QB and WR combos (1 Viewer)

[whitewizard]

here is my question, do you think it is wise or gives a better production to your team to get a QB and his best receiver on your team?

there are always the guys that are great like marvin and manning and they are just the best at their position and if you could you would take them in a heatbeat. this year though the top receivers do not neccessarily have eilte QBs. so it is very easy to get that combo going. Really this year the 2 best QBs (brees and brady) can have their best receiver (colston and moss) with them if you go for it especially in middle to late picks. trent can be paired with owens and so forth.

do you like to do this? is it a good idea? what are your opinions on this strategy?

i like to do it especially if i get someone like owens, trent is a good backup to wait for. it can add good production, and it could provide for an interesting bonus if teams want to add a real NFL bonus type of thing. you always want to get the best player for the roster but do you factor in getting your QB and WR comboed at all?

just an interesting thought.

 

[-jb-]

It's good if you are in a league that gives out weekly payouts. If Warner and Fitz hook up three times, you're winning money. I am in three such leagues, so the "connection" is quite popular. Of course, in contrast, it can hurt you in terms of W/L since they could also get none.

If there's money on the line for weekly payouts, then do it. If not, stay away.

 

[greggorymac]

It's good if you are in a league that gives out weekly payouts. If Warner and Fitz hook up three times, you're winning money. I am in three such leagues, so the "connection" is quite popular. Of course, in contrast, it can hurt you in terms of W/L since they could also get none.If there's money on the line for weekly payouts, then do it. If not, stay away.

Jennings/Rogers also comes to mind.

 

[-jb-]

It's good if you are in a league that gives out weekly payouts. If Warner and Fitz hook up three times, you're winning money. I am in three such leagues, so the "connection" is quite popular. Of course, in contrast, it can hurt you in terms of W/L since they could also get none.If there's money on the line for weekly payouts, then do it. If not, stay away.

Jennings/Rogers also comes to mind.

Or Brady/Moss...or Manning/Wayne...but I think the sneaky connection this year is McNabb/Jackson

 

[Ray_T]

It's good if you are in a league that gives out weekly payouts. If Warner and Fitz hook up three times, you're winning money. I am in three such leagues, so the "connection" is quite popular. Of course, in contrast, it can hurt you in terms of W/L since they could also get none.If there's money on the line for weekly payouts, then do it. If not, stay away.

Jennings/Rogers also comes to mind.

Or Brady/Moss...or Manning/Wayne...but I think the sneaky connection this year is McNabb/Jackson

yeah, but the crappy thing about this is what happens if the QB gets hurt.look at Brady/Moss. Moss put up fair numbers without brady, but the end result is that by losing the QB you also lose at WR too. I paid the price with McNabb/Owens some years back and the injury to McNabb basically led to the Owens Meltdown & suspension shortly thereafter. We could speculate that Owens was headed that direction anyhow, but the bottom line is his frustration with the situation certainly caused the meltdown sooner than it otherwise would have happened. either way, your WR's numbers can be poor if the WR is having a bad season or if the QB is having a bad season or gets hurt.Like was mentioned earlier, it's not normally a wise idea unless you get weekly money. Why? A good week by both QB and WR likely put you in the money. and one usually goes hand in hand with the other.

 

[Eminence]

I only do this strategy because I hate when I'm facing someone, and their starting QB throws to my starting receiver.

Oh sweet! Larry went for 100 Yards and 2 TDS!

Oh no! My opponent has Kurt Warner!

:(

 

[iSnitch]

Manning/Wayne = good.

Pennington/Ginn = bad.

Schaub/AJ = good.

Garrard/Holt = bad.

Rodgers/Jennings = good.

Culpepper/Calvin = bad.

And so on and so forth.

 

[brakeyawself]

Palmer/Ocho - Good.....

 

[prgromek]

I like WR/TE combos more than QB/WR combos, although I wouldn't neccessarily stay away from QB/WR if the value is right.

If you're in a head-to-head league, pairing an elite WR with a top TE on a good passing offense can give you more weekly consistency in your scoring totals, sort of likes hedging your bets.

R Wayne/D Clark

A Johnson/ O Daniels

R Williams/J Witten

R White/T Gonzalez

Jackson/A Gates

 

[Art_VanDalay]

Manning/Wayne = good. Pennington/Ginn = bad. Schaub/AJ = good. Garrard/Holt = bad. Rodgers/Jennings = good. Culpepper/Calvin = bad. And so on and so forth.

Ryan/White = Good

 

[tytyty]

I like WR/TE combos more than QB/WR combos, although I wouldn't neccessarily stay away from QB/WR if the value is right.If you're in a head-to-head league, pairing an elite WR with a top TE on a good passing offense can give you more weekly consistency in your scoring totals, sort of likes hedging your bets. R Wayne/D ClarkA Johnson/ O DanielsR Williams/J WittenR White/T GonzalezJackson/A Gates

Very good call here

 

[whitewizard]

i definately see how a weekly payout or gross scoring league how this strategy is very useful, and i appreciate it.

the question iwas trying to get at more was does the down side of having the combo when they do not hook up as well, outweigh the positive when it works.

a couple people touched on it when they talked about trying to balance out an opposing players QB or WR. which is why i like to do it especially if it is a bit of a toos up. if i know i can get the QB to my big WR or the choice is say between colston and roddy white and i have brees it helps in the decision process and gives another check for colston.

that is a good idea about the TE/WR combos but i generally try and stay away from things like that because the odds of having enough success in a passing game for it to be very affective is slim. still though the option is out there.

 

[iSnitch]

Last year in the championship I had Brees and my opponent had Colston...in what was a very close game, that turned out to be the difference.

I've generally been a fan of grabbing elite wr's if I have the qb just to prevent situations like that.

 

[-jb-]

the question iwas trying to get at more was does the down side of having the combo when they do not hook up as well, outweigh the positive when it works.

to answer your question specifically, i would say yes, the downside does outweigh the upside when it comes to wins and losses. that's just an opinion, though.

 

[ATC1]

I like WR/TE combos more than QB/WR combos, although I wouldn't neccessarily stay away from QB/WR if the value is right.If you're in a head-to-head league, pairing an elite WR with a top TE on a good passing offense can give you more weekly consistency in your scoring totals, sort of likes hedging your bets. R Wayne/D ClarkA Johnson/ O DanielsR Williams/J WittenR White/T GonzalezJackson/A Gates

Very good call here

I don't like White and Gonzo because you'll have to get them both high, and this is a run first team. There is too many question behind how Gonzo will make the transition and if it will hurt or help Gonzo. I would certainly rather Brees and Colston vs Ryan and White, but if it was between White and Colston and I have Brees, I'm taking White because White will be playing against the Saints secondary twice.

 

[Tanner9919]

I don't like using a QB/WR combo..if the team has a bad game, you're now out of luck for TWO players...so the bad far outweighs the good, IMO..

lets say you have Fitz and Warner, and Az plays a tough defense...you're not going to get many fantasy pts if the Cards have a bad game..and the other side of it is this: what if the Cards play a lousy team, let's say the Rams..you'd *think* Fitz and Warner would tear them apart,right? well,what if the Rams' defense is so bad that Wells runs up a storm, you know, 160+ yards, 2 TDs...not much room left for passing ,is there? no need for passing, since the running game is burying the Rams' defense..so even in the best case scenaio where your QB/WR combo faces a favorable matchup, if one aspect of the offense is working better than the other ( i.e., running game v. passing game), the other would suffer...

I'd rather spread things out..it's part of the reason why you draft for depth and usually have 4 WR's on your roster..

 

[kerpow]

The main reason for not actively drafting combos is purely born out of frustration from previous seasons. There is nothing more frustrating than watching a game with your QB/RB, WR/RB or QB/WR playing and have to endure a backup RB running it in on the goal line. Makes you want to which isn't fun. Spread you guys around and hedge your bets.

Statistically I'm sure there is no advantage or disadvantage in this strategy if both players offer the best value when you draft them.

 

[Bankerguy]

It's a little bit boom and bust with that strategy. When it works, you can be hard to beat. Have a bad week and it can be hard to win. The last few years I have stayed away from the hookup with QB1 and WR1. I'm more a fan of QB1 and the TE.

YMMV.

 

[Tigerbot Hesh]

It depends on the players involved. If they are starting-caliber players, then take both of them. But one stud player + one mediocre player does not equal two stud players.

One of the guys I play with LOVES combos. Some weeks his guys will go crazy and he'll beat his opponent by 50 points, but then some weeks his guys are AWOL and he'll lose by 20.

I'd rather spread things out and try to be more consistent. If you have all of your guys showing up and posting decent to above-average stats, a stellar game from either a WR or QB should help put you over the top.

 

[Ray_T]

Palmer/Ocho - Good.....

are you sure?palmer got hurt last year and look what Ocho did?

 

[towney]

It all depends on who you target as a combo with a pass friendly offense. Last year I targeted Rogers/Jennings and Shaub/AJ. It worked out great. I really like Rogers/Jennings this year too