QBs 2009- A look back (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

Here’s the deal with this thread. You see folks that are comparing stats and points between let’s say Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning and for this exercise we’ll say Rodgers had 350 for the season, Manning 325…most owners will say 25 points spread out over a 12 week season…2 points a week so there really is no difference between the two of them. I find this to be misguided and I have long wanted to go back and analyze it week to week to try and uncover more clues for future success.

What I did was create an average weekly. But I did it with some serious BIAS…how so you ask? In week 1 the odds of most owners starting Joe Flacco was not very high, especially in redraft leagues so why include that in the averages…a guy that is starting on 1% of most rosters or maybe even less should not be part of the equation. So I took players and tried to look at trends.



I will continue with Flacco as the example. He did reach a point where he was startable and I thought after the 1st couple weeks that more owners thought he was too so I do start counting points in some weeks for him. But again he reached a point where he quickly was detrimental for owners and I doubt he made the line up during those stretches.



I also added in a lot of fringe QBs for bye weeks. If someone drafted Drew Brees it is very likely they might have grabbed a guy like Jason Campbell very late and so at a certain point I had to add more QBs into the mix. You’ll see as we go along but the reality is for most of the 1st 3 weeks in 12 team leagues the top 12-16 QBs were likely given the starts so I also incorporated the rounds that QBs were drafted in.



So the avg for starting QBs in week 1 was 19. This is with 6 pt TDs, 1pt 20 pass. Drew Brees scored 51 that week so he was +32 over the avg in week 1. Don’t worry if this seems confusing, after we get into week 1 it will make more sense.





Week 1 Winners and Losers

Drew Brees: Scored 32 over the weekly avg of 19…so he put up 51. Guy almost single handedly won the game for most owners that week. What percentage of Drew Brees owners won in week 1? Almost all in my leagues that I scanned over. It’s not just that Drew Brees was 3-5 points a week better, some weeks he absolutely kills it for owners.

Brees vs Rodgers-34 point swing for owners

Brees vs Schaub-45 point swing for owners

Brees vsP.Manning-32 point swing for owners



What I am trying to explain is that in most 12 team leagues and especially at QB, most owners are going to roll with Brees, Rodgers, Manning, Brady, Romo, Schaub…the point is you are facing a top notch gunslinger almost every week and if you are wheeling out Garrard each week you might have some serious problems. I understand owners that drafted their QBs in the 8th round or later had plans of building an army at WR/RB/TE, but we now are in an era where RB seems to be less of a need but strong WRs and a powerhouse QB can almost take you to the playoffs.

Other winners include Romo (+16) over the avg, Brady(+10), and Joe Flacco posted a (+14) or 33 in week 1 but the likelihood that a lot of owners started him is slim to none in week 1. So his points don’t have the same impact of someone like Brees, Romo, or Brady.

On my spreadsheet the players would look something like this:

Weekly avg for week 1 (19)

Drew Brees +32

Tony Romo +16

Joe Flacco +14

Tom Brady +10

Matt Hasselbeck +9

Matt Ryan +4

McNabb +3

Big Ben +1

P.Manning +0

Aaron Rodgers (-2)

Kurt Warner (-2)

Phillip Rivers (-3)

E.Manning (-5)

J.Cutler (-6)

Carson Palmer (-11)

D.Garrard (-12)

M.Schaub (-13)



As you can see if you had Romo and the other owner started Warner which is a very likely scenario that Romo owners got an 18 point swing that week. A lot of this is total luck as far as who you draw each week to play but these numbers to me look a lot different than the canned “2 point a week” difference that so many assume especially at the QB. Every site out there has been pioneering to wait on QB and I’m not saying they are wrong but we do need to look at more than just year end stats.



Losers include Matt Schaub (-13), David Garrard (-12), and Carson Palmer (-11). Add their numbers to any of the winners and you start getting spreads in the 30+ range which is an awful lot to make up over the rest of your roster. Is it impossible? Of course not but you are at a major disadvantage so stop believing that QBs are only marginally better than the next, its simply not true and I will continue to show you thru what happened week 2 week.



Guys in the middle…Manning, Rivers, Big Ben, McNabb, Warner, Ryan…these guys were within a couple of points above and below the average. Hopefully if you had one of these QBs you were fortunate enough to play an owner that was starting another of these QBs.

Example: Manning vs Cutler-6 point swing for Manning owners. Big Ben vs Rivers-4 point swing in favor of BB owners. You get the idea here. This is what a lot of owners think about QBs, that they are all with a couple points of each other…sometimes and in certain pockets of QBs this is true, but you can see the extremely different outcome of other QBs.



I hope you guys are with me, at least following this even if you are confused and can’t quite connect the dots yet.



Week 2 Winners and Losers

Matt Schaub: He posted 42 and was by far the winner of week 2. He was horrendous the week before and I bet owners were cursing him after week 1. He redeems himself mightily.

Schaub vs Favre-23 point swing for Schaub owners

Schaub vs Rodgers-18 point swing for Schaub owners

Schaub vs Brady-33 point swing for Schaub owners

Schaub vs Romo-30 point swing for Schaub owners

I’m not pulling odd match ups, these are pretty realistic match ups that week.



Guys that were solid if not spectacular would be…Brees(+7), Rivers (+6), Palmer (+5) but what were the odds Palmer owners wheeled him out again in week 2 after he pooped the bed in week 1? That was another thing I tried to analyze was that some guys might post a 30 spot but if they had 3 crummy weeks in a row, most of their owners will bench them unless it’s a Peyton Manning type. So you can’t put as much stock in a guy that had 2-3 big weeks or above average and a lot of subpar performances, most owners will not put up with that.



Losers include Brady (-15) and Romo (-12), so both of these guys were great last week but they end up really hurting owners here. Romo is going to have a rough 3 week span here, but he of course will right the ship once he finds Miles Austin for the 2nd half of the season where he is one of the best QBs in the league to own.



I could keep walking everyone thru all 13 weeks but that might get a little boring if this hasn’t already so I think it’s better if I just run down the QBs one by one and I will also include the rounds that most were drafted in so we have some reference too.



Aaron Rodgers (2nd round): Guy was a big hit for most owners. He was (-2) in week1 but after that he never dipped below the avg the rest of the year. From weeks 7-13 he really hammered it home for owners. (+11 (+18) (+8) (+5) (+10) (+14)…in real points these equated to 32, 37, 28, 23, 30, and 33…he just could do no wrong down the stretch. He certainly seemed like he paid for the 2nd round price tag most owners used on him, a few stole him in the top of the 3rd round but this selection was solid and I think most owners were pretty happy with themselves.



Drew Brees (1st round): He had some very explosive weeks, he also had some stinkers in weeks 3 and 4 that probably rattled owners briefly. This guy has posted about 4,400 yds and roughly 30+ TDs for the average over the past 4 seasons, that is complete consistency and that is what you get. 51 in week1, 43 in week 6, and 48 in week 12, those type of performances make it a lot easier filling out the rest of your roster. But I also want to say that on top of the stinkers in weeks 3 and 4, Brees also was very average for weeks 7-10 where he didn’t hurt owners but he was just at about the average for most of those weeks. So in essence this guy had 2 big weeks in the 1st 10 this season. So he is consistent, has a few pop games but on the whole he was solid. I think most owners would have liked some of those big point weeks to be spread out just a bit more. I haven’t analyzed his other 3 seasons but if folks are asking if Brees is worth the 1st round pick, honestly I have to revert to the Shark Pool for that answer because I’m not 100% sure I have the right answer.



Brett Favre (Undrafted in some leagues): likely a mid round selection at best once he announced he was going to play. In the 1st 7 weeks he posted 4 below avg numbers. But again most owners got him as a QB2, very few folks did I see grab him and say “I’m good.” That didn’t happen much but Favre really showcased himself down the stretch. Weeks 8, 10, 11, and 12 Favre was not only consistent, he was perhaps the best QB to have in FF over that stretch of games. Will he come back, will he retire? I don’t care anymore but if he plays you have to take him seriously when you factor in your QBs.



Peyton Manning (2nd round): Manning was simply consistent. He did have a decided advantage several weeks but he also did not hurt owners all that much either. The 2nd round price was a bit steep but Manning never really pooped the bed much. Problem I think for owners is that he really only exploded over the average for 1 week and that was week 3 where he was 19 over the weekly avg, he posted a 41. From weeks 8-13 though he posted in comparison to the weekly averages totals of -2, 0, 18, -3, 7, -3…kind of a mixed bag. I am going to show a couple of other QBs who finish much further back for the season than Manning but for where they were drafted probably were much higher value.



Matt Schaub (6th round): Let’s look at week 1 thru 7 1st. He had a rough go of it in weeks 1 and 4 but the other 5 weeks he gave a decided advantage for most owners. I showed you what he did in week 2 but in week 5 he was +6 over avg that week but guys like Rodgers and Brees were on byes so a couple of the big gunslingers just happened to be off, however that adds a little more zip to what he did that week. And the point is that Schaub paid off big for owners because he was drafted later so owners likely already had 3 WRs, 2RBs before they grabbed Schaub. Finally stays healthy and it paid off for owners. Down the stretch he was a little more average but he was still very solid for most owners. I think Schaub was a much better pick than Manning this year, by a mile actually because you had a guy that likely pulled a couple wins out because of the advantage he extracted over others. And you only burned a 6th, not a 2nd.



Tony Romo (4th round): Romo was great in week 1, then had a rough go of it in weeks 2, 3, and 4, and I think many owners were scrambling to possibly find another starter. He starts a nice run briefly interrupted in week 6 for a bye but he post straight numbers of 28, 36, and 29 over this little stretch and owners were delighted. He was avg to a little below in weeks 9-11 and then he finishes strong in week 12 and 13 plus he did fairly well in those later weeks which is crucial for FF owners when they make the playoffs. Romo was up and down and he’s a guy that now has Austin, Witten, and some other decent WRs around him plus a trio of strong and explosive RBs behind him, good solid OL. Lot to like here but I think Romo still needs to get better and I’m not sure if he will. Romo wasn’t a bargain but he sure was no bust either.

I’m gonna skip a few QBs and jump down to a combo that could be had in the 8th and 9th round this past season.



Big Ben and Eli (8th and 9th round): If you waited, jammed your roster with 4 WRs, 3 RBs, or add a TE take away one of those WRs, now you turned to QB and you found Big Ben and Eli on the 8/9 turn. If you scooped up both you did pretty well as both of them were solid and as a combo you very rarely were in a pickle most weeks…a couple times you would have had to make up ground but on the whole this combo kept you ahead of the curve and if you drafted strong in the other positions you likely were good to go most of the year. Ben is a QB that was overvalued 2 years ago, then tossed less than 20 TDs and he was way down this past season and he certainly played up to if not over his draft selection.



I think you guys are getting the idea here. What does any of this mean? I’m actually not sure, maybe nothing but I feel the conversation is worth exploring and I wanted to turn this loose in the SP where most of the folks sticking around after the pool closes will be able to chew into this a little more.



Do you feel QB is a position you have to lend some serious credence to in the 1st 2-3 rounds? If so, why? If not, why not? I really appreciate you feedback and don’t be afraid to ask questions.



Thanks,

MOP

 

[Ministry of Pain]

One thing I think I should point out is the avg moved up and down over the season. here are the weekly averages for what I am explaining.

Week1- 19

Week2- 24

Week3- 22

Week4- 23

Week5- 23

Week6- 24

Week7- 21

Week8- 19

Week9- 20

Week10-18

Week11-20

Week12-19

Week13-22

It seems the points are a bit more in the early part of the season weeks 2-6 which is about late October and then as we move into November and December the avg starts to fall slightly to 21, 19, 20, 18, 20, 19...certainly weather plays a factor. So there isn't just 1 average, it changes week to week based on who Ifelt was most likely to get the starts plus about 5-6 more to make sure the majority of starters are factored in.

 

[Jeff Tefertiller]

very interesting. Thanks for sharing this, MoP

 

[Black]

Every year I go through this exercise, and every year I do the FBG thing and take a couple of pre-round-10 QBs.

Then, about week 8, while staring at McNabb and Garrard on my roster, I wish I just had an Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning.

Just saying.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Every year I go through this exercise, and every year I do the FBG thing and take a couple of pre-round-10 QBs.Then, about week 8, while staring at McNabb and Garrard on my roster, I wish I just had an Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning.Just saying.

I'm not implying that people should wait. I posted about the problems with a Garrard each week.

 

[kdt]

perhaps someone should implement a tier-based ranking with more info, like a value stat that considers +- standard deviations.

 

[BRONG]

Here's the deal with this thread. YOU DON'T NEED TO ENLARGE THE FONT SO THAT EVERYONE CAN SEE WHAT YOU THINK, Jimbo.

MoP, and his gregarious self, foaming at the bit in the Shark Pool. Classic!!!

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Nice post MoP

I think this year the shark move will be waiting on whichever of Rivers, Schaub, and Romo falls the farthest, probably snagging one in the late 3rd to early 5th.

Cutler and Ryan seem like the 2nd tier QBs most likely to break out and build your late pick QBBC around.

Stafford and Young (and to a lesser extent Smith) look like nice QB2s in a QBBC with great upside.

I think we've seen the rest of the first tier pull a lot closer to the Brees-Manning-Brady elite tier, and of course, Rodgers should be the first QB taken in every draft next year.

With the miss rate at RB on early picks, spending a 2nd-3rd on Rodgers-Brees-Manning is still a reasonable strategy. I won the FBG staff league with Manning as my 3rd round pick this year.

 

[smackdaddies]

Here's the deal with this thread. YOU DON'T NEED TO ENLARGE THE FONT SO THAT EVERYONE CAN SEE WHAT YOU THINK, Jimbo.

MoP, and his gregarious self, foaming at the bit in the Shark Pool. Classic!!!

Thanks For Playing, and Contributing in such a useful and productive manner.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Here's the deal with this thread. YOU DON'T NEED TO ENLARGE THE FONT SO THAT EVERYONE CAN SEE WHAT YOU THINK, Jimbo.

MoP, and his gregarious self, foaming at the bit in the Shark Pool. Classic!!!

Thanks For Playing, and Contributing in such a useful and productive manner.

I thought it was his way of saying he loved it. he did use the word classic in his critique so I focused on the positive words

 

[gonzobill5]

What are you trying to learn from this analysis?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

What are you trying to learn from this analysis?

I am going to have to likely go back and take some of the top rated QBs and do a 3 year study. The guy that scores 20 a week every week and hits the avg...is he worth as much as another QB that has 3-4 outstanding football games where he wins it almost on his own, then has several average weeks and maybe 2-3 below average weeks. I plan on running the same type of analysis on WR/RB and perhaps even TE. Bill, I say this every year and it never changes. It's a handful of players that really make the difference. I guess what I want to do is get people to think. Don't assmue all stats in a vacuum are equal. Inevitably someois going to say that Jason Campbell was a top20 QB and was an "integral part of my team"...spare me because his stats are all over the place that other than a bye week filler or serious injury(which we really didn't have much of) it's highly doubtful anyone used him.I think it liktley is best to compare the top12 and how they competed against each other, the bottom 10-14 QBs in the grand scope of things just don't matter very much. When you look at this Bill, what do you find interesting if anything?

 

[CaptainHook]

yea...im not really getting the point this...are you just trying to demonstrate variability?

 

[boubucarow]

From what I remember from some research article in FBG's past, a player's week to week consistency in one year does not have a strong relationship with their consistency the next year. Namely, just because Rodgers was more consistent than Brees this year doesn't give us any reason to think he will be more consistent next year. I am having difficulty seeing the implications on drafting since we can't hope to predict the deviation in scoring from week to week for players. Now if for instance top scorers seem to have the same type of consistency there would be some implication, but I don't think that is the case.

 

[CaptainHook]

and if you want to get into boom and bust vs steady average type players, its quite obvious that the steady players are more valuable because winning by 1 pt is just as valuable as winning by 60.

when you look at the teams with a ton of points but not a ton of wins, sometimes its just pure bad luck, but oftentimes they will often be using players with highly correlated performances.

(ex: the guy in my league this year with the 2nd most points ended up in 5th using brees, colston, and shockey)

 

[gonzobill5]

What are you trying to learn from this analysis?

I am going to have to likely go back and take some of the top rated QBs and do a 3 year study. The guy that scores 20 a week every week and hits the avg...is he worth as much as another QB that has 3-4 outstanding football games where he wins it almost on his own, then has several average weeks and maybe 2-3 below average weeks. I plan on running the same type of analysis on WR/RB and perhaps even TE. Bill, I say this every year and it never changes. It's a handful of players that really make the difference. I guess what I want to do is get people to think. Don't assmue all stats in a vacuum are equal. Inevitably someois going to say that Jason Campbell was a top20 QB and was an "integral part of my team"...spare me because his stats are all over the place that other than a bye week filler or serious injury(which we really didn't have much of) it's highly doubtful anyone used him.I think it liktley is best to compare the top12 and how they competed against each other, the bottom 10-14 QBs in the grand scope of things just don't matter very much. When you look at this Bill, what do you find interesting if anything?

First of all, I appreciate the effort here, and think some really valuable discussion should ensue. Your analysis reminds me a bit of something called the runoff method, used in voting. It's a system where voters rank the candidates in order of preference. The candidate with the fewest 1st place votes is eliminated, then the processes is repeated. Each round, another candidate is eliminated, thereby establishing a ranking. I thought the breakdown really brings to light how dramatically things change from week to week. This year, I kept track of the top thirty at each position, and how it changed from week to week. IIRC, for QBs, the top ten after week 1 had only three guys who were in the top ten by week 8. I found this to be really helpful in trading. On the other hand, I'm not sure that this is something I'd use when looking forward. I disagree with your premise that 2 ppg was an insignificant difference between two players (though I think you are implying it is insignificant compared to some of the weekly differences). If I can pick between two players and one is 2 ppg better than the other, but the lesser player was more consistent (or alternatively more likely to post big games or whatever) I'm still going with the guy with the higher average.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

yea...im not really getting the point this...are you just trying to demonstrate variability?

Afternoon Capt, yes I think that definitely is shown with the numbers and how they run. In the end I'm not sure you can take this an apply it to an upcoming season but it will translate into certain folks approach to their team.When trying to build a good team to make the playoffs, are you an owner that wants guys that have big weeks and then some small weeks or are you more comfortable with a steady eddy type team. Everyone is different, and I've seen both styles win a lot of games, but the next time I have to watch someone post that player A is marginally better than player B based on year end stats I'm going to be redirecting people here. CH, this really harks back to the Portis thread form 2-3 years ago, do you remember the beating I took at th etime because Portis was always ranked in the top10/top5 and I said he was pretty average and never cracked the top10 much week to week...I was almost run out of the building when I spoke of this. At the time I believe I was correct, still do, but now I am going back and showing my work sort of speak. Bress was better than Manning...OK but what did it mean week to week? not just what the total points were end of year. Another example is Manning has 350 and QB12 has 275 so Manning is assigned a VBD of 75...that doesn't always tell the whole story is what I'm attempting to point out.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

From what I remember from some research article in FBG's past, a player's week to week consistency in one year does not have a strong relationship with their consistency the next year. Namely, just because Rodgers was more consistent than Brees this year doesn't give us any reason to think he will be more consistent next year. I am having difficulty seeing the implications on drafting since we can't hope to predict the deviation in scoring from week to week for players. Now if for instance top scorers seem to have the same type of consistency there would be some implication, but I don't think that is the case.

Excellent points, and I would only reply with this...guys like Brees, Manning, Favre...those guys have long track histories to pull form. brees has been uber consistent year to year the past 4 years...4,000+ 25+ TDs 4 year sin a row, most seasons were a lot higher than that even. When we start getting the kool-aid passed around, remeber to go back and look for guys like Schaub, Big Ben, Eli...those guys were bought in the 6th (Schaub), and 8th/9th for the others. You could mount a pretty good attack with those guys if you had drafted welll earlier. Bloom touched on a few that will be undervalued.

 

[mjd2]

mop as always excellent analysis. my keepers are romo and cutler, got favre in the 8th round. in my league, 1 pt for every 25 yds passing 1 pt for every 15 yds rushing 6 pts for a touchdown. obviously qb's are very important, for the past 3 years i use my qbs as a comittee. based on defensive matchups, this has worked well for me. i also look at late season trends for who might turn the corner. when choosing a qb some simple rules i keep in mind:

SOS

team offensive philosophy

rushing attemps i.e. aaron rodgers (10 tds last 2 years)

in my keeper league i have no chance at aaron rodgers but for redrafts he should be the number #1 qb taken, my opinion. 70 tds the last 2 years!!!!

 

[Ministry of Pain]

mop as always excellent analysis. my keepers are romo and cutler, got favre in the 8th round. in my league, 1 pt for every 25 yds passing 1 pt for every 15 yds rushing 6 pts for a touchdown. obviously qb's are very important, for the past 3 years i use my qbs as a comittee. based on defensive matchups, this has worked well for me. i also look at late season trends for who might turn the corner. when choosing a qb some simple rules i keep in mind:SOSteam offensive philosophyrushing attemps i.e. aaron rodgers (10 tds last 2 years)in my keeper league i have no chance at aaron rodgers but for redrafts he should be the number #1 qb taken, my opinion. 70 tds the last 2 years!!!!

You mentioned Cutler and I wanted to highlight him.Wk1 (-6)Wk2 +/-0Wk3 +6wk 4 +2wk5 Byewk6 +2His 1st 5-6 weeks were not a disaster by any stretch. In fact he looked like a 6th round bargain for awhile. But he runs into big trouble 6 of the next 7 weeks...imo though he will be nice value assuming you don't have anyone that gets too crazy over him...should be there in the 6th thru 8th rounds as there are too many sure things at qb ahead of him. Nice feedback, thanks

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

I appreciate the effort and think this is something well worth looking into to see where it takes us.

If it boils down to a consistency vs big games argument, then we are just spinning our wheels. Both variations are useful, and most fantasy teams will have a mixture of the two types of players. It is a matter of personal preference, and I have never seen any evidence that shows that one preference is substantively more successful than the other.

The fact of the matter is that 98% of fantasy teams will not have the chance to field a team full of studs, and those Clinton Portis types that MOP sort of derided a couple of years ago are VERY useful to depend on. If I have a team that averages 110 points per week and almost always scores between 100 and 120 points, but my opponent has a team that scores the same average but varies between 80 and 140, who will win? It is still likely around 50/50 who wins.

It is rarely an either/or proposition when we are talking about these kinds of players. You rode Drew Brees to your super bowl title? Congrats, I rode Kurt Warner this year. Warner was QB11 in my two dynasty leagues on a ppg basis... the Brees owner did not make the super bowl in either league. What does that tell us? Not much.

The hit or miss player will lose as many games as he wins; the consistent guy won't singlehandedly win games, but will not singlehandedly lose games either. An interesting use of this information (to me at least) will be whether the guy who scores 4 or 5 points less for 10 games but goes off for 4 or 5 games leads to more victories than the "consistent" guy. That player only puts you at a mild disadvantage for his lower scoring games, but might win you your game on his big weeks. I THINK that is sort of what MOP is getting at here.

The predictive value of this is pretty shaky, though, imo. But it will be interesting to follow along.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I liked this thread topic and now more folks are piling into the SP, thought this might be a fun topic to revisit.

My point when I wrote this remains the same. Sure, Brees is 3-5 points better each week over the other QBs, but many weeks he is a 15-20 point difference, not 3-5 and that includes other top QBs that he might go up against. And it's not just Brees, there are lots of others. I want to do this at WR and RB but QB was the easiest place to start.

 

[The Dude]

What are you trying to learn from this analysis?

Alright, I didn't read the last few posts. While your analysis is accurate, I'm not sure of the relevance - but that may be my problem as I am assuming you are hinting at an implied value based on this method.I think it would be more important to simply provide an average weekly ranking of each QB which would then lead to the likelihood that you outscored your opponent in that week. For instance, if Manning is ranked 3rd on the list and I am in a 12 team league, Manning's likelihood to outscore my opposing QB is 75%.But again, that's is my understanding - I may be missing your point.

 

[bagger]

I have the #1 pick in my draft for the first time in years, and after doing a ton of mocks I am very seriously considering taking a top tier QB on the 2.12/3.01 turn. In the past I have been a huge proponent of late QBs, with some excellent success some years and some mediocre success in others.

I think the biggest issue I have seen with this strategy is exactly what you state...the first month of the season I am trying to guess who the guy should be, often times getting me off to a slow start. So while ultimately my two picks may have been smart strategically, if I didn't have the right guy in there it is a moot point.

Drafting towards the top of the draft this year makes this especially appealing (I don't think you could do this on the other end of the draft as you need to build RB/WR depth). Drafting a C Johnson allows you to wait until the 6th/7th rounds to get your 2nd and 3rd RBs in a PPR league rotating in a CJ Spiller or some other comparable talent as your RB2 while having the likes of C Johnson/T Romo/G Jennings/Whitten/and another good WR on your team.

This year especially I feel there is a ton of value for RBs in the mid to later rounds if you have the comfort of a top 3 pick in PPR leagues.

Taking a Romo in the 3rd and two RBs in the 6th/7th rounds may be better ultimately than taking a 3rd round RB and finding two QBs in the 6th/7th to platoon, when taking into consideration starting actual players given who is available via ADP.

 

[GoBears84]

I have the #1 pick in my draft for the first time in years, and after doing a ton of mocks I am very seriously considering taking a top tier QB on the 2.12/3.01 turn. In the past I have been a huge proponent of late QBs, with some excellent success some years and some mediocre success in others.I think the biggest issue I have seen with this strategy is exactly what you state...the first month of the season I am trying to guess who the guy should be, often times getting me off to a slow start. So while ultimately my two picks may have been smart strategically, if I didn't have the right guy in there it is a moot point.Drafting towards the top of the draft this year makes this especially appealing (I don't think you could do this on the other end of the draft as you need to build RB/WR depth). Drafting a C Johnson allows you to wait until the 6th/7th rounds to get your 2nd and 3rd RBs in a PPR league rotating in a CJ Spiller or some other comparable talent as your RB2 while having the likes of C Johnson/T Romo/G Jennings/Whitten/and another good WR on your team.This year especially I feel there is a ton of value for RBs in the mid to later rounds if you have the comfort of a top 3 pick in PPR leagues.Taking a Romo in the 3rd and two RBs in the 6th/7th rounds may be better ultimately than taking a 3rd round RB and finding two QBs in the 6th/7th to platoon, when taking into consideration starting actual players given who is available via ADP.

SI had an interesting article last week in which they push the idea of drafting a strong QB (Brees/Manning) early and then getting a BYE week filler in round 10 or later. Its' an interesting strategy and not what FBG's (especially Dodds) usually recommends. I'm curious what the consensus is of the board and how much it will depend on draft position.

 

[Catbird]

If Brees is 3-5 points better per week than, say, Palmer, and one week he is 35 points better, the rest of the weeks he averages 1-3 points better? If he is 35 points better in 2 weeks, he is equal to Palmer in the other 14 (meaning they are each better than the other roughly half of the remaining 14 weeks). I don't see a lot that is predictive here, other than the better guy will outscore the lesser guy, although sometimes by a lot and sometimes will be outscored by the lesser guy - but not that often? Whether a lot of fantasy owners were starting one or the other of them means nothing to me? I am probably missing the central point (I too often do any more) but it seems to me that if the better guy is 3-5 points better a game (big difference BTW) the lesser guy will probably out score the better guy several times, they may score equally a few times, the better guy will probably outscore the lesser by a lot 2 or 3 times. Mostly, though, the better guy will outscore the worse guy by a handful. The statisticians can tell you that likely distribution - but I don't think you can pin it down a lot closer than that? While the 4 points per game doesn't sound like much, I imagine the guy with the better QB would RATHER have the 4 points every week than 2 great games and the other 14 games with his round 1 QB scoring the same as my Round 7 guy?

As to whether those of us who take QBs later wake up mid-year and think, 'Wow. I would sure rather have Brees than Eli ... we probably all do at some level, but its only a valid question if we ask:'Would I rather have Brees than Eli if it meant I didn't get to have MJD (or Andre) on my roster.'

 

[GoBears84]

If Brees is 3-5 points better per week than, say, Palmer, and one week he is 35 points better, the rest of the weeks he averages 1-3 points better? If he is 35 points better in 2 weeks, he is equal to Palmer in the other 14 (meaning they are each better than the other roughly half of the remaining 14 weeks). I don't see a lot that is predictive here, other than the better guy will outscore the lesser guy, although sometimes by a lot and sometimes will be outscored by the lesser guy - but not that often? Whether a lot of fantasy owners were starting one or the other of them means nothing to me? I am probably missing the central point (I too often do any more) but it seems to me that if the better guy is 3-5 points better a game (big difference BTW) the lesser guy will probably out score the better guy several times, they may score equally a few times, the better guy will probably outscore the lesser by a lot 2 or 3 times. Mostly, though, the better guy will outscore the worse guy by a handful. The statisticians can tell you that likely distribution - but I don't think you can pin it down a lot closer than that? While the 4 points per game doesn't sound like much, I imagine the guy with the better QB would RATHER have the 4 points every week than 2 great games and the other 14 games with his round 1 QB scoring the same as my Round 7 guy?As to whether those of us who take QBs later wake up mid-year and think, 'Wow. I would sure rather have Brees than Eli ... we probably all do at some level, but its only a valid question if we ask:'Would I rather have Brees than Eli if it meant I didn't get to have MJD (or Andre) on my roster.'

The central point to the SI article (which I don't have in front of me) is that if you already had a MJD, and you could grab a Manning and a great WR with your next two picks, it would lock in your top positions and then you could build value without having to worry about another QB until very late in the draft. If at all. Certainly there is positional difference with your draft position (01 is going to have a better opportunity to do that than 09). Each year I wait until my 7th pick to grab a QB and then I grab a complimentary one soon after and I drop one along the way and seem to struggle with the position all season long...

 

[Ministry of Pain]

If Brees is 3-5 points better per week than, say, Palmer, and one week he is 35 points better, the rest of the weeks he averages 1-3 points better? If he is 35 points better in 2 weeks, he is equal to Palmer in the other 14 (meaning they are each better than the other roughly half of the remaining 14 weeks). I don't see a lot that is predictive here, other than the better guy will outscore the lesser guy, although sometimes by a lot and sometimes will be outscored by the lesser guy - but not that often? Whether a lot of fantasy owners were starting one or the other of them means nothing to me? I am probably missing the central point (I too often do any more) but it seems to me that if the better guy is 3-5 points better a game (big difference BTW) the lesser guy will probably out score the better guy several times, they may score equally a few times, the better guy will probably outscore the lesser by a lot 2 or 3 times. Mostly, though, the better guy will outscore the worse guy by a handful. The statisticians can tell you that likely distribution - but I don't think you can pin it down a lot closer than that? While the 4 points per game doesn't sound like much, I imagine the guy with the better QB would RATHER have the 4 points every week than 2 great games and the other 14 games with his round 1 QB scoring the same as my Round 7 guy?As to whether those of us who take QBs later wake up mid-year and think, 'Wow. I would sure rather have Brees than Eli ... we probably all do at some level, but its only a valid question if we ask:'Would I rather have Brees than Eli if it meant I didn't get to have MJD (or Andre) on my roster.'

The point was to take likely starting QBs in 12 team leagues from week to week and see what the QBs did in relation to the mean or average of that week and also against head to head competition. It's not about Brees vs Palmer always. It's about finding yourself -20 in the QB column all the time because one week you face Schaub, the next it's Manning, then Brees, then back to Schaub perhaps...all the sudden you are 0-4 and scratching your head. It's tough to get your arms around it but if you really comb thru the numbers week to week you find a lot of interesting things other than lookng at the total points each August before you draft.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

If Brees is 3-5 points better per week than, say, Palmer, and one week he is 35 points better, the rest of the weeks he averages 1-3 points better? If he is 35 points better in 2 weeks, he is equal to Palmer in the other 14 (meaning they are each better than the other roughly half of the remaining 14 weeks). I don't see a lot that is predictive here, other than the better guy will outscore the lesser guy, although sometimes by a lot and sometimes will be outscored by the lesser guy - but not that often? Whether a lot of fantasy owners were starting one or the other of them means nothing to me? I am probably missing the central point (I too often do any more) but it seems to me that if the better guy is 3-5 points better a game (big difference BTW) the lesser guy will probably out score the better guy several times, they may score equally a few times, the better guy will probably outscore the lesser by a lot 2 or 3 times. Mostly, though, the better guy will outscore the worse guy by a handful. The statisticians can tell you that likely distribution - but I don't think you can pin it down a lot closer than that? While the 4 points per game doesn't sound like much, I imagine the guy with the better QB would RATHER have the 4 points every week than 2 great games and the other 14 games with his round 1 QB scoring the same as my Round 7 guy?As to whether those of us who take QBs later wake up mid-year and think, 'Wow. I would sure rather have Brees than Eli ... we probably all do at some level, but its only a valid question if we ask:'Would I rather have Brees than Eli if it meant I didn't get to have MJD (or Andre) on my roster.'

The central point to the SI article (which I don't have in front of me) is that if you already had a MJD, and you could grab a Manning and a great WR with your next two picks, it would lock in your top positions and then you could build value without having to worry about another QB until very late in the draft. If at all. Certainly there is positional difference with your draft position (01 is going to have a better opportunity to do that than 09). Each year I wait until my 7th pick to grab a QB and then I grab a complimentary one soon after and I drop one along the way and seem to struggle with the position all season long...

The one that kills me is the guy who takes a secondary QB in the 4th round and then grabs another in the 5th or perhaps 6th...if you are going to burn 2 of your 1st 6 picks on QB I say just take one in the 1st or 2nd and then wiat until very late and find a bye week replacement. You can find a lot of value at RB/WR/TE in the 4th-10th rounds while others are burning multiple picks on QB so they can find the hot hand. I do like the Eli/Big Ben combo though for what it will cost you.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

I always look for QB value later in the draft and it's very hit or miss. Sometime it works (Garcia a few times in the past, Warner when he came to ARI), most of the time it didn't. Last year I got 'stuck' in my main league and, after a run of RB's and WR's, looked at the board and saw Peyton Manning as clearly the BPA. I grabbed him and hit the ground running week 1. The playoffs were a bit of a headache as he sat week 16, but all in it turned out well for me.