case for Rivers and not worst case for many other QBs. I think that is the biggest problem I have had with Jeff's analysis all along. He is giving other QBs the benefit of the doubt in some areas, but he is assuming no improvement, and indeed probably regression, from Rivers.

I agree with almost everything you wrote here. I'm a Rivers fan, but I can see the arguments against him. There is one thing I wanted to mention, though.

So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

Yes, and no. The distinction lies in the difference between retrodictive and predictive rankings. Here's a useful link explaining the difference. A retrodictive ranking determines who was the best and who accomplished the most. That's useful when figuring out who should make the Pro Bowl, or who had the best season at QB. In that case, staying healthy matters a lot -- you can't add value to your team when on the bench. A predictive system, on the other hand, is what it sounds like -- it helps to predict who will have the best season.If we were going to play in a league where we would use last year's numbers as our data, then you'd want to rank the players according to a retrodictive system. Staying healthy is really important. The fact that Rivers ranked 9th last year matters a lot. If we're going to rank players according to how we will predict them to do this year, we want a predictive system. In that case, we care about PPG, not FP. And while staying healthy doesn't make a QB less valuable, it mostly is irrelevant. If you're not going to predict injuries, you don't care who was hurt last year. That's why Eli Manning and Alex Smith drop a ton in my rankings when you do a predictive system (which is what you should do for your fantasy rankings), than if I was to do a retrodictive system. Yes, Manning ranks higher than say, Tony Romo in a retrodictive system because Manning passed for 350 more yards and five more TDs. But in a predictive system, Romo's per game numbers make you like him more than Manning. That's not a knock on Eli because he stayed healthy, though. And that's the key distinction.

 

[Tau837]

I agree with almost everything you wrote here. I'm a Rivers fan, but I can see the arguments against him. There is one thing I wanted to mention, though.

So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

Yes, and no. The distinction lies in the difference between retrodictive and predictive rankings. Here's a useful link explaining the difference. A retrodictive ranking determines who was the best and who accomplished the most. That's useful when figuring out who should make the Pro Bowl, or who had the best season at QB. In that case, staying healthy matters a lot -- you can't add value to your team when on the bench. A predictive system, on the other hand, is what it sounds like -- it helps to predict who will have the best season.If we were going to play in a league where we would use last year's numbers as our data, then you'd want to rank the players according to a retrodictive system. Staying healthy is really important. The fact that Rivers ranked 9th last year matters a lot. If we're going to rank players according to how we will predict them to do this year, we want a predictive system. In that case, we care about PPG, not FP. And while staying healthy doesn't make a QB less valuable, it mostly is irrelevant. If you're not going to predict injuries, you don't care who was hurt last year. That's why Eli Manning and Alex Smith drop a ton in my rankings when you do a predictive system (which is what you should do for your fantasy rankings), than if I was to do a retrodictive system. Yes, Manning ranks higher than say, Tony Romo in a retrodictive system because Manning passed for 350 more yards and five more TDs. But in a predictive system, Romo's per game numbers make you like him more than Manning. That's not a knock on Eli because he stayed healthy, though. And that's the key distinction.

Understood. But suppose you can have a starter caliber QB in PPG. And then suppose he stays healthy. Isn't that what you want?Part of what I have always cited as a strength for Rivers is his durability and likelihood to stay in the lineup. As I posted above, once the Chargers stopped holding him back after the first few games last season, their team QB was top 11 in PPG. Rivers himself put up top 10 caliber QB PPG numbers in the last 13 games last year. So if you can get that kind of per game production, don't you want it every game? That was what I was thinking with my post.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I agree with almost everything you wrote here. I'm a Rivers fan, but I can see the arguments against him. There is one thing I wanted to mention, though.

So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

Yes, and no. The distinction lies in the difference between retrodictive and predictive rankings. Here's a useful link explaining the difference. A retrodictive ranking determines who was the best and who accomplished the most. That's useful when figuring out who should make the Pro Bowl, or who had the best season at QB. In that case, staying healthy matters a lot -- you can't add value to your team when on the bench. A predictive system, on the other hand, is what it sounds like -- it helps to predict who will have the best season.If we were going to play in a league where we would use last year's numbers as our data, then you'd want to rank the players according to a retrodictive system. Staying healthy is really important. The fact that Rivers ranked 9th last year matters a lot. If we're going to rank players according to how we will predict them to do this year, we want a predictive system. In that case, we care about PPG, not FP. And while staying healthy doesn't make a QB less valuable, it mostly is irrelevant. If you're not going to predict injuries, you don't care who was hurt last year. That's why Eli Manning and Alex Smith drop a ton in my rankings when you do a predictive system (which is what you should do for your fantasy rankings), than if I was to do a retrodictive system. Yes, Manning ranks higher than say, Tony Romo in a retrodictive system because Manning passed for 350 more yards and five more TDs. But in a predictive system, Romo's per game numbers make you like him more than Manning. That's not a knock on Eli because he stayed healthy, though. And that's the key distinction.

Understood. But suppose you can have a starter caliber QB in PPG. And then suppose he stays healthy. Isn't that what you want?Part of what I have always cited as a strength for Rivers is his durability and likelihood to stay in the lineup. As I posted above, once the Chargers stopped holding him back after the first few games last season, their team QB was top 11 in PPG. Rivers himself put up top 10 caliber QB PPG numbers in the last 13 games last year. So if you can get that kind of per game production, don't you want it every game? That was what I was thinking with my post.

You can manually "bump" Rivers up on your rankings because of durability. But when projecting his FP/G, it's not that relevant. I think the most important feature when projecting Rivers' numbers this year is his 16th or whatever rank he had in my rearview article. You can make projections off that (Rivers getting better as a QB, maturation of Jackson, downgrade for the departure of Cameron -- whatever), and then bump him up or down in the rankings based on durability. At least that's how I'd do it.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I actually applaud Jeff for avoiding groupthink and sticking to his guns. But as I have made clear in this thread, I think he is very wrong.

Before we go down this path once again, there are lots of new people in the Shark Pool now. Welcome.Let's just say that even though I'm on Staff and I'm a Mod, that doesn't mean you can't take a stance with or against me. We are all here to improve our fantasy and football knowledge and acumen. I don't take any football debates personally, nor do the staff in general. Conversations and debate threads are highlights of the Shark Pool.And don't draft Rivers.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I was as big a Rivers fan as you could find last year, but he underperformed IMO. I was expecting top ten numbers, but he really didn't produce that way. Sure he finished top ten, but only due to the injury of other QBs.

Doesn't this happen every year? That is, isn't it typical for one or more QBs to finish top 10 who wouldn't have if other QBs had not been injured? So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

In a normal redraft league, I really don't care about durability (to a point). If you start 12, 13, 14, 15 or 16 games, I probably won't care as long as I have at least 1 good starter per week.The point is this - Philip Rivers is ranked high on an annual basis because he did well on an annual basis - not a weekly one. Most fantasy leagues start QBs on a weekly basis, and most weeks you had 12-16 better options than running Rivers out there for your team.I'll take two guys that give me 20 pts per week but only start 10 games all year and hope that I can get 16 games covered for my FF season rather than taking a guy that will start 16 games but just put up 15 points per week. The first two guys will have 200 pts for the year, but the other one (Rivers) will outpace both for the year with 240. I'll take the first two and I'm much more likely to win.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

The 2 QBs I re-thought about...Delhomme - Yes, he's not doing well right now, but with Steve Smith it's hard not to like him to start for you a few times fantasy-wise as a QB2. If he continues to have bad outings (and I do expect Carr to take over at some point this year) I might lower him more.Schaub - Jury is way out on him, but I think Houston has to throw. WR2 bothers me (AJ and ODaniels still solid), but the run game impresses me even less.I could see Rivers up two ticks before the season starts, but regardless he doesn't belong in the Top 12 at all and I see many ?s about him being your #2 fantasy QB.

at Rivers not being worthy of being someone's QB2. I guess that *might* be true if you play in 6 team, start 1 QB leagues.Jeff, your comment about Delhomme hints that you do your rankings a bit differently. I gather that you are not necessarily ranking players by (1) expected total points or (2) expected points per game, but rather perhaps by the number of times you could see yourself starting them...? Can you please elaborate on this? I'd like to get it on the record so we can revisit later.

Sure, I will elaborate.We're asked here at FBG to rank players for the year, not on a weekly basis.We also, generally, shouldn't take injuries into account (trying to predict who will get hurt). Positional battles, yes, but not injuries. So if I think Carr might start in December for Delhomme, I should account for that. Same for DeAngelo taking over for Foster, for example. This is where the PPG comes in the most - if I assume no starter controversy and don't try and predict injuries, then my forecasts should be roughly the same as their average PPG projections.

 

[Tau837]

The 2 QBs I re-thought about...Delhomme - Yes, he's not doing well right now, but with Steve Smith it's hard not to like him to start for you a few times fantasy-wise as a QB2. If he continues to have bad outings (and I do expect Carr to take over at some point this year) I might lower him more.Schaub - Jury is way out on him, but I think Houston has to throw. WR2 bothers me (AJ and ODaniels still solid), but the run game impresses me even less.I could see Rivers up two ticks before the season starts, but regardless he doesn't belong in the Top 12 at all and I see many ?s about him being your #2 fantasy QB.

at Rivers not being worthy of being someone's QB2. I guess that *might* be true if you play in 6 team, start 1 QB leagues.Jeff, your comment about Delhomme hints that you do your rankings a bit differently. I gather that you are not necessarily ranking players by (1) expected total points or (2) expected points per game, but rather perhaps by the number of times you could see yourself starting them...? Can you please elaborate on this? I'd like to get it on the record so we can revisit later.

Sure, I will elaborate.We're asked here at FBG to rank players for the year, not on a weekly basis.We also, generally, shouldn't take injuries into account (trying to predict who will get hurt). Positional battles, yes, but not injuries. So if I think Carr might start in December for Delhomme, I should account for that. Same for DeAngelo taking over for Foster, for example. This is where the PPG comes in the most - if I assume no starter controversy and don't try and predict injuries, then my forecasts should be roughly the same as their average PPG projections.

Just to make sure I'm understanding you here, this means you are projecting Rivers to finish this season as #22 in PPG for QBs. Is that correct?Did you see my earlier post that in the last 13 games last season he averaged 16.7 ppg? Are you aware that the 9th best QB PPG last season (FBG scoring) was 16.6? How do you get from there to #22?

 

[Tau837]

I actually applaud Jeff for avoiding groupthink and sticking to his guns. But as I have made clear in this thread, I think he is very wrong.

Before we go down this path once again, there are lots of new people in the Shark Pool now. Welcome.Let's just say that even though I'm on Staff and I'm a Mod, that doesn't mean you can't take a stance with or against me. We are all here to improve our fantasy and football knowledge and acumen. I don't take any football debates personally, nor do the staff in general. Conversations and debate threads are highlights of the Shark Pool.

Agreed.

 

[Tau837]

I was as big a Rivers fan as you could find last year, but he underperformed IMO. I was expecting top ten numbers, but he really didn't produce that way. Sure he finished top ten, but only due to the injury of other QBs.

Doesn't this happen every year? That is, isn't it typical for one or more QBs to finish top 10 who wouldn't have if other QBs had not been injured? So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

In a normal redraft league, I really don't care about durability (to a point). If you start 12, 13, 14, 15 or 16 games, I probably won't care as long as I have at least 1 good starter per week.The point is this - Philip Rivers is ranked high on an annual basis because he did well on an annual basis - not a weekly one. Most fantasy leagues start QBs on a weekly basis, and most weeks you had 12-16 better options than running Rivers out there for your team.I'll take two guys that give me 20 pts per week but only start 10 games all year and hope that I can get 16 games covered for my FF season rather than taking a guy that will start 16 games but just put up 15 points per week. The first two guys will have 200 pts for the year, but the other one (Rivers) will outpace both for the year with 240. I'll take the first two and I'm much more likely to win.

Jeff, would you be interested in tracking this throughout the season? I was thinking of posting a thread in which I would ask people to put forth their QB options at the start of the season and track the fantasy points in their lineup all season. So at the end of the season we could compare the performance of those who use multiple QBs with those who use a single starter. I suspect it will turn out to be harder to use QBBC and earn the same points than most people seem to think.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I was as big a Rivers fan as you could find last year, but he underperformed IMO. I was expecting top ten numbers, but he really didn't produce that way. Sure he finished top ten, but only due to the injury of other QBs.

Doesn't this happen every year? That is, isn't it typical for one or more QBs to finish top 10 who wouldn't have if other QBs had not been injured? So a QB is less valuable for staying healthy?

In a normal redraft league, I really don't care about durability (to a point). If you start 12, 13, 14, 15 or 16 games, I probably won't care as long as I have at least 1 good starter per week.The point is this - Philip Rivers is ranked high on an annual basis because he did well on an annual basis - not a weekly one. Most fantasy leagues start QBs on a weekly basis, and most weeks you had 12-16 better options than running Rivers out there for your team.I'll take two guys that give me 20 pts per week but only start 10 games all year and hope that I can get 16 games covered for my FF season rather than taking a guy that will start 16 games but just put up 15 points per week. The first two guys will have 200 pts for the year, but the other one (Rivers) will outpace both for the year with 240. I'll take the first two and I'm much more likely to win.

Jeff, would you be interested in tracking this throughout the season? I was thinking of posting a thread in which I would ask people to put forth their QB options at the start of the season and track the fantasy points in their lineup all season. So at the end of the season we could compare the performance of those who use multiple QBs with those who use a single starter. I suspect it will turn out to be harder to use QBBC and earn the same points than most people seem to think.

It is harder than it looks, but it gets easier by eliminating a few QBs from possibly starting for your fantasy team....

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Just to make sure I'm understanding you here, this means you are projecting Rivers to finish this season as #22 in PPG for QBs. Is that correct?

Did you see my earlier post that in the last 13 games last season he averaged 16.7 ppg? Are you aware that the 9th best QB PPG last season (FBG scoring) was 16.6? How do you get from there to #22?

Here's how I get to that conclusion (actually Rivers gets there, not me):1. I start by pointing out that his QB PPG last season was 15.88, 14th best QB in the NFL in 2006.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2006/06finalppgstats.php

2. I find 7 QBs that will be better. Really wasn't that hard.

 

[Gr00vus]

in the last 13 games last season he averaged 16.7

I start by pointing out that his QB PPG last season was 15.88, 14th best QB in the NFL in 2006.

In other words you didn't address what JWB was saying. Please address the 16.7 ppg mark.

2. I find 7 QBs that will be better. Really wasn't that hard.

Seems hard to me. Especially considering QB #22 (where you have him ranked) is projected to put up around 14.4 ppg. It just seems like you're really very far off in your projections for Rivers.

 

[Tau837]

Just to make sure I'm understanding you here, this means you are projecting Rivers to finish this season as #22 in PPG for QBs. Is that correct?

Did you see my earlier post that in the last 13 games last season he averaged 16.7 ppg? Are you aware that the 9th best QB PPG last season (FBG scoring) was 16.6? How do you get from there to #22?

Here's how I get to that conclusion (actually Rivers gets there, not me):1. I start by pointing out that his QB PPG last season was 15.88, 14th best QB in the NFL in 2006.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2006/06finalppgstats.php

2. I find 7 QBs that will be better. Really wasn't that hard.

Thanks for confirming that your ranking means you are indeed projecting Rivers to finish as #22 in PPG. I'm glad it is on the record here. Should make for some good in season entertainment.As Groovus pointed out, you ignored the second part of my post. Not sure why you bothered quoting it if you weren't going to address it. Also, you are ranking 9 QBs who did not outscore Rivers last year ahead of him, not 7.

 

[Tau837]

Decided to bump this and use this thread to follow Rivers' progress this season. Since I called out Jeff Pasquino, I thought I'd post his final preseason rankings, dated 8/31. Jeff, correct me if I don't have these right, I just got them off the site.

1. Manning, Peyton

2. Palmer

3. Brees

4. Brady

5. McNabb

6. Bulger

7. Kitna

8. Leinart

9. Hasselbeck

10. Young

11. Roethlisberger

12. Favre

13. Cutler

14. Manning, Eli

15. Romo

16. Grossman

17. Losman

18. Smith

19. Schaub

20. Delhomme

21. Rivers

Obviously not a great opening day. Using FBG scoring, he is QB28 after one week, with just 8.4 fantasy points. He had a better game than only 3 of the guys Jeff ranked above him: Brees, Grossman, and Losman.

I expected him to play better, even against the Bears, and I said so in a few threads, whereas Jeff specifically cited his schedule as a negative. So Jeff wins week 1.

I expect a nice rebound game from Rivers this week, even at New England.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Decided to bump this and use this thread to follow Rivers' progress this season. Since I called out Jeff Pasquino, I thought I'd post his final preseason rankings, dated 8/31. Jeff, correct me if I don't have these right, I just got them off the site.1. Manning, Peyton2. Palmer3. Brees4. Brady5. McNabb6. Bulger7. Kitna8. Leinart9. Hasselbeck10. Young11. Roethlisberger12. Favre13. Cutler14. Manning, Eli15. Romo16. Grossman17. Losman18. Smith19. Schaub20. Delhomme21. RiversObviously not a great opening day. Using FBG scoring, he is QB28 after one week, with just 8.4 fantasy points. He had a better game than only 3 of the guys Jeff ranked above him: Brees, Grossman, and Losman.I expected him to play better, even against the Bears, and I said so in a few threads, whereas Jeff specifically cited his schedule as a negative. So Jeff wins week 1.I expect a nice rebound game from Rivers this week, even at New England.

Classy bump here JWB.This is about what I expected from Rivers. His INT was actually more of a bad throw than a bad decision, but could have been considered both.Bear in mind (no pun intended) that I am not looking to "win" or "lose" this debate. I pointed out what I saw and what my expectations were and based my rankings accordingly.I just don't see many weeks where Rivers is startable, and as a result I wanted no part of him this year. I actually smile whenever I'm in a draft and he gets picked as a QB1. As I did mention earlier somewhere, his December schedule is decent so his numbers should improve then - but getting to the postseason with Rivers will be a challenge.Let's see how he does against New England.

 

[tommyGunZ]

I just don't see many weeks where Rivers is startable, and as a result I wanted no part of him this year. I actually smile whenever I'm in a draft and he gets picked as a QB1.

As I did mention earlier somewhere, his December schedule is decent so his numbers should improve then - but getting to the postseason with Rivers will be a challenge.

Let's see how he does against New England.

I'll find out - I took Rivers as my QB1 in my most important league and am backing him up with Cutler. Rivers didn't play very well against the Bears on Sunday and still ended up completing 72% of his passes.

 

[Tau837]

Decided to bump this and use this thread to follow Rivers' progress this season. Since I called out Jeff Pasquino, I thought I'd post his final preseason rankings, dated 8/31. Jeff, correct me if I don't have these right, I just got them off the site.1. Manning, Peyton2. Palmer3. Brees4. Brady5. McNabb6. Bulger7. Kitna8. Leinart9. Hasselbeck10. Young11. Roethlisberger12. Favre13. Cutler14. Manning, Eli15. Romo16. Grossman17. Losman18. Smith19. Schaub20. Delhomme21. RiversObviously not a great opening day. Using FBG scoring, he is QB28 after one week, with just 8.4 fantasy points. He had a better game than only 3 of the guys Jeff ranked above him: Brees, Grossman, and Losman.I expected him to play better, even against the Bears, and I said so in a few threads, whereas Jeff specifically cited his schedule as a negative. So Jeff wins week 1.I expect a nice rebound game from Rivers this week, even at New England.

Bumping this for a status update. Wanted to see where things stand after 5 weeks. Given that some have had byes or missed games due to injury (or for backups started games due to injury), I tried to look at only QBs who have played substantially in at least 2 games. As an example, this means I ignored Frerotte, Clemens, and Boller. Inexact science, just trying to get a reasonable set of guys to look at.Jeff's rankings, with status for each QB:1. Manning, Peyton - QB4 in FBG-based ppg scoring2. Palmer - QB33. Brees - QB264. Brady - QB25. McNabb - QB126. Bulger - QB31 and currently injured7. Kitna - QB88. Leinart - QB34 and out for the season9. Hasselbeck - QB1910. Young - QB2411. Roethlisberger - QB1112. Favre - QB613. Cutler - QB2114. Manning, Eli - QB1515. Romo - QB116. Grossman - QB35 and benched17. Losman - QB36 and currently injured18. Smith - QB32 and currently injured19. Schaub - QB1620. Delhomme - QB5 but done for the season after 2 1/2 games21. Rivers - QB14Rivers is currently QB14 in ppg, but that is with Delhomme, Derek Anderson, Culpepper, Griese, and Garrard ranked ahead of him. I doubt anyone would be happy to have Delhomme instead of Rivers. I doubt Anderson or Culpepper will finish the season ranked ahead of Rivers, and IMO it could go either way with Griese and/or Garrard.Some may say it's not fair to consider injuries. Well, I posted a number of times in the offseason that Rivers' durability was a positive in his favor, so IMO it is fair to consider.Remember, Jeff's ranking was a substantial outlier compared to the rest of the FBG rankings. It's not looking like a good ranking to me, already, and, as I have already indicated throughout the season so far, I expect Rivers to get better from here. Jeff ranked 20 QBs above Rivers, and only 8 of them are currently outperforming him.I realize there will be those who will say that with Rivers at QB, a team would have been burned a few times so far. But that is also the case with at least half of the other QBs Jeff ranked above him. Meanwhile, Rivers' outlook for the rest of the season looks pretty bright right now IMO.