Player Spotlight: Daunte Culpepper (1 Viewer)

[bostonfred]

Further, to suggest that your best offensive weapon took you from 1st out of 32 all the way down to 9th and some think that's terrible? Seriously, it's a heck of a testament to Cpep that he was still putting up top 10 numbers without Moss. It's not like he had a replacement for him to come in and play. Robinson was dinged & Kleinsasser was out. 3 important parts to your offense are missing and yet you still put up top 10 numbers?

For those of that are making the Moss argument, this really makes Moss look bad in some ways. They only dropped to 9th? If you ask me, that's not the type impact I expect from a guy many of you say is the greast WR ever and the only reason Cpep accomplished what he has to date.

Now that I wrote that I realize even more just how good Cpep really is! Wow. Thanks for making my case for Cpep even stronger guys!

Nobody's saying Culpepper is terrible. Like I said, he's the bestest quarterback in the whole world. (Sorry Tom I'm just trying to make a point) The question is where should he be taken in fantasy drafts. "Only 9th" is a pretty huge dropoff. I don't expect Culpepper to be 9th this year just because Moss is gone. I do think that all of the negative factors going against him make it much less likely he ends up top 2. And I don't understand why anyone would want to spend a pick in the first two rounds on a guy who is likely to fail to earn back that draft spot.

 

[bostonfred]

Look, none of these things is GOOD for Culpepper.  You can make a case that each one, in a vacuum, probably isn't that big a deal.  But you can't deny that, if you write up pros and cons for Culpepper's year this year, you have a lot more cons than pros compared with last year.

Finally, I can agree with you here. But, where I want to chop off 10 to 15% of his 2004 productivity you're implying 35%+. Culpepper alone is a great player and he won't fall off as much as you're predicting. That's pretty much it.

I'm not implying that he will fall off by 35%+. I'm saying the most optimistic case for Culpepper is about a 15% dropoff. Add to that the possibility that he drops off even more significantly, which I happen to think is very likely, and the range by which he could drop off is anywhere from, say, 15% to 35% or more. It's specifically the risk associated with him that makes him a bad pick in the first two rounds.

You pretty much are ... or you're saying a 25% reduction at best. In any case, I do agree with you that he's going way too early in a lot of drafts right now. I might consider him at the end of the 2nd in some standard leagues, but before the 3rd in a 1ppr is not a good move.

I haven't given any projections, and I've never said a 25% reduction at best. I've said on more than one occasion that it's possible Culpepper is still the QB1 this year. It's the huge, huge risks associated with him that drop him out of the first two rounds for me. From the sounds of your post, we're not that far apart. I would probably consider Culpepper in the third, and almost certainly in the fourth, when the sure RBs, WRs and TEs are gone, because the risk/reward is worth it. But there's no way I pass on a starter quality RB to take a QB who might be very good, but might be middle of the pack.

Come on Fred, you're telling me you'd think about taking Culpepper in the 3rd and certainly in the 4th??????? Well, I'll consider taking Edgerin James at the beginning of the 2nd. Let's be realistic........you are not going to see Culpepper in the mid 3rd and early 4th rounds. I think it's safe to say that you won't have Culpepper on your teams this upcoming year.

That's right. I've said on more than one occasion that I won't be drafting Culpepper this year. I'm actually keeping Culpepper in a keeper league, though, and I would trade him for anyone I perceive to be a better value, so it's very relevant to think about what he's worth to me.

It's also a very valid exercise to discuss what his ADP SHOULD BE as opposed to what it is.

 

[Capella]

I might point out that it's been about 35 posts since someone followed the directions and actually posted a projection for Culpepper for the upcoming season.   

Jason will be on me tomorrow FOR SURE about this. 

1500 yards passing with 11 TDs200 yards rushing with 1 TD

benched in the middle of the year due to ineffectiveness.

or insane. Take your pick.

option C) :11:Let's just say I don't think he's sending in a MENSA application anytime soon.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Look, none of these things is GOOD for Culpepper.  You can make a case that each one, in a vacuum, probably isn't that big a deal.  But you can't deny that, if you write up pros and cons for Culpepper's year this year, you have a lot more cons than pros compared with last year.

Finally, I can agree with you here. But, where I want to chop off 10 to 15% of his 2004 productivity you're implying 35%+. Culpepper alone is a great player and he won't fall off as much as you're predicting. That's pretty much it.

I'm not implying that he will fall off by 35%+. I'm saying the most optimistic case for Culpepper is about a 15% dropoff. Add to that the possibility that he drops off even more significantly, which I happen to think is very likely, and the range by which he could drop off is anywhere from, say, 15% to 35% or more. It's specifically the risk associated with him that makes him a bad pick in the first two rounds.

You pretty much are ... or you're saying a 25% reduction at best. In any case, I do agree with you that he's going way too early in a lot of drafts right now. I might consider him at the end of the 2nd in some standard leagues, but before the 3rd in a 1ppr is not a good move.

I haven't given any projections, and I've never said a 25% reduction at best. I've said on more than one occasion that it's possible Culpepper is still the QB1 this year. It's the huge, huge risks associated with him that drop him out of the first two rounds for me. From the sounds of your post, we're not that far apart. I would probably consider Culpepper in the third, and almost certainly in the fourth, when the sure RBs, WRs and TEs are gone, because the risk/reward is worth it. But there's no way I pass on a starter quality RB to take a QB who might be very good, but might be middle of the pack.

Come on Fred, you're telling me you'd think about taking Culpepper in the 3rd and certainly in the 4th??????? Well, I'll consider taking Edgerin James at the beginning of the 2nd. Let's be realistic........you are not going to see Culpepper in the mid 3rd and early 4th rounds. I think it's safe to say that you won't have Culpepper on your teams this upcoming year.

That's right. I've said on more than one occasion that I won't be drafting Culpepper this year. I'm actually keeping Culpepper in a keeper league, though, and I would trade him for anyone I perceive to be a better value, so it's very relevant to think about what he's worth to me.

It's also a very valid exercise to discuss what his ADP SHOULD BE as opposed to what it is.

Ok.......but keep in mind that what his "ADP SHOULD BE" before the season is still subjective on our part unless you're 100 percent accurate on all your projections. I mean, if we're both wrong and Culpepper throws for 32 Td's and 4200 yards, what is ADP SHOULD BE is a lot higher than what we're saying.IMO, he should be drafted early 3rd round.......however, there are just too many people who have him projected to go higher than that, which means I won't be drafting him unless of course I'm drafting against 11 BFred's.

 

[bostonfred]

Look, none of these things is GOOD for Culpepper.  You can make a case that each one, in a vacuum, probably isn't that big a deal.  But you can't deny that, if you write up pros and cons for Culpepper's year this year, you have a lot more cons than pros compared with last year.

Finally, I can agree with you here. But, where I want to chop off 10 to 15% of his 2004 productivity you're implying 35%+. Culpepper alone is a great player and he won't fall off as much as you're predicting. That's pretty much it.

I'm not implying that he will fall off by 35%+. I'm saying the most optimistic case for Culpepper is about a 15% dropoff. Add to that the possibility that he drops off even more significantly, which I happen to think is very likely, and the range by which he could drop off is anywhere from, say, 15% to 35% or more. It's specifically the risk associated with him that makes him a bad pick in the first two rounds.

You pretty much are ... or you're saying a 25% reduction at best. In any case, I do agree with you that he's going way too early in a lot of drafts right now. I might consider him at the end of the 2nd in some standard leagues, but before the 3rd in a 1ppr is not a good move.

I haven't given any projections, and I've never said a 25% reduction at best. I've said on more than one occasion that it's possible Culpepper is still the QB1 this year. It's the huge, huge risks associated with him that drop him out of the first two rounds for me. From the sounds of your post, we're not that far apart. I would probably consider Culpepper in the third, and almost certainly in the fourth, when the sure RBs, WRs and TEs are gone, because the risk/reward is worth it. But there's no way I pass on a starter quality RB to take a QB who might be very good, but might be middle of the pack.

Come on Fred, you're telling me you'd think about taking Culpepper in the 3rd and certainly in the 4th??????? Well, I'll consider taking Edgerin James at the beginning of the 2nd. Let's be realistic........you are not going to see Culpepper in the mid 3rd and early 4th rounds. I think it's safe to say that you won't have Culpepper on your teams this upcoming year.

That's right. I've said on more than one occasion that I won't be drafting Culpepper this year. I'm actually keeping Culpepper in a keeper league, though, and I would trade him for anyone I perceive to be a better value, so it's very relevant to think about what he's worth to me.

It's also a very valid exercise to discuss what his ADP SHOULD BE as opposed to what it is.

Ok.......but keep in mind that what his "ADP SHOULD BE" before the season is still subjective on our part unless you're 100 percent accurate on all your projections. I mean, if we're both wrong and Culpepper throws for 32 Td's and 4200 yards, what is ADP SHOULD BE is a lot higher than what we're saying.IMO, he should be drafted early 3rd round.......however, there are just too many people who have him projected to go higher than that, which means I won't be drafting him unless of course I'm drafting against 11 BFred's.

It's not about being 100% accurate on your predictions. It's about taking an expected value approach to players to make sure you get good guys. As I've said in the past, I think Culpepper could still be the QB1. That wouldn't make it right to draft him in the first round. I also think that the roulette wheel is going to come up red on the next spin; that doesn't make it right for me to bet the mortgage on it, even if it does come up red (although I'd definitely be psyched if it did).

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Look, none of these things is GOOD for Culpepper.  You can make a case that each one, in a vacuum, probably isn't that big a deal.  But you can't deny that, if you write up pros and cons for Culpepper's year this year, you have a lot more cons than pros compared with last year.

Finally, I can agree with you here. But, where I want to chop off 10 to 15% of his 2004 productivity you're implying 35%+. Culpepper alone is a great player and he won't fall off as much as you're predicting. That's pretty much it.

I'm not implying that he will fall off by 35%+. I'm saying the most optimistic case for Culpepper is about a 15% dropoff. Add to that the possibility that he drops off even more significantly, which I happen to think is very likely, and the range by which he could drop off is anywhere from, say, 15% to 35% or more. It's specifically the risk associated with him that makes him a bad pick in the first two rounds.

You pretty much are ... or you're saying a 25% reduction at best. In any case, I do agree with you that he's going way too early in a lot of drafts right now. I might consider him at the end of the 2nd in some standard leagues, but before the 3rd in a 1ppr is not a good move.

I haven't given any projections, and I've never said a 25% reduction at best. I've said on more than one occasion that it's possible Culpepper is still the QB1 this year. It's the huge, huge risks associated with him that drop him out of the first two rounds for me. From the sounds of your post, we're not that far apart. I would probably consider Culpepper in the third, and almost certainly in the fourth, when the sure RBs, WRs and TEs are gone, because the risk/reward is worth it. But there's no way I pass on a starter quality RB to take a QB who might be very good, but might be middle of the pack.

Come on Fred, you're telling me you'd think about taking Culpepper in the 3rd and certainly in the 4th??????? Well, I'll consider taking Edgerin James at the beginning of the 2nd. Let's be realistic........you are not going to see Culpepper in the mid 3rd and early 4th rounds. I think it's safe to say that you won't have Culpepper on your teams this upcoming year.

That's right. I've said on more than one occasion that I won't be drafting Culpepper this year. I'm actually keeping Culpepper in a keeper league, though, and I would trade him for anyone I perceive to be a better value, so it's very relevant to think about what he's worth to me.

It's also a very valid exercise to discuss what his ADP SHOULD BE as opposed to what it is.

Ok.......but keep in mind that what his "ADP SHOULD BE" before the season is still subjective on our part unless you're 100 percent accurate on all your projections. I mean, if we're both wrong and Culpepper throws for 32 Td's and 4200 yards, what is ADP SHOULD BE is a lot higher than what we're saying.IMO, he should be drafted early 3rd round.......however, there are just too many people who have him projected to go higher than that, which means I won't be drafting him unless of course I'm drafting against 11 BFred's.

It's not about being 100% accurate on your predictions. It's about taking an expected value approach to players to make sure you get good guys. As I've said in the past, I think Culpepper could still be the QB1. That wouldn't make it right to draft him in the first round. I also think that the roulette wheel is going to come up red on the next spin; that doesn't make it right for me to bet the mortgage on it, even if it does come up red (although I'd definitely be psyched if it did).

I know what you're saying. I bet you have a real hard time playing video poker. I could see you talking to yourself on what to keep? Should I keep the pair of 10's or should I go for the flush?

 

[-OZ-]

The only question IMO is whether he should be the #2 or #3 QB taken this year.

It used to be a question of whether he was #1 or #2.

Actually there's another, more important question - should he be drafted in the first two rounds. Because even if you believe he's the #2 or #3 QB, that's traditionally not been worth such an early pick.

Depends on the league size, lineup, scoring, etc. I'd look his was at the end of the 2nd in a 12 team, 1 QB start league, but probably not take him until mid-3rd.

 

[jwvdcw]

Others have mentioned turnovers as Culpepper's potential undoing, but he has improved dramatically in the past two seasons.

In terms of QB touches, I included passing attempts and rushing attempts (which really does not account for sacks) which was the best way I could think of to assess this.

2000: 563 total attempts, 22 turnovers, 25.5 touches/turnover

2001: 437 total attempts, 20 turnovers, 21.9 touches/turnover

2002: 655 total attempts, 31 turnovers, 21.1 touches/turnover

2003: 527 total attempts, 17 turnovers, 31.0 touches/turnover

2004: 636 total attempts, 15 turnovers, 42.4 touches/turnover

Culpepper had half as many turnovers as he had in 2002. Perhaps he has improved some as a QB and has made some better decisions?

Again, any stat a QB puts up with Moss is meaningless to me if they lose Moss. Having one WR double covered every play makes defenses easier to read. Also safeties don't blitz as often because they need to be there to defend Moss deep...this gave Pepper more time to throw which resulted in less INTs.I'm not debating that Pepper's numbers were great with Moss. Nor will I debate that he improved. Nor have I debated anything about any of Pepper's numbers with Moss. All I have ever said is that any QB can put up top 3 numbers with MOss, and when I watch Pepper play, I don't see a great QB, I see someone who just benefitted from Moss(he is an above average QB imo though)...and yes I was joking with my projections.

 

[David Yudkin]

Others have mentioned turnovers as Culpepper's potential undoing, but he has improved dramatically in the past two seasons.

In terms of QB touches, I included passing attempts and rushing attempts (which really does not account for sacks) which was the best way I could think of to assess this.

2000: 563 total attempts, 22 turnovers, 25.5 touches/turnover

2001: 437 total attempts, 20 turnovers, 21.9 touches/turnover

2002: 655 total attempts, 31 turnovers, 21.1 touches/turnover

2003: 527 total attempts, 17 turnovers, 31.0 touches/turnover

2004: 636 total attempts, 15 turnovers, 42.4 touches/turnover

Culpepper had half as many turnovers as he had in 2002.  Perhaps he has improved some as a QB and has made some better decisions?

Again, any stat a QB puts up with Moss is meaningless to me if they lose Moss. Having one WR double covered every play makes defenses easier to read. Also safeties don't blitz as often because they need to be there to defend Moss deep...this gave Pepper more time to throw which resulted in less INTs.I'm not debating that Pepper's numbers were great with Moss. Nor will I debate that he improved. Nor have I debated anything about any of Pepper's numbers with Moss. All I have ever said is that any QB can put up top 3 numbers with MOss, and when I watch Pepper play, I don't see a great QB, I see someone who just benefitted from Moss(he is an above average QB imo though)...and yes I was joking with my projections.

The part that confuses me about people that have annointed Moss as the uber football player that "makes" other players is this.Last season, Moss had half as many receptions (or more) than he had the past two seasons and half as many receiving yards as the season before. So in short, it was easily Moss' worst season.

Yet Culpepper had statistically his BEST season BY FAR with Moss producing at the lowest level of Moss' career.

I would be more likely to attach myself to the Moss "makes" other players/QBs more if he had had his best year and accounted for a huge chunk of Culpepper's production.

In 2003, Moss accounted for 149.6 of Culpepper's 329 fantasy points scored (81.6 in passing yardage and 68 in passing TD). So in 2003, Moss DIRECTLY contributed 45.4% of Culpepper's fantasy production.

In 2004, Moss accounted for 90.3 of Culpepper's 433 fantasy points scored (38.3 in passing yardage and 52 in passing TD). So in 2004, Moss DIRECTLY contributed to 20.8% of Culpepper's fantasy production--more than half as much as the season before.

The flip side to that would be that Culpepper earned 79.2% of his production in 2004 without having DIRECT involvement of Moss--or 343 fantasy points. That total ON ITS OWN would have ranked as the #4 fantasy QB.

Now, I am not a complete idiot and do understand that Moss' presence on the field and INDIRECT involvement aided Culpepper in succeeding even when Moss was NOT involved in the play.

However, Culpepper performed at an exceptional level in plays not involving Moss--far better than in other seasons. I am curious as to what productivity level people are saying Culpepper's numbers will fall to (as was the exercise of the thread).

 

[Dancing Bear]

jwvdcw,First let me say that there are really just two points about Culpepper to be considered.a) What will he score for Fantasy Points in 2005?b) Where can he be obtained in any draft with value [How much will he cost in an auction]?With regards to b), it is clear that one has to assess the associated risk(s) and scoring projections with respect to each of the other potential scorers. Watching the draft unfold and seeing each player selected surely provides an indication of where your league-mates are valuing certian players. IMHO, no QB warrants a 1st round pick from a value perspective. I would even stretch that through to the 2nd round [depending upon the number of teams in the league]. If one of your league-mates takes a QB in either of these two rounds, then he/ she is likely to be paying too high a price!Now with regards to a). You are spinning the mathematics to slant your argument, and you are not clearly representing the performance of any QB. You are also not considering the entire contribution of scoring that a QB has, or the relevance of the merit associated with the short-term performances of the Minnesota backups.To be fair, let's review all QB performances since 1960 ...We will review only those QB's who score 20.0 ppg or higher; there were 103 individual instances of this achievement. Now let's parse it down by only reviewing those QB's who show a repeated capability to perform at this level [minimum of 3 instances]. There were 16 different QB's who accumulated 65 individual instances of this success.This is the list of QB'sCulpepper [5 times]Cunningham [5 times]Favre [6 times]Fouts [4 times]Gannon [3 times]Garcia [3 times]Lamonica [3 times]Manning [5 times]Marino [4 times]McNabb [3 times]McNair [3 times]Montana [6 times]Moon [3 times]Unitas [3 times]Warner [3 times]Young [6 times]Now, these performances are combination of both passing and rushing and this should not be ignored as it is the collective effort which merits our projections and success during the season. We are going to therefore consider the total fantasy points scored [rushing and passing] divided by the total number of touches [rushing and passing].The collective average of fantasy points per touch for these 65 instances is 0.62.27 of the 65 instances were .62 or higher; 38 instances were lower.Culpepper has 3 of his 5 instances above the average!Further he and Steve Young are the only ones with career averages above the group average [Young is at 0.65]. NO ONE ELSE IS ABOVE 0.60!Of the various Minnesota backups ...Brister is hardly worth mentioning with his spot duty. However, it is interesting that Bubby had over 20 ffp/game and a ffp/touch of 0.68 in 1998 with Denver.He also had a reasonable year with a ffp/touch of 0.50 in 1990 with Pittsburgh.He certainly should have been able to take better advantage of Moss; at least better than his horrible 0.20 ffp/touch. Especially considering that his career average for ffp/touch is 0.44 ...Frerotte and Bouman certainly performed admirably and they benefited by Moss and the various other supporting cast.Frerotte benefited from a RBBC which created ~2,700 yards and 14 TD's, and an REBC for the tune of ~1,500 yards and 10 TD's.Bouman still had the fabled 3 WR's plus a Top 10 TE who generated better than 1,900 yards and 10 TD'sFrerotte had a ffp/touch of 0.78 and Bouman had a ffp/touch of 0.74. However, each have what amounts to 3 game stints. Neither is a reasonable data source for true comparisons ... Frerotte had a speckled past but he did do admirably in Washington [1995, 1996, 1997] with a Top 11 finish, and in Denver [2001] with a ffp/touch of 0.57. Frerotte's career ffp/touch is 0.46.Bouman has had no other attempts to speak of since leaving Minnesota and speculating his performance is pretty futile. Bouman's career ffp/touch is 0.70 ...Except for the fact that Wynn had more attempts than Todd in 2001 and his ffp/touch was a dismal 0.23! With the same cast of players. Wynn has a career ffp/touch of 0.20.In conclusion ...Culpepper is among the games elite QB's. There is no way around it; he has executed and performed at a high level.Randy Moss clearly assisted in this performance, and his presence will be missed in 2005. The other supporting cast will offset this in part.Some other Minnesota QB's performed admirably for short durations, and have not repeated their performances.Culpepper may loss as much as 25% from 2005, but he will once again finish as a premier QB in the league. He will score a minimum of 386 points!

 

[Jason Wood]

GREAT Debate guys, kudos to everyone pretty much keeping to factual back and forth on this one. As David said yesterday though, kindly post your PROJECTIONS if you've not done so as that is one of the main focal points of the thread.

 

[David Yudkin]

Since I believe in at least REVIEWING the assertions that people make, I decided to look into the theory that "Randy Moss makes average QBs Top 3 QBs."Here's what I found . . .In 2001, Todd Bouman had two big games in filling in for Culpepper vs . . .- Tennessee, ranked 31st in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.- Detroit, ranked 25th in yards allowed and 31st in passing TD allowed.In 2003, Gus Frerotte had two big games filling in for Culpepper vs . . .- SF, ranked 18th in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.- Atlanta, ranked 32nd in passing yards allowed and 30th in passing TD allowed.In 1999 (prior to Culpepper), Jeff George's three best games came vs . . .- SF, ranked 31st in both passing yards allowed and passing TD allowed.- Chicago, ranked 28th in passing yards allowed and 23rd in passing TD allowed.- SD, ranked 22nd in passing yards allowed and 25th in passing TD allowed.IMO, what "made" these QBs was not as much Randy Moss as it was the NFL schedule makers. And for those that shrug off Spergon Wynn as the atypical Minnesota fill-in that inexplicably did not do as well as the others, he started three games. His competition in those games were Jacksonville, GB, and Baltimore--all Top 10 defenses that season.

 

[Muahahaha]

Randy Moss got injured week 6. He was a shadow of his former self the rest of the year. In weeks 1-6, he averaged 14.8 fp/game; weeks 7-17, he averaged 6.0 fp/game.I have no problem grossing up CPs stats from weeks 7-17 to a full year. The effect of a gimpy Moss weeks 7-17 should be offset by Williamson, Kleinsasser, a healthy O-line and an offseason getting used to playing without Moss. Here is the resulting projection:4295 pyds / 30 ptd / 11int / 410 ryds / 3 rtdThis works out to a 15% decrease from last year and is good enough for #2 overall QB.Pundits will argue that the schedule favored the Vikings & that the defense greatly improved. I would argue that many of these schedule strength numbers are biased by the very fact that the defenses Minny played faced a variety of strong pass offenses during the year (every team in the NFC North played Minny and GB twice in addition to IND & the teams that Minny faced in the AFC South all had to face IND Twice). The defense improving is probably a wash: short field should offset the reduced chance of a shootout.

 

[radballs.]

Using FBG scoring and assuming standard (start 1QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 Def) 12 team leagues, if Culpepper in 2005 has a 23.5% reduction in FP from his 2004 numbers, his production would be identical to McNabb's in 2004 of just over 350 FP. Assuming all the other players in the league had the same stats, there would still be only 18 players that would have a higher X value than Culpepper in '05. Last year that group would have been represented by 1 QB, 7 RBs, 8 WRs, and 2 TEs. Now, I'm not saying he should necessarily be the 19th player off the board because of DVBD concerns. But, Culpepper can take a major hit and still be a decent value toward the end of the second round. Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example. Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP. This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. This would be a reduction of over 100 FP from 2004 and more than a 31% decline. His X value will have dropped from 166 in 2004 to 61 in 2005. Still, there would only be 2 QBs, 8 RBs, 11 WRs, and 3 TEs with higher X values. Unless you see Culpepper sliding 40% or more, he'll still be major value in the early 3rd round in standard scoring leagues.

 

[Family Matters]

Using FBG scoring and assuming standard (start 1QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 Def) 12 team leagues, if Culpepper in 2005 has a 23.5% reduction in FP from his 2004 numbers, his production would be identical to McNabb's in 2004 of just over 350 FP. Assuming all the other players in the league had the same stats, there would still be only 18 players that would have a higher X value than Culpepper in '05. Last year that group would have been represented by 1 QB, 7 RBs, 8 WRs, and 2 TEs. Now, I'm not saying he should necessarily be the 19th player off the board because of DVBD concerns. But, Culpepper can take a major hit and still be a decent value toward the end of the second round.

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example. Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP. This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. This would be a reduction of over 100 FP from 2004 and more than a 31% decline. His X value will have dropped from 166 in 2004 to 61 in 2005. Still, there would only be 2 QBs, 8 RBs, 11 WRs, and 3 TEs with higher X values. Unless you see Culpepper sliding 40% or more, he'll still be major value in the early 3rd round in standard scoring leagues.

Well said Rads.Does anyone realize that all the "Moss is the reason Cpep is good charter members" really helped to subsatntiate that fact Cpep is better than some of us thought? I mean think about it. Cpep losses his best weapon week 6 and for a few games and has to go on without the benfit of being able to prepare or replace Moss. All the while MRob is banged up, Bennett is pretty much useless and Klien is IR's. And yet he still put up what amounts to QB2 numbers.

Before this thread it hadn't dawned on me that he was that good. I appreciate all the Moss charter members showing me the light. Absolutely amazing.

While some of that sarcasm I really am impressed with the depth of anaysis on this board. Collectively, we turned Cpep inside out and upside down looking at every possible perspective of his talen and performance. Cpep is pretty good!

 

[bostonfred]

Since I believe in at least REVIEWING the assertions that people make, I decided to look into the theory that "Randy Moss makes average QBs Top 3 QBs."

Here's what I found . . .

In 2001, Todd Bouman had two big games in filling in for Culpepper vs . . .

- Tennessee, ranked 31st in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.

- Detroit, ranked 25th in yards allowed and 31st in passing TD allowed.

In 2003, Gus Frerotte had two big games filling in for Culpepper vs . . .

- SF, ranked 18th in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.

- Atlanta, ranked 32nd in passing yards allowed and 30th in passing TD allowed.

In 1999 (prior to Culpepper), Jeff George's three best games came vs . . .

- SF, ranked 31st in both passing yards allowed and passing TD allowed.

- Chicago, ranked 28th in passing yards allowed and 23rd in passing TD allowed.

- SD, ranked 22nd in passing yards allowed and 25th in passing TD allowed.

IMO, what "made" these QBs was not as much Randy Moss as it was the NFL schedule makers.

And for those that shrug off Spergon Wynn as the atypical Minnesota fill-in that inexplicably did not do as well as the others, he started three games. His competition in those games were Jacksonville, GB, and Baltimore--all Top 10 defenses that season.

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

 

[Muahahaha]

Using FBG scoring and assuming standard (start 1QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 Def) 12 team leagues, if Culpepper in 2005 has a 23.5% reduction in FP from his 2004 numbers, his production would be identical to McNabb's in 2004 of just over 350 FP. Assuming all the other players in the league had the same stats, there would still be only 18 players that would have a higher X value than Culpepper in '05. Last year that group would have been represented by 1 QB, 7 RBs, 8 WRs, and 2 TEs. Now, I'm not saying he should necessarily be the 19th player off the board because of DVBD concerns. But, Culpepper can take a major hit and still be a decent value toward the end of the second round.

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example. Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP. This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. This would be a reduction of over 100 FP from 2004 and more than a 31% decline. His X value will have dropped from 166 in 2004 to 61 in 2005. Still, there would only be 2 QBs, 8 RBs, 11 WRs, and 3 TEs with higher X values. Unless you see Culpepper sliding 40% or more, he'll still be major value in the early 3rd round in standard scoring leagues.

The other thing is, in my opinion, there is huge variance in who exactly will be these 8 RBs, 11 WRs and 3 TEs. I don't think you will get that with DC. I think his absolute worst is Trent Green type numbers with the potential for much better than that.

 

[bostonfred]

Cpep losses his best weapon week 6 and for a few games and has to go on without the benfit of being able to prepare or replace Moss. All the while MRob is banged up, Bennett is pretty much useless and Klien is IR's. And yet he still put up what amounts to QB2 QB9 numbers against the easiest possible schedule.

Fixed.

 

[Family Matters]

Since I believe in at least REVIEWING the assertions that people make, I decided to look into the theory that "Randy Moss makes average QBs Top 3 QBs."

Here's what I found . . .

In 2001, Todd Bouman had two big games in filling in for Culpepper vs . . .

- Tennessee, ranked 31st in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.

- Detroit, ranked 25th in yards allowed and 31st in passing TD allowed.

In 2003, Gus Frerotte had two big games filling in for Culpepper vs . . .

- SF, ranked 18th in passing yards allowed and 27th in passing TD allowed.

- Atlanta, ranked 32nd in passing yards allowed and 30th in passing TD allowed.

In 1999 (prior to Culpepper), Jeff George's three best games came vs . . .

- SF, ranked 31st in both passing yards allowed and passing TD allowed.

- Chicago, ranked 28th in passing yards allowed and 23rd in passing TD allowed.

- SD, ranked 22nd in passing yards allowed and 25th in passing TD allowed.

IMO, what "made" these QBs was not as much Randy Moss as it was the NFL schedule makers.

And for those that shrug off Spergon Wynn as the atypical Minnesota fill-in that inexplicably did not do as well as the others, he started three games.  His competition in those games were Jacksonville, GB, and Baltimore--all Top 10 defenses that season.

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

Get real. So why didn't Moss blow up every game he played?

 

[bostonfred]

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example.  Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP.  This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. 

Why is 28 TDs the floor for Culpepper? Culpepper has only passed for 28 TDs twice in his career, and his career average is 26 TDs per season WITH MOSS. Now, granted he was injured for seven of the 80 games, so his prorated career average WITH MOSS is almost 27 TDs per season. But I don't understand why you see 28 as his floor. Let me ask a different question: You project Manning to drop off by 14 TDs when the only receiver he lost was Marcus Pollard (Link). Why is the absolute floor for Culpepper an 11 TD dropoff when he lost Randy Moss?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Nobody's saying Culpepper is terrible. Like I said, he's the bestest quarterback in the whole world. (Sorry Tom I'm just trying to make a point)

 

[Muahahaha]

I can't wait to see the Collins player spotlight. These guys think anybody would have had Culpepper's year given Moss and the Vikings schedule. Therefore, they must be projecting Collins to be making a run for Manning's record, given that he will have a healthy Moss for all 16 games and Culpepper only had a healthy Moss for 6....

 

[bostonfred]

These guys think anybody would have had Culpepper's year given Moss and the Vikings schedule.

I'm going to have to ask you for a link on that one. Nobody's saying Culpepper is a bad QB. But I don't see any reason to put him by himself in some sort of magical, I don't need great receivers to be the #1 fantasy QB tier, either.

 

[David Yudkin]

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

An NFL team's QB2 stepping in and running the same offense with the same personnel (including Randy Moss) against a poor defense, IMO, has a greater chance of success than a team having to completely rebrand its game plan to refocus away from its primary weapon (Moss) in a limited time span.The other issue, is you (and others) have made a distinction of looking at ONLY the numbers when Moss was COMPLETELY out of the lineup when he was hobbled, not used much if at all, or generally no longer a fixture in the offense in several other games.And opposing defenses could quickly tell that Moss was not going to do much when he was in the lineup while he was hurt, often giving him single coverage and focusing on other receivers. From the couple of Vikings games that I saw, Moss was not on the field much (even though he was "playing"), and when he was on the field he was a liability. On many plays, it became 11 defenders vs 10 offensive players and Moss standing on the outside but barely even running.

 

[reg]

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

An NFL team's QB2 stepping in and running the same offense with the same personnel (including Randy Moss) against a poor defense, IMO, has a greater chance of success than a team having to completely rebrand its game plan to refocus away from its primary weapon (Moss), and a new offensive coordinator in a limited time span.

 

[Muahahaha]

These guys think anybody would have had Culpepper's year given Moss and the Vikings schedule.

I'm going to have to ask you for a link on that one. Nobody's saying Culpepper is a bad QB. But I don't see any reason to put him by himself in some sort of magical, I don't need great receivers to be the #1 fantasy QB tier, either.

Well, I have seen a number of comments, not necessarily from yourself, comparing him to Bouman, Frerotte, etc., and then stating that basically anyone would be successful throwing to Moss. All this implies that Collins will have a monster year next year. This is a conclusion that I just plain don't buy. I think Collins will be better, but will still have a very hard time coming close to Culpepper's year last year with a healthy Moss for only 6 games.

 

[Muahahaha]

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

An NFL team's QB2 stepping in and running the same offense with the same personnel (including Randy Moss) against a poor defense, IMO, has a greater chance of success than a team having to completely rebrand its game plan to refocus away from its primary weapon (Moss) in a limited time span.The other issue, is you (and others) have made a distinction of looking at ONLY the numbers when Moss was COMPLETELY out of the lineup when he was hobbled, not used much if at all, or generally no longer a fixture in the offense in several other games.

And opposing defenses could quickly tell that Moss was not going to do much when he was in the lineup while he was hurt, often giving him single coverage and focusing on other receivers. From the couple of Vikings games that I saw, Moss was not on the field much (even though he was "playing"), and when he was on the field he was a liability. On many plays, it became 11 defenders vs 10 offensive players and Moss standing on the outside but barely even running.

Many opposing teams were shifting coverage AWAY from Moss after his return.

 

[bostonfred]

These guys think anybody would have had Culpepper's year given Moss and the Vikings schedule. 

I'm going to have to ask you for a link on that one. Nobody's saying Culpepper is a bad QB. But I don't see any reason to put him by himself in some sort of magical, I don't need great receivers to be the #1 fantasy QB tier, either.

Well, I have seen a number of comments, not necessarily from yourself, comparing him to Bouman, Frerotte, etc., and then stating that basically anyone would be successful throwing to Moss. All this implies that Collins will have a monster year next year. This is a conclusion that I just plain don't buy. I think Collins will be better, but will still have a very hard time coming close to Culpepper's year last year with a healthy Moss for only 6 games.

I haven't seen anyone say that Collins will put up the same numbers Moss did last year. I think a lot of people are saying that Collins will put up Randall Cunningham or Jeff George numbers with Moss.

 

[bostonfred]

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example.  Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP.  This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. 

Why is 28 TDs the floor for Culpepper? Culpepper has only passed for 28 TDs twice in his career, and his career average is 26 TDs per season WITH MOSS. Now, granted he was injured for seven of the 80 games, so his prorated career average WITH MOSS is almost 27 TDs per season. But I don't understand why you see 28 as his floor. Let me ask a different question: You project Manning to drop off by 14 TDs when the only receiver he lost was Marcus Pollard (Link). Why is the absolute floor for Culpepper an 11 TD dropoff when he lost Randy Moss?

I want to bump this question, because it's a big part of why I think Culpepper could drop by more than some arbitrary number like 15 percent.

 

[jwvdcw]

The part that confuses me about people that have annointed Moss as the uber football player that "makes" other players is this.

Every QB he has ever played with has been a top 3 FF QB. The Vikes went from ranked 16th in passing to 2nd in just Moss' rookie year. Just by watching him, you can see that he has skills that no WR has ever possessed. Those same QBs that have been top 3 with him have often times struggled without him.I think that the onus(sp?) is on you to prove that Moss isn't the uber football player that makes other players that because all evidence that I see points towards otherwise.

 

[jwvdcw]

jwvdcw,

First let me say that there are really just two points about Culpepper to be considered.

a) What will he score for Fantasy Points in 2005?

b) Where can he be obtained in any draft with value [How much will he cost in an auction]?

With regards to b), it is clear that one has to assess the associated risk(s) and scoring projections with respect to each of the other potential scorers.  Watching the draft unfold and seeing each player selected surely provides an indication of where your league-mates are valuing certian players.  IMHO, no QB warrants a 1st round pick from a value perspective.  I would even stretch that through to the 2nd round [depending upon the number of teams in the league].  If one of your league-mates takes a QB in either of these two rounds, then he/ she is likely to be paying too high a price!

Now with regards to a).  You are spinning the mathematics to slant your argument, and you are not clearly representing the performance of any QB.  You are also not considering the entire contribution of scoring that a QB has, or the relevance of the merit associated with the short-term performances of the Minnesota backups.

To be fair, let's review all QB performances since 1960 ...

We will review only those QB's who score 20.0 ppg or higher; there were 103 individual instances of this achievement.  Now let's parse it down by only reviewing those QB's who show a repeated capability to perform at this level [minimum of 3 instances].  There were 16 different QB's who accumulated 65 individual instances of this success.

This is the list of QB's

Culpepper [5 times]

Cunningham [5 times]

Favre [6 times]

Fouts [4 times]

Gannon [3 times]

Garcia [3 times]

Lamonica [3 times]

Manning [5 times]

Marino [4 times]

McNabb [3 times]

McNair [3 times]

Montana [6 times]

Moon [3 times]

Unitas [3 times]

Warner [3 times]

Young [6 times]

Now, these performances are combination of both passing and rushing and this should not be ignored as it is the collective effort which merits our projections and success during the season.  We are going to therefore consider the total fantasy points scored [rushing and passing] divided by the total number of touches [rushing and passing].

The collective average of fantasy points per touch for these 65 instances is 0.62.

27 of the 65 instances were .62 or higher; 38 instances were lower.

Culpepper has 3 of his 5 instances above the average!

Further he and Steve Young are the only ones with career averages above the group average [Young is at 0.65].  NO ONE ELSE IS ABOVE 0.60!

Of the various Minnesota backups ...

Brister is hardly worth mentioning with his spot duty.  However, it is interesting that Bubby had over 20 ffp/game and a ffp/touch of 0.68 in 1998 with Denver.

He also had a reasonable year with a ffp/touch of 0.50 in 1990 with Pittsburgh.

He certainly should have been able to take better advantage of Moss; at least better than his horrible 0.20 ffp/touch.  Especially considering that his career average for ffp/touch is 0.44 ...

Frerotte and Bouman certainly performed admirably and they benefited by Moss and the various other supporting cast.

Frerotte benefited from a RBBC which created ~2,700 yards and 14 TD's, and an REBC for the tune of ~1,500 yards and 10 TD's.

Bouman still had the fabled 3 WR's plus a Top 10 TE who generated better than 1,900 yards and 10 TD's

Frerotte had a ffp/touch of 0.78 and Bouman had a ffp/touch of 0.74. However, each have what amounts to 3 game stints.  Neither is a reasonable data source for true comparisons ... 

Frerotte had a speckled past but he did do admirably in Washington [1995, 1996, 1997] with a Top 11 finish, and in Denver [2001] with a ffp/touch of 0.57.  Frerotte's career ffp/touch is 0.46.

Bouman has had no other attempts to speak of since leaving Minnesota and speculating his performance is pretty futile.  Bouman's career ffp/touch is 0.70 ...

Except for the fact that Wynn had more attempts than Todd in 2001 and his ffp/touch was a dismal 0.23!  With the same cast of players.  Wynn has a career ffp/touch of 0.20.

In conclusion ...

Culpepper is among the games elite QB's.  There is no way around it; he has executed and performed at a high level.

Randy Moss clearly assisted in this performance, and his presence will be missed in 2005.  The other supporting cast will offset this in part.

Some other Minnesota QB's performed admirably for short durations, and have not repeated their performances.

Culpepper may loss as much as 25% from 2005, but he will once again finish as a premier QB in the league.  He will score a minimum of 386 points!

I've been through this many times with you. Here is one of my posts in another thread, which I believe addresses what you are doing hereerson who started this thread: "Culpepper has great stats with Moss. He could lose a lot and still be to 5."

Me: "I'll fully admit that Culpepper had great stats with Moss. However, I believe that many QBs have had great success with Moss and they havn't done that well without him. Furthermore, I can show that Culpepper has not played any better with Moss than these other QBs. Therefore, I predict that he'll fall off as well without him."

You: "Yeah, but Culpepper has great stats with Moss."

Me: "I already said that I fully admitted that Culpepper had great stats with Moss. Please address my points."

You: "Ok fine. Your main point was that every other Vikings QB who did great with Moss didn't do well without Moss. I disagree- look at these stats."

Me: "Huh? Your stats show exactly what I'm talking about! Only 5 of their 52 seasons did they put up top 5 numbers and 4 of those were due to Cunningham's legs, which he didn't have when he played with Moss!"

You: "Yeah, but Culpepper had great stats with Moss. Look at how he compares to the all time greats."

Me: " "

Edited to add link: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...culpepper&st=70

And also to add one of BF's posts that show you just how much Moss mattered...Remember that Culpepper was on pace through 5 weeks(when Moss was healthy) to be the #1 FF QB of all time last year. BF's post details what happened once Moss got hurt:

Did you look at his games without Moss?

In his first game without Moss, Culpepper threw for 183 yards and one TD while rushing for 4 yards. I know you said "regardless of who the Vikes play", but this was against Tennessee, a "Great Matchup". I didn't do the math, but it looks like he was just shy of the 20 point mark in that game. Still it was his first without Moss, so we'll give him a mulligan.

He bounced back the next week with 231 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs against the Giants. Even with his 32 rushing yards, that was a little south of the 20 points you said he was a lock for.

But don't worry, he had a great matchup the following week against Indianapolis. Sure, he didn't have Moss, but he put up a whopping 169 yards and a TD. His 27 rushing yards brought him into the double digits range, though, so it wasn't a complete waste.

He blew up against Green Bay, but he barely broke the 20 point mark against Detroit the following week.

He then bounced back and averaged almost 300 yards and more than 2 TDs a game the rest of the way once Moss came back. It's a small sample size, but his rush yards even went back up, and he scored his only rush TDs of the season while Moss was playing.

I'm absolutely amazed that people assume Culpepper's just going to overcome the loss of a player of Moss' caliber and continue to be a 320+ point QB, when the only evidence we have of Culpepper without Moss points to him struggling against the worst pass defenses in the league.

 

[jwvdcw]

In conclusion ...

Culpepper is among the games elite QB's when he has Randy Moss. There is no way around it; he has executed and performed at a high level with Randy Moss but has been a very average FF starter in the small sample of games without Moss

edited for accuracy.

 

[jwvdcw]

Seriously, Dancing Bear...please please please do not make another point about how good Pepper was when he had Moss. Go take a look at the link that I gave you. You and I went back and forth with you continuing to do that and me continuing to tell you that I understand he was great with Moss but because every QB was great with Moss that doesn't really matter.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

If one of your league-mates takes a QB in either of these two rounds, then he/ she is likely to be paying too high a price!

Culpepper has 3 of his 5 instances above the average!

Further he and Steve Young are the only ones with career averages above the group average [Young is at 0.65]. NO ONE ELSE IS ABOVE 0.60!

Except for the fact that Wynn had more attempts than Todd in 2001 and his ffp/touch was a dismal 0.23!

He will score a minimum of 386 points!

Hey Bear,Wondering why you only ended 5 sentences in your post with ! marks, usually you use them at a much higher clip. Most posts i've seen you end at least every other sentence with the !.

Curious why you were so reluctant to use the exclamation point this time around.

 

[jwvdcw]

Using FBG scoring and assuming standard (start 1QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 Def) 12 team leagues, if Culpepper in 2005 has a 23.5% reduction in FP from his 2004 numbers, his production would be identical to McNabb's in 2004 of just over 350 FP.  Assuming all the other players in the league had the same stats, there would still be only 18 players that would have a higher X value than Culpepper in '05.  Last year that group would have been represented by 1 QB, 7 RBs, 8 WRs, and 2 TEs.  Now, I'm not saying he should necessarily be the 19th player off the board because of DVBD concerns.  But, Culpepper can take a major hit and still be a decent value toward the end of the second round. 

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example.  Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP.  This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason.  This would be a reduction of over 100 FP from 2004 and more than a 31% decline.  His X value will have dropped from 166 in 2004 to 61 in 2005.  Still, there would only be 2 QBs, 8 RBs, 11 WRs, and 3 TEs with higher X values.  Unless you see Culpepper sliding 40% or more, he'll still be major value in the early 3rd round in standard scoring leagues.

Well said Rads.Does anyone realize that all the "Moss is the reason Cpep is good charter members" really helped to subsatntiate that fact Cpep is better than some of us thought? I mean think about it. Cpep losses his best weapon week 6 and for a few games and has to go on without the benfit of being able to prepare or replace Moss. All the while MRob is banged up, Bennett is pretty much useless and Klien is IR's. And yet he still put up what amounts to QB2 numbers.

Before this thread it hadn't dawned on me that he was that good. I appreciate all the Moss charter members showing me the light. Absolutely amazing.

While some of that sarcasm I really am impressed with the depth of anaysis on this board. Collectively, we turned Cpep inside out and upside down looking at every possible perspective of his talen and performance. Cpep is pretty good!

As someone has already pointed out, he was the 9th best FF QB without Moss, while still in an offense that was pretty wide open due to their poor defense.That impresses you? I could name a ton of QBs who have lost their best WR for a stretch and still put up Qb#9 FF stats or better.

 

[jwvdcw]

If it's so easy to blow up against a weak schedule, why didn't Culpepper do better against Tennessee, Detroit and Indy while Moss was out?

An NFL team's QB2 stepping in and running the same offense with the same personnel (including Randy Moss) against a poor defense, IMO, has a greater chance of success than a team having to completely rebrand its game plan to refocus away from its primary weapon (Moss) in a limited time span.The other issue, is you (and others) have made a distinction of looking at ONLY the numbers when Moss was COMPLETELY out of the lineup when he was hobbled, not used much if at all, or generally no longer a fixture in the offense in several other games.

And opposing defenses could quickly tell that Moss was not going to do much when he was in the lineup while he was hurt, often giving him single coverage and focusing on other receivers. From the couple of Vikings games that I saw, Moss was not on the field much (even though he was "playing"), and when he was on the field he was a liability. On many plays, it became 11 defenders vs 10 offensive players and Moss standing on the outside but barely even running.

Since you just asked a few posts up why I think Moss is that uber football player that makes everyone so great, I'll use your own post as an example:The Vikings with Moss at about 60% at best and the opposing team knowing that were still tons better than without him.

Look, I understand Moss is a punk, but he imo is on the short list(maybe 5 players in the history of the NFL) that COMPLETELY change the complexion of every game in which they play. And just in case you're curious, no Jerry Rice is not on that list.

Please note that I'm not saying Moss is a better WR than Rice here, just that he changes team's gameplans more and can succeed without a good QB easier.

 

[David Yudkin]

Every QB he has ever played with has been a top 3 FF QB. The Vikes went from ranked 16th in passing to 2nd in just Moss' rookie year. Just by watching him, you can see that he has skills that no WR has ever possessed. Those same QBs that have been top 3 with him have often times struggled without him.I think that the onus(sp?) is on you to prove that Moss isn't the uber football player that makes other players that because all evidence that I see points towards otherwise.

There are so many misleading comments inhere, I don't know where to begin.

The Vikes went from ranked 16th in passing to 2nd in just Moss' rookie year.

This is true, but the Vikings ranked in the Top 10 the 3 years before ranking 16th with a high of #2 in passing yards.

Every QB he has ever played with has been a top 3 FF QB.

As I pointed out already in this thread, the replacements that filled in had a handful of solid games aginst Bottom 5 or Bottom 10 defenses. That, IMO, is the reason they did as well as they did.Similarly, Cunningham had 5 Top 3 seasons before ever setting foot in Minnesota. Jay Fiedler had a Top 10 season after leaving Minnesota, Brad Johnson had Top 5 and Top 10 seasons after leaving town, and Jeff George had 3 Top 10 seasons before coming to the Vikings with a high as the #3 fantasy QB.I guess I missed the seasons where Bubby Brister, Todd Bouman, Spergon Wynn, and Gus Frerotte had Top 3 fantasy seasons over an entire season.

I think that the onus(sp?) is on you to prove that Moss isn't the uber football player that makes other players that because all evidence that I see points towards otherwise.

As I outlined earlier, how do you explain then that the Vikings and Culpepper had statistically their best season when Moss had his worst? His total yardage was a fraction of what it has been on a regular basis, he missed a substantial amount of time, and by all accounts was hobbled or M.I.A. for more than half the season.How were the Vikings able to have their first #1 passing yard ranking in a season when Moss was a fraction of his uber self?How did Moss being on the sideline or limping through plays play a role in the RB corps getting almost 1,100 receiving yards? How will a tandem of Wiggins and Kleinsasser do without Moss there this year? Will these players all do worse without Moss?As I already outlined, even with ZERO production from Moss last year, Culpepper had enough fantasy points to rank as the #4 QB in 2004.Will the 2005 Vikings offense be better than the 2004 version? No. Will the 2005 Raiders offense be better than the 2004 Raiders offense. Yes.But the Vikings start the season having had a 735 yard advantage in passing yards, 15 TD advantage in passing TD, 1463 yard advantage in total offense, and 85 point advantage in total points scored.

 

[bostonfred]

As I outlined earlier, how do you explain then that the Vikings and Culpepper had statistically their best season when Moss had his worst? His total yardage was a fraction of what it has been on a regular basis, he missed a substantial amount of time, and by all accounts was hobbled or M.I.A. for more than half the season.

How were the Vikings able to have their first #1 passing yard ranking in a season when Moss was a fraction of his uber self?

How did Moss being on the sideline or limping through plays play a role in the RB corps getting almost 1,100 receiving yards? How will a tandem of Wiggins and Kleinsasser do without Moss there this year? Will these players all do worse without Moss?

As I already outlined, even with ZERO production from Moss last year, Culpepper had enough fantasy points to rank as the #4 QB in 2004.

OK, we can agree that it wasn't just Moss. There's a lot of things that have changed in Minnesota, most for the worse when it comes to Culpepper's numbers. The loss of Moss is a doozy, but not the only thing. Let me ask you the same basic question I asked radballs: What do you project Peyton Manning to do this year for stats? Radballs projected Manning to drop off further in TDs than Culpepper, and I think that's inconsistent given the loss of Moss.

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example. Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP. This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason.

Why is 28 TDs the floor for Culpepper? Culpepper has only passed for 28 TDs twice in his career, and his career average is 26 TDs per season WITH MOSS. Now, granted he was injured for seven of the 80 games, so his prorated career average WITH MOSS is almost 27 TDs per season. But I don't understand why you see 28 as his floor. Let me ask a different question: You project Manning to drop off by 14 TDs when the only receiver he lost was Marcus Pollard (Link). Why is the absolute floor for Culpepper an 11 TD dropoff when he lost Randy Moss?

 

[Dancing Bear]

jwvdcw,You have 3 sample sizes of 3 games which you are using to nail Culpepper's coffin. IMHO there simply is not enough evidence to draw the conclusions that you are drawing. There is way too much evidence to state what I and others have repeatedly try to express to you.Let's take a different tact shall we ...Randy Moss is the #1 WR in NFL history. Jerry Rice is the #2 WR in NFL history.Joe Montana is a good QB [would you agree?]. He had 3-Top 5 finishes and 1 additional Top 10 finish prior to Rice arriving in San Francisco. He has his best season ever in 1982 with 327 points, and he consistently made both Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon look good.Rice arrives in San Francisco and what happens?Montana continues to perform at basically his previous level ... With no discernible change in his performance! He has 6 straight years in the Top 10; 4 in the Top 5 and 2 in the Top 10. Wonder why? There is no denying that he too was a good QB!He finished first as QB only once [Rice's first year]; with 310 fantasy points. Where Clark finished WR #16, and Rice finished WR #22.Explain to me why Joe Montana did not automatically jump into the 400-point range when Rice joined him and stay there? Rice is clearly to superior to both Clark and Solomon. If one WR can have so much impact on a QB as you are inferring for Culpepper-Moss, then surely Rice would have too. I do not believe that one WR can impact a team that much. Montana's history clearly verifies my thesis.I am not about to go through each NFL QB to try and sway you ...but using a much broader sample size 10 years of one of the best QB-WR comparisons, I can clearly show that Culpepper will continue at or near his previous levels.The fact is that Culpepper's worst effort is better than Montana's best effort! He will miss Moss, but no way does he go below 20 ppg!

 

[David Yudkin]

OK, we can agree that it wasn't just Moss. There's a lot of things that have changed in Minnesota, most for the worse when it comes to Culpepper's numbers. The loss of Moss is a doozy, but not the only thing. Let me ask you the same basic question I asked radballs: What do you project Peyton Manning to do this year for stats? Radballs projected Manning to drop off further in TDs than Culpepper, and I think that's inconsistent given the loss of Moss.

What's funny is that I suspect that we might be in the same ball park when it comes to projections, yet differ on how we arrive at them.I have intentionally NOT added a projection in this thread for Culpepper, as the chances are pretty good that I will have to WRITE the Player Spotlight for Culpepper. So rather than throw out some numbers and then potentially want to change them later, I would rather just wait.But in terms of the question, I suspect that Culpepper will lose his fair share of TD this year (as will Manning), but again for different reasons than are being debated here.I would probably think that even with the loss of Moss, the difference between the two might be closer this year than last year based mostly on the insane amount of TD Manning had last year.As for value and when to take either of these QB, I suspect that they will not lap the QB field be as much as they did last year, and those looking to take Manning two rounds earlier than last year are looking for trouble. I doubt that there are folks that would take Culpepper EARLIER than they did in prior years given that Moss has gone, and I have yet to decipher at what point does Culpepper potentially represent value given what would be a lot riskier of an investment this year.I gnerally avoid taking QB inthe first two rounds, and I suspect that that's where both of these guys will go. As I mentioned in another thread, I would rather target guys that I think can be Top 5 QB and draft them 4-6 rounds later than having to pony up a first or second round pick and suffer at another position.

 

[radballs.]

As I outlined earlier, how do you explain then that the Vikings and Culpepper had statistically their best season when Moss had his worst?  His total yardage was a fraction of what it has been on a regular basis, he missed a substantial amount of time, and by all accounts was hobbled or M.I.A. for more than half the season.

How were the Vikings able to have their first #1 passing yard ranking in a season when Moss was a fraction of his uber self?

How did Moss being on the sideline or limping through plays play a role in the RB corps getting almost 1,100 receiving yards?  How will a tandem of Wiggins and Kleinsasser do without Moss there this year?  Will these players all do worse without Moss?

As I already outlined, even with ZERO production from Moss last year, Culpepper had enough fantasy points to rank as the #4 QB in 2004.

OK, we can agree that it wasn't just Moss. There's a lot of things that have changed in Minnesota, most for the worse when it comes to Culpepper's numbers. The loss of Moss is a doozy, but not the only thing. Let me ask you the same basic question I asked radballs: What do you project Peyton Manning to do this year for stats? Radballs projected Manning to drop off further in TDs than Culpepper, and I think that's inconsistent given the loss of Moss.

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example.  Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP.  This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. 

Why is 28 TDs the floor for Culpepper? Culpepper has only passed for 28 TDs twice in his career, and his career average is 26 TDs per season WITH MOSS. Now, granted he was injured for seven of the 80 games, so his prorated career average WITH MOSS is almost 27 TDs per season. But I don't understand why you see 28 as his floor. Let me ask a different question: You project Manning to drop off by 14 TDs when the only receiver he lost was Marcus Pollard (Link). Why is the absolute floor for Culpepper an 11 TD dropoff when he lost Randy Moss?

I'll get back to you in a few minutes Fred with my reasoning. Sorry for the holdup. I was working my blog shift. Slow news day.

 

[bostonfred]

Take your time. I'm headed out to the U2 concert right now. I'll check back tomorrow.

 

[reg]

Love all the predictions in here guys. :thumbsup:

 

[radballs.]

As I outlined earlier, how do you explain then that the Vikings and Culpepper had statistically their best season when Moss had his worst?  His total yardage was a fraction of what it has been on a regular basis, he missed a substantial amount of time, and by all accounts was hobbled or M.I.A. for more than half the season.

How were the Vikings able to have their first #1 passing yard ranking in a season when Moss was a fraction of his uber self?

How did Moss being on the sideline or limping through plays play a role in the RB corps getting almost 1,100 receiving yards?  How will a tandem of Wiggins and Kleinsasser do without Moss there this year?  Will these players all do worse without Moss?

As I already outlined, even with ZERO production from Moss last year, Culpepper had enough fantasy points to rank as the #4 QB in 2004.

OK, we can agree that it wasn't just Moss. There's a lot of things that have changed in Minnesota, most for the worse when it comes to Culpepper's numbers. The loss of Moss is a doozy, but not the only thing. Let me ask you the same basic question I asked radballs: What do you project Peyton Manning to do this year for stats? Radballs projected Manning to drop off further in TDs than Culpepper, and I think that's inconsistent given the loss of Moss.

Now, let's say you are really down on Culpepper and you think it will be even worse than the above example.  Let's say you project Culpepper with 3,600 passing yards, 28 passing TDs, 19 Ints, 445 rushing yards, and 2 rushing TDs for a total of 330 FP.  This is about the lowest floor in 2005 that I could see for Culpepper within reason. 

Why is 28 TDs the floor for Culpepper? Culpepper has only passed for 28 TDs twice in his career, and his career average is 26 TDs per season WITH MOSS. Now, granted he was injured for seven of the 80 games, so his prorated career average WITH MOSS is almost 27 TDs per season. But I don't understand why you see 28 as his floor. Let me ask a different question: You project Manning to drop off by 14 TDs when the only receiver he lost was Marcus Pollard (Link). Why is the absolute floor for Culpepper an 11 TD dropoff when he lost Randy Moss?

I'll get back to you in a few minutes Fred with my reasoning. Sorry for the holdup. I was working my blog shift. Slow news day.

One of the biggest reasons that I have Manning’s projections dropping so much more than Culpepper’s is because Manning’s season was much higher than his historical average relative to Culpepper’s. I believe that players generally revert back somewhat to their historical averages. The reasons for this can vary and you can either agree or disagree with that. Maybe my approach is too statistical in nature and not qualitative enough. Culpepper’s situation has changed with the loss of Moss. Manning’s targets haven’t changed much. Still, it will be harder for Manning to duplicate the kind of season that he had last year than it will be for Culpepper because Manning does not get many FP from his legs and I doubt he can have everything come together as well as it did for him last year. Culpepper also did not have Moss healthy for quite a few games as well. His performance was not great without Moss playing but it was a very small sample size, and it is more difficult to adjust to the loss of a key player midway through a season than to be able to plan ahead for it like he’ll be able to do this year. Prior to the 2004 season, Culpepper’s annualized FP averaged 376 and Manning’s averaged 319. In 2004, Culpepper had 433 and Manning had 417. I realize that I’m probably in the minority for having Culpepper projected for more FP in 2005 than Manning. My current projections will probably change a bit as we see things play out in training camp, but for the most part I believe their respective performances will be close. My projections for Culpepper have his FP coming in at 383 which is 1.9% more than his historical average prior to 2004. My projections for Manning have his FP coming in at 346 which is 8.4% higher than his historical average prior to 2004. As you can see, I have discounted Culpepper’s projections for 2005 more from his average than I have from Manning’s. I don’t see a contradiction here. I think both QBs will have a hard time repeating what they did last year. You might disagree with me and say it doesn’t make any sense to have Manning’s FP coming in 17.2% less than he had in ’04 while Culpepper’s is only 11.6% less. But, I believe that my projections for Culpepper’s rushing yardage and TDs are very conservative (projecting only 2 rushing TDs when he averaged over 7 in his previous seasons and almost 90 rushing yards less than his average). There’s some room for upside there. There’s no doubt that Culpepper is a riskier play because of the fact that he runs so much and he has not remained as healthy as iron man Manning. My gut tells me though that Manning had the PERFECT season last year (for him) and Culpepper had room for improvement. Still, Culpepper had 3.8% more FP than Manning during his record breaking year in ’04.

Have a great time at the concert. That should be a great one.

 

[jwvdcw]

I guess I missed the seasons where Bubby Brister, Todd Bouman, Spergon Wynn, and Gus Frerotte had Top 3 fantasy seasons over an entire season.

I guess I missed the part where I ever said anything about an entire season.

 

[jwvdcw]

jwvdcw,

You have 3 sample sizes of 3 games which you are using to nail Culpepper's coffin. IMHO there simply is not enough evidence to draw the conclusions that you are drawing. There is way too much evidence to state what I and others have repeatedly try to express to you.

Let's take a different tact shall we ...

Randy Moss is the #1 WR in NFL history. Jerry Rice is the #2 WR in NFL history.

Joe Montana is a good QB [would you agree?]. He had 3-Top 5 finishes and 1 additional Top 10 finish prior to Rice arriving in San Francisco. He has his best season ever in 1982 with 327 points, and he consistently made both Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon look good.

Rice arrives in San Francisco and what happens?

Montana continues to perform at basically his previous level ... With no discernible change in his performance! He has 6 straight years in the Top 10; 4 in the Top 5 and 2 in the Top 10. Wonder why? There is no denying that he too was a good QB!

He finished first as QB only once [Rice's first year]; with 310 fantasy points. Where Clark finished WR #16, and Rice finished WR #22.

Explain to me why Joe Montana did not automatically jump into the 400-point range when Rice joined him and stay there? Rice is clearly to superior to both Clark and Solomon. If one WR can have so much impact on a QB as you are inferring for Culpepper-Moss, then surely Rice would have too. I do not believe that one WR can impact a team that much. Montana's history clearly verifies my thesis.

I am not about to go through each NFL QB to try and sway you ...

but using a much broader sample size 10 years of one of the best QB-WR comparisons, I can clearly show that Culpepper will continue at or near his previous levels.

The fact is that Culpepper's worst effort is better than Montana's best effort! He will miss Moss, but no way does he go below 20 ppg!

Because Montana is a Brady-like QB who puts winning far above stats and manages a game well. QBs like them too often lead long time consuming drives which rest their defense. While this hurts their FF stats, it helps their teams win games.

 

[jwvdcw]

Every QB he has ever played with has been a top 3 FF QB. The Vikes went from ranked 16th in passing to 2nd in just Moss' rookie year. Just by watching him, you can see that he has skills that no WR has ever possessed. Those same QBs that have been top 3 with him have often times struggled without him.

I think that the onus(sp?) is on you to prove that Moss isn't the uber football player that makes other players that because all evidence that I see points towards otherwise.

There are so many misleading comments inhere, I don't know where to begin.

The Vikes went from ranked 16th in passing to 2nd in just Moss' rookie year.

This is true, but the Vikings ranked in the Top 10 the 3 years before ranking 16th with a high of #2 in passing yards.

Every QB he has ever played with has been a top 3 FF QB.

As I pointed out already in this thread, the replacements that filled in had a handful of solid games aginst Bottom 5 or Bottom 10 defenses. That, IMO, is the reason they did as well as they did.Similarly, Cunningham had 5 Top 3 seasons before ever setting foot in Minnesota. Jay Fiedler had a Top 10 season after leaving Minnesota, Brad Johnson had Top 5 and Top 10 seasons after leaving town, and Jeff George had 3 Top 10 seasons before coming to the Vikings with a high as the #3 fantasy QB.

I guess I missed the seasons where Bubby Brister, Todd Bouman, Spergon Wynn, and Gus Frerotte had Top 3 fantasy seasons over an entire season.

I think that the onus(sp?) is on you to prove that Moss isn't the uber football player that makes other players that because all evidence that I see points towards otherwise.

As I outlined earlier, how do you explain then that the Vikings and Culpepper had statistically their best season when Moss had his worst? His total yardage was a fraction of what it has been on a regular basis, he missed a substantial amount of time, and by all accounts was hobbled or M.I.A. for more than half the season.How were the Vikings able to have their first #1 passing yard ranking in a season when Moss was a fraction of his uber self?

How did Moss being on the sideline or limping through plays play a role in the RB corps getting almost 1,100 receiving yards? How will a tandem of Wiggins and Kleinsasser do without Moss there this year? Will these players all do worse without Moss?

As I already outlined, even with ZERO production from Moss last year, Culpepper had enough fantasy points to rank as the #4 QB in 2004.

Will the 2005 Vikings offense be better than the 2004 version? No. Will the 2005 Raiders offense be better than the 2004 Raiders offense. Yes.

But the Vikings start the season having had a 735 yard advantage in passing yards, 15 TD advantage in passing TD, 1463 yard advantage in total offense, and 85 point advantage in total points scored.

I'm not presenting any misleading info whatsoever....every QB that Moss has ever played with has been a FF force except for one long exception: 3rd stringer Spurgeon Wynn. You can twist the stats any way you want, but you can't change that. Therefore, I expect Collins to be a FF force and I don't give Culpepper that much credit without Moss.

 

[Chaka]

Wow this whole thread is like deja vu all over again.Let it go jw... obviously you are not convincing anyone and no one is convincing you.And because I want to contribute to the thread I see Daunte finishing with ~3,700 yards, 27 passing TDs, 15 INTs with 450 and 5 on the ground.

 

[jurb26]

Well, sorry I have nothing to add but my projections guys. I have successfully debated myself sick on this topic. :X 305 comp, 490 att, 3920 yds, 29 TDs, 15 INTs, 95 carries, 475 yds, 2 TDs

 

[-OZ-]

I'm not presenting any misleading info whatsoever....every QB that Moss has ever played with has been a FF force except for one long exception: 3rd stringer Spurgeon Wynn. You can twist the stats any way you want, but you can't change that. Therefore, I expect Collins to be a FF force and I don't give Culpepper that much credit without Moss.

Well, you're half right. Collins should do well with Moss, Porter, and Curry.Culpepper will still be a top 4 QB.

300-320 comp, 460-480 att, 3800-4200 yds, 28-32 TDs, 13-17 INTs, 80-100 carries, 400-500 yds, 2-5 TDs