Rise of the Quarterback? (1 Viewer)

[Shutout]

My early Fantasy football life was dominated by the axiom that RBs were the alpha and Omega of FF success.

Then, over the past several years, with the advent of more sophisticated fantasy leagues and a real-life trend of RBBC in the NFL, WRs and sometimes even the occasional TE in the right scenario has balanced that out or even made the occasional argument that the RB was bumpde from his perch a bit.

And now, with another Real-life movement of various rules and offensive and defensive philosophies, it seems that fantasy football may actually be on the same page as real-life consensus in that a dominant QB wins championships.

By a wide margin, more than any time in my years of playing FF, this year's playoff contenders were dominated by the big QBs. It really didn't seem to matter if teams have depth or balance or other things that made them have a great lineup, the teams with the elite QBsall seemed to push into the championship games in the leagues I know (and several on the boards here have mentioned the Brees, Bradys, Newtons, Rodgers, etc dominating their playoffs too).

So, with the trend and rules seemingly firmly in place in this new pass-happy "don't touch 'em" NFL, is there more importance for the forseeable future to focus on top QBs in leagues?

 

[mr roboto]

Yes.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Yes.

+1

 

[Snickers]

I'm not going to draft a RB before the 6th round next year. Most likely I'm looking at getting a Top 5 QB, 3 solid WRs and a Top 3 TE before I even look at a RB. I could even see myself drafting a 2nd QB and/or TE before picking up my first back.

 

[The Rook]

My early Fantasy football life was dominated by the axiom that RBs were the alpha and Omega of FF success.

Then, over the past several years, with the advent of more sophisticated fantasy leagues and a real-life trend of RBBC in the NFL, WRs and sometimes even the occasional TE in the right scenario has balanced that out or even made the occasional argument that the RB was bumpde from his perch a bit.

And now, with another Real-life movement of various rules and offensive and defensive philosophies, it seems that fantasy football may actually be on the same page as real-life consensus in that a dominant QB wins championships.

By a wide margin, more than any time in my years of playing FF, this year's playoff contenders were dominated by the big QBs. It really didn't seem to matter if teams have depth or balance or other things that made them have a great lineup, the teams with the elite QBsall seemed to push into the championship games in the leagues I know (and several on the boards here have mentioned the Brees, Bradys, Newtons, Rodgers, etc dominating their playoffs too).

So, with the trend and rules seemingly firmly in place in this new pass-happy "don't touch 'em" NFL, is there more importance for the forseeable future to focus on top QBs in leagues?

My immediate reaction after taking a quick look at point totals by position for the year (weeks 1-16) in our league is yes. We have ten teams in our league. The drop off from QB1 to QB10 (177 points) is much more significant than drop off from RB1 to RB10 (100 points)... it was even bigger than drop off from RB1 to RB20(127). We start three WR/TE and drop off from WR1 to WR30 (108 points) wasn't as significant. This tells me the advantage of top QB in points per week was more significant than other positions.

 

[SacramentoBob]

No.

Look at the fantasy teams winning it all and they have players like Stafford and Newton on their roster who were FF studs, but not "focused on".

 

[FUBAR]

In a 12 team league, almost half the league had a QB who would "lead" them to a championship. VBD is still vital, but don't get caught waiting too long.

 

[David Yudkin]

I won my league this year with waiver wire QBs (due to massive injuries) and took the league title starting Matt Moore. You can win without a dominant fantasy QB taken with an early pick.

That being said, given the huge production that the big boys get at QB compared to bottom end fantasy starters, taking a QB early certainly is a viable strategy these days and in many leagues probably a decent maneuver.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

I agree with the general sentiment -- the value drop-off between the elite QBs and the next tier is large, which makes them a hotter commodity in RD 1 and early 2 than before. This was true for last year as well, IMO.

But does a dominant QB completely supplant the value of a dominant RB in fantasy?

I don't think so.

I won leagues this year with tandems of Romo/Big Ben/Eli/Sanchez this year. All solid, but none what you would call elite, and aside from Manning, you could say they had middling to worse-than-average years from a fantasy perspective.

Having guys like ADP, Forte, MJD, or Foster was more of a contributing factor for success than my QB positions.

You need to draft the best value player in any round, and let the draft come to you, but my initial approach from a value perspective remains the same: look to get the best elite primary back off the board if I am within the first 3-5 picks of a draft, and wait for QBs who can be had a little later that will stay competitive from a FF perfromance perspective with elite QBs like Brees, Rogers and Brady (Cam, Eli, Stafford and Ryan are good examples from this year).

 

[matttyl]

My league doesn't have "standard/traditional" scoring, but it's not that far off. It awards bonuses for 300 yard passing games, 400 yards, TDs over 20 yards, TDs over 50 yards, 20 completions in a game, and for 30 completions. Each "bonus" is small, though, either 2 or 3 points.

Keep in mind that bonuses are also giving to RBs and WRs for 100+ yard days, long TDs, 5+ receptions, and a few others.

Anyway, the point different for the season between Brees (was #1) and Sanchez (was #10) was 282 points. That was nearly DOUBLE Sanchez' point total for the season, and more than any RB not named McCoy, Rice or Foster, or any WR not named Calvin. It was pretty much like starting an extra player named Gronk every week over your opponent.

I'll take that in the first round every year.

 

[butcher boy]

I dont think its a question of "Can you win without an elite QB", it's more a question of "Is it a good idea to draft an elite QB early?"

I think the answer to that question is quickly becoming yes if you have a mid-late pick. I'll take Brees or Brady any day over guys like Mendenhall or Gore.

 

[zamboni]

I would agree that in most leagues, you need a top QB to win - or at least an above average option.

But as others have said, I don't think it dismisses the RB theory as much as one would think. While the RBBC rage has dampened the value of many RBs, the ability to get the dwindling number of three-down, all-purpose, non-vultured RBs can be a critical advantage.

 

[Concept Coop]

Then, over the past several years, with the advent of more sophisticated fantasy leagues and a real-life trend of RBBC in the NFL, WRs and sometimes even the occasional TE in the right scenario has balanced that out or even made the occasional argument that the RB was bumpde from his perch a bit.

This isn't true. It has really only been this season. 2 TEs and 4 QBs had VBD around the top RB. I feel comfortable saying that is very rare in most formats. Last year, not a single QB offered 100VBD. This year, 4 did. As for the notion of it continuing, I am not sure. It is a very interesting thing to think about, however. I don't have an answer on my opinion, yet.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I would agree that in most leagues, you need a top QB to win - or at least an above average option.

In any worthwhile league which considers overall points instead of SB winners only.

 

[David Yudkin]

I would agree that in most leagues, you need a top QB to win - or at least an above average option.But as others have said, I don't think it dismisses the RB theory as much as one would think. While the RBBC rage has dampened the value of many RBs, the ability to get the dwindling number of three-down, all-purpose, non-vultured RBs can be a critical advantage.

While best saved for a different thread, I think one thing people need to do better to win at fantasy football is do a better job of changing a team strategy to keep winning once it becomes clear that your individual team is what it is. By that I mean identifying who to keep/add, evaluating trades, who on the waiver wire can be a short term fix, etc.I love the threads at the end of the year where an owner laments his players got hurt and ruined his fantasy season. Sure, a ton of injuries can kill you, but it is still possible to press on and still win. For example, I had no real QB for half a season, had Best and Britt go on IR early, had some other guys miss time, and through better research and analysis of guys on the wire and playing matchups still went on to win.The secret is finding where to score more points than the other guys . . . whether that be picking up a kicker or a defense for a week or drafting Aaron Rodgers and all points in between.

 

[RUSF18]

In my primary league, I had the only top tier QB in the playoffs (and I traded for Brady late). Rodgers, Brees, Cam all missed out...if you're including Stafford as top tier, his owner finished 6th. Funny to see the differences in leagues. I lost in the championship to Matt Ryan.

I think we'll see an overreaction to this next season. Rodgers/Brady/Brees should of course go early and often, but the rest have enough question marks where even a little volatility can make that Stafford 1st rounder very risky.

 

[FavreCo]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick. Additionally, the RB is more likely to get hurt than the top 4 QBs. You lose your #1 pick, odds are that you are done.

 

[Concept Coop]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

 

[butcher boy]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

I dont think its a question of "Can you win without an elite QB", it's more a question of "Is it a good idea to draft an elite QB early?"

I think the answer to that question is quickly becoming yes if you have a mid-late pick. I'll take Brees or Brady any day over guys like Mendenhall or Gore.

IMO there's only five RBs worthy of a RD1 selection next year. Rice, Foster, MJD, Forte and McCoy. After that all the RBs are way too risky for a RD1 pick.

There's the ACL trio:

ADP

Charles

Mendy

The "i'm always hurt club"

Darren McFadden

Ryan Mathews

Beanie Wells

DeMarco Murray

The "I don't trust you club"

CJ1K

Marshawn Lynch

The "old mans club"

Fred Jackson

Frank Gore

Steven Jackson

Micheal Turner

I'd personally take Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Newton and Stafford ahead of all those RBs not in the top 5. Add in Calvin, and that's 11 of the first 12 picks. (I do play in 6 pt for all TD leagues)

So to answer the OP, QBs are absolutely taking over in FF.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Yeah, this is wrong.

 

[RavenLunatic]

Great thread!

I would agree that the benefit of one of the top 3 is easy to see and the weekly point advantage is huge.

 

[FavreCo]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Correct. That was why I said top 4. Eli is not top 4. It used to be 3: Brady, P. Manning, Brees. Now it's Brees, Rodgers, Newton and Brady and quite possibly Stafford.

 

[shadyridr]

im gonna make sure i have my qb by rd 3 next yr. whether thats stafford, romo, or brady...heck wrs are such a crapshoot rb, rb qb or rb, gronk or graham, qb might. e the correct plan

 

[cubbie5150]

I agree w/ the sentiment that taking QB after the "top" RBs (& maybe top 2 WRs) are gone makes sense. This year, picking from the 11th out of 12 spots, I went Megatron then Brady w/ pick 2.02 (14th overall). My opinion going into drafts was that if I couldn't get Foster/ADP/Rice/McCoy, I wasn't going RB early. I'm done w/ grabbing a RB in the 1st 2 rounds simply b/c they're a RB. makes no sense to me. Those feeling high & mighty about NOT going QB early can go ahead & enjoy the Mendenhalls/CJ2YPCs of the world. If someone in your league is stupid enough to let one of the top RBs fall, good for you, but barring that, going elite QB makes all the sense in the world as far as I'm concerned

 

[Luke Skywalker]

I went Brady with the 9th pick and finished first. Second place guy had Rodgers, third place Newton, fourth place Stafford. The guy who had Brees had a terrible team and gave up after week 6 or so but still managed sixth.

 

[duaneok66]

I agree w/ the sentiment that taking QB after the "top" RBs (& maybe top 2 WRs) are gone makes sense. This year, picking from the 11th out of 12 spots, I went Megatron then Brady w/ pick 2.02 (14th overall). My opinion going into drafts was that if I couldn't get Foster/ADP/Rice/McCoy, I wasn't going RB early. I'm done w/ grabbing a RB in the 1st 2 rounds simply b/c they're a RB. makes no sense to me. Those feeling high & mighty about NOT going QB early can go ahead & enjoy the Mendenhalls/CJ2YPCs of the world. If someone in your league is stupid enough to let one of the top RBs fall, good for you, but barring that, going elite QB makes all the sense in the world as far as I'm concerned

classic.

 

[bc0312]

I won my league with Eli as my only QB on my roster with the exception of his bye week.

My keys to victory were drafting Roddy White in the 1st, Calvin Johnson in the 2nd, Gronk in the 6th, and picking up Murray off the waiver wire.

 

[shadyridr]

Just look at how many great QB1s there will be next year:

Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Stafford, Cam

Romo, Eli, Rivers, Ben, Peyton?, Vick, Ryan

Thats 12 "sure thing" QB1s. Which means if you wait you will still get a great QB. The thing is the guys in the 1st section are head and shoulders over the guys in the second section. Id still like to secure one of those.

 

[cstu]

In a 12 team league, almost half the league had a QB who would "lead" them to a championship. VBD is still vital, but don't get caught waiting too long.

While it's great to have a top QB it's also important to note that in a start one league it's possible to play QBBC and post good numbers.

 

[The Jerk]

I agree w/ the sentiment that taking QB after the "top" RBs (& maybe top 2 WRs) are gone makes sense. This year, picking from the 11th out of 12 spots, I went Megatron then Brady w/ pick 2.02 (14th overall). My opinion going into drafts was that if I couldn't get Foster/ADP/Rice/McCoy, I wasn't going RB early. I'm done w/ grabbing a RB in the 1st 2 rounds simply b/c they're a RB. makes no sense to me. Those feeling high & mighty about NOT going QB early can go ahead & enjoy the Mendenhalls/CJ2YPCs of the world. If someone in your league is stupid enough to let one of the top RBs fall, good for you, but barring that, going elite QB makes all the sense in the world as far as I'm concerned

classic.

I'm very open to taking any player at any time if the value is present. I've found success drafting a QB in the first round and in the ninth round, and I've found failure both ways too.While I agree with what cubbie5150 said concerning not grabbing a RB in the first two rounds just because they're a RB, that same logic applies to other positions, too, including QB. Just taking a QB in the first two rounds does not guarantee elite production. If Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Newton, Stafford, Eli are all gone, selecting the next QB in the second round (say, pick 16-18 overall) may not be the right move. It may be too late to try to hang QB vs. QB, and it may instead be time to seek an advantage at RB or WR to combat your likely deficit at QB.

All things being equal, I am more than willing to draft an early QB, but at some point, you need to zig where others have zagged. Taking the 7th or 8th best QB in the second round and allowing the team that already has a better QB than you to also get a better RB/WR than you is solidifying your disadvantage.

Personally, I list the QBs I am willing to take in each round prior to the draft. If they are available, I'm happy to pull the trigger. If not, I have my alternative late QB plan as my fall back. Of course, I do this at every position, more or less, so that I can react to what is happening in my draft and not panic by following positional runs.

By the way, the bigger dropoff could possibly be at TE. I'm prepared to take a TE in the 2nd round next year, which I've never done. But Graham and especially Gronkowski are creating a bigger point interval than I've ever seen at tight end. So I need to take that into account in my draft strategy. In fact, I'm hoping that by taking one of those two tight ends early, I can draw at least a few other owners into drafting other TEs early, who are not worth that pick, which will help keep the talent pool at the other positions higher for my next couple of picks.

 

[Kwai Chang Caine]

No.Look at the fantasy teams winning it all and they have players like Stafford and Newton on their roster who were FF studs, but not "focused on".

Wrong. Took Rodgers first round. Title!Of course getting Calvin round 2 didn't hurt. But to echo other posters: you can have Gore and Mendenhall first round. Me, I'll pass.

 

[UnknownCoach]

The issue has always been the fantasy lineup. As long as you have two (some leagues have even more!) starting RBs and only one QB, RBs will continue to be the more important position. It goes back to the origins of fantasy football when you created a fantasy team with 2 RBs because of fullbacks. It hasnt changed. As long as there are twice as many RBs starting on your team as QBs, RBs will be more valuable.

 

[BassNBrew]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Correct. That was why I said top 4. Eli is not top 4. It used to be 3: Brady, P. Manning, Brees. Now it's Brees, Rodgers, Newton and Brady and quite possibly Stafford.

Did sCam get a name change?

 

[BassNBrew]

In a 12 team league, almost half the league had a QB who would "lead" them to a championship. VBD is still vital, but don't get caught waiting too long.

While it's great to have a top QB it's also important to note that in a start one league it's possible to play QBBC and post good numbers.

And it's possible to have Eli in that QBBC and catch all his clunkers while he's benched on good days.

 

[Shutout]

Then, over the past several years, with the advent of more sophisticated fantasy leagues and a real-life trend of RBBC in the NFL, WRs and sometimes even the occasional TE in the right scenario has balanced that out or even made the occasional argument that the RB was bumpde from his perch a bit.

This isn't true. It has really only been this season. 2 TEs and 4 QBs had VBD around the top RB. I feel comfortable saying that is very rare in most formats. Last year, not a single QB offered 100VBD. This year, 4 did. As for the notion of it continuing, I am not sure. It is a very interesting thing to think about, however. I don't have an answer on my opinion, yet.

While it may be subject to your particular league, in mine (and from what I have seen other people post), it is absolutely true. Last year (2010), guys like Jason Witten and the dallas clark/Jaocb tamme combo made ALL the difference. I saw three league, in fact, where guys were winning leagues with the dominant TE points; beating the guys that had AP and Foster. The year before that it was Vernon Davis and Gates. I am sure there were QBs those years too, I just seem to recall the TEs easier. Point being: we have seen simple scoring leagues evolve to sophisticated ones and especially the past few years, we have seen some spectacular throwing and receiving efforts completely unseat the "stud" Rbs. Actually, it has even been the RBs that have come out of nowhere that have swung things more lately than it has been the perennial guys that everyone argues over the top spot each pre-season.

Someone a few posts ago pretty much said where I think this headed: When you have a top 3-5 pick, sure, by all means look at Rice and AP and Foster and mcCoy, etc. But when you are sitting at the 10 spot or something, the QB is the guy to have more than ever before. Just my opinion.

 

[Shutout]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick. Additionally, the RB is more likely to get hurt than the top 4 QBs. You lose your #1 pick, odds are that you are done.

 

[FavreCo]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Correct. That was why I said top 4. Eli is not top 4. It used to be 3: Brady, P. Manning, Brees. Now it's Brees, Rodgers, Newton and Brady and quite possibly Stafford.

Did sCam get a name change?

For fantasy, yes. I still stay clear in 2012 of him even though I would put him in the top 5. Reason being, Freeman and Bradford looked good and then took ####s in years 3 & 2. Newton really started tailing off at the end of the season as more film of him was available. He's a huge risk reward guy for 2012. He does get a candy ### schedule again for 2012 though.

 

[butcher boy]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Yeah, this is wrong.

Wow, you make such a great argument! No, it's not wrong. The first round isnt the time to go for risky guys. It's the time to get guys you know will put up points with the least number of question marks.

 

[FavreCo]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

You do realize why that is silly, right - to pick based on most points? Or is Eli Manning worth a top 10 pick?

Who said anything about Eli Manning. I'm sure he means one of either Rodgers/Brady/Brees.I think it makes some sense too. You dont win your draft with your first round pick but you can sure lose it. Elite QBs are among the most consistent point scorers in fantasy.

Yeah, this is wrong.

Wow, you make such a great argument! No, it's not wrong. The first round isnt the time to go for risky guys. It's the time to get guys you know will put up points with the least number of question marks.

Kinda like our 2008 season (14 team) of Brees in the 1st round. DeAngelo's 20 TD season in the 6th round. DeAngelo & Brees won it for us. While it is 90+% luck, I always go with the most points in the 1st round. Virtual lock for the playoffs and some weekly top score wins. The top 7 QB's were on the 6 playoff teams in our league.Tomlinson & Westbrook, the 2 top 2007 RB's couldn't touch Brees' points.

 

[General Tso]

Barring injury, you can pretty much bank on a top 3 QB. Can you say the same for a RB? Heck no. Look at CJ1K this year.

Best draft strategy - get a top 3 QB and then fill your team with high upside players - guys with a lot of talent and/or opportunity. All you'll need is one of them to break out (ala Gronk, Shady, Calvin, Lynch, etc) and you're pretty much in the playoffs.

VBD is fine, but it has to balanced with consistency and high upside.

 

[fightingillini]

A lot depends on the scoring system. But in general, grabbing a stud QB early is becoming a very viable strategy, if not a recommended one. In one of my leagues (10 teams) here were the top 6 QB values computed as worst starter method. This league has 1 pt /25 yds passing and 4 pts per TD pass

Rodgers 177

Brees 171

Brady 136

Newton 133

Stafford 120

E Manning 63

Top 6 RB values were (PPR league, start 2RB)

Rice 191

McCoy 146

Foster 125

MJD 114

Sproles 83

Lynch 59

To 6 WR values were (PPR league, start 3WR)

Calvin 189

Welker 161

Cruz 120

J Nelson 117

White 100

Fitzgerald 93

Values are fairly similar. But the key is Rodgers, Brees, and Brady were all early picks where only Vick was a bust out of the early picked QBs. At the RB position, Rice, McCoy and Foster were early selections...but you could have chosen Chris Johnson, AP, McFadden, Charles or Mendenhall who were all 1st round busts due to injury or lack of elite performance. At WR position, Calvin, White and Fitz were early picks but you would have busted on AJ, Nicks, and V Jackson, and Jennings got hurt.

So based on early picks, you have about a 75% hit rate on QBs, and 50% at best at RB or WR positions. So that should entice more 1st round stud QB draft selections. You know what you're getting and the bust rate is fairly low. In fact we all knew about Vick's injury risk, so the rate is even higher than 75%. Seriously, is there any reason why Rodgers won't throw for 4500+ yards and 37+ TDs next year? Injury is the only reason. It's not like GB is all of sudden going to start running the ball. You can say the same about Brees and Brady. Newton will be a slight risk as a 1st round QB, but he should cut down his INTs and increse his passing TDs to make up for a likely lower rushing TD total.

Now this analysis is with 4 pts per TD pass and PPR. Non PPR leagues or PPR leagues with QBs scoring 6 points per TD pass will make you lean even more towards a 1st round QB. In fact in a nonPPR league with 6 points per TD pass, I take Rodgers #1 overall and not look back. With 6 pts per TD pass and PPR, it would be a tough call between Rice and Rodgers and I wouldn't fault anyone for picking the other side.

Yes, the days of drafting 2RBs early is gone. And it's made drafts a lot more fun and interesting.

 

[fightingillini]

In a 12 team league, almost half the league had a QB who would "lead" them to a championship. VBD is still vital, but don't get caught waiting too long.

While it's great to have a top QB it's also important to note that in a start one league it's possible to play QBBC and post good numbers.

And it's possible to have Eli in that QBBC and catch all his clunkers while he's benched on good days.

That was my year in a nutshell in one league. I had Romo and Eli after acquiring Eli cheap in a postdraft trade. I picked wrong 10 of the 16 games. And two of the 6 that I got right were because their byes.

 

[Andrew74]

Not sure of others, but in one of my dynasty leagues the perceived value of top QBs is crazy. I was told it would take Jennings, Julio AND AJ Green for Brees.

 

[ark]

I agree w/ the sentiment that taking QB after the "top" RBs (& maybe top 2 WRs) are gone makes sense. This year, picking from the 11th out of 12 spots, I went Megatron then Brady w/ pick 2.02 (14th overall). My opinion going into drafts was that if I couldn't get Foster/ADP/Rice/McCoy, I wasn't going RB early. I'm done w/ grabbing a RB in the 1st 2 rounds simply b/c they're a RB. makes no sense to me. Those feeling high & mighty about NOT going QB early can go ahead & enjoy the Mendenhalls/CJ2YPCs of the world. If someone in your league is stupid enough to let one of the top RBs fall, good for you, but barring that, going elite QB makes all the sense in the world as far as I'm concerned

classic.

I'm very open to taking any player at any time if the value is present. I've found success drafting a QB in the first round and in the ninth round, and I've found failure both ways too.While I agree with what cubbie5150 said concerning not grabbing a RB in the first two rounds just because they're a RB, that same logic applies to other positions, too, including QB. Just taking a QB in the first two rounds does not guarantee elite production. If Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Newton, Stafford, Eli are all gone, selecting the next QB in the second round (say, pick 16-18 overall) may not be the right move. It may be too late to try to hang QB vs. QB, and it may instead be time to seek an advantage at RB or WR to combat your likely deficit at QB.

All things being equal, I am more than willing to draft an early QB, but at some point, you need to zig where others have zagged. Taking the 7th or 8th best QB in the second round and allowing the team that already has a better QB than you to also get a better RB/WR than you is solidifying your disadvantage.

Personally, I list the QBs I am willing to take in each round prior to the draft. If they are available, I'm happy to pull the trigger. If not, I have my alternative late QB plan as my fall back. Of course, I do this at every position, more or less, so that I can react to what is happening in my draft and not panic by following positional runs.

By the way, the bigger dropoff could possibly be at TE. I'm prepared to take a TE in the 2nd round next year, which I've never done. But Graham and especially Gronkowski are creating a bigger point interval than I've ever seen at tight end. So I need to take that into account in my draft strategy. In fact, I'm hoping that by taking one of those two tight ends early, I can draw at least a few other owners into drafting other TEs early, who are not worth that pick, which will help keep the talent pool at the other positions higher for my next couple of picks.

Both very good posts!

 

[kface]

we had a huge discussion about this in our league yesterday. the difference in pts in the top person and the #10 person at the same position are below

QB = 202

WR = 111

RB = 134

TE = 139

rodgers, the top qb had 476 total pts this season

ray rice, the top rb, had 303 total pts this season

megatron, the top wr had 274 total pts this season

you can see that the drop off at qb is huge and they are well worth a top pick

 

[FantasyTrader]

we had a huge discussion about this in our league yesterday. the difference in pts in the top person and the #10 person at the same position are below

QB = 202

WR = 111

RB = 134

TE = 139

rodgers, the top qb had 476 total pts this season

ray rice, the top rb, had 303 total pts this season

megatron, the top wr had 274 total pts this season

you can see that the drop off at qb is huge and they are well worth a top pick

Not necessarily. What we can see is that the dropoff between #1 and #10 across all positions was greatest at QB...this year. Also, just saying #1 vs. #10, those are just arbitrary points on the continuum and not a full-proof map for you to use when making decisions next year.

 

[GridironMenace]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

This is pretty dumb and clearly identifies your lack of understanding VBD. Who in the world compares points from each round? That is just stupid. This year you could take your Aaron Rodgers at pick #7 and I'll gladly take my McCoy or Foster. The fact that Rodgers will outscore McCoy means absolutely nothing. What matters is adding the points scored from my Matthew Stafford in round 6 vs. your scrub HB that you drafted in round 6 Ryan Grant. I'll take my Stafford/McCoy vs. your Rodgers/Grant any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. Get in the ring, son. Get in the ring!

 

[butcher boy]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

This is pretty dumb and clearly identifies your lack of understanding VBD. Who in the world compares points from each round? That is just stupid. This year you could take your Aaron Rodgers at pick #7 and I'll gladly take my McCoy or Foster. The fact that Rodgers will outscore McCoy means absolutely nothing. What matters is adding the points scored from my Matthew Stafford in round 6 vs. your scrub HB that you drafted in round 6 Ryan Grant. I'll take my Stafford/McCoy vs. your Rodgers/Grant any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. Get in the ring, son. Get in the ring!

Your strategy assumes you're going to hit on landing an elite RB at the end of round 1. There is a higher likelihood that whatever RB you take there will bust or get hurt. Sure, in hindsight, the McCoy pick is brilliant there, but in that range you could've easily picked McFadden, Mendenhall, or Charles, and where would that "value" have gotten you? If you can correctly pick next year's McCoy, then yeah it's a sound strategy. But picking a consistent high scorer in the first round in order to lower your percentage of busting is not a losing strategy.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

I take the most points possible in the 1st round. That is a top 4 QB. Instantly I am up 200+ points over your 1st round pick.

This is pretty dumb and clearly identifies your lack of understanding VBD. Who in the world compares points from each round? That is just stupid. This year you could take your Aaron Rodgers at pick #7 and I'll gladly take my McCoy or Foster. The fact that Rodgers will outscore McCoy means absolutely nothing. What matters is adding the points scored from my Matthew Stafford in round 6 vs. your scrub HB that you drafted in round 6 Ryan Grant. I'll take my Stafford/McCoy vs. your Rodgers/Grant any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. Get in the ring, son. Get in the ring!

Your strategy assumes you're going to hit on landing an elite RB at the end of round 1. There is a higher likelihood that whatever RB you take there will bust or get hurt. Sure, in hindsight, the McCoy pick is brilliant there, but in that range you could've easily picked McFadden, Mendenhall, or Charles, and where would that "value" have gotten you? If you can correctly pick next year's McCoy, then yeah it's a sound strategy. But picking a consistent high scorer in the first round in order to lower your percentage of busting is not a losing strategy.

This.I pick 11th in a 12 man redraft next year. Rice, McCoy, Foster, MJD and Forte are all gone along with another couple RBs that are looking promising. So which RB would you like me to take? McFadden? Charles? CJ1K? I'll take the safety of a top 5QB over any of those risky RB options.