This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Gerrard was a top 12 QB in most scoring systems last year? Why would you not expect similar performance if you drafted him this year?
Grahamburn said:I feel like there are a lot of 2010 Footballguys' subscriptions riding on David Garrard's performance this season.
"I've done a lot of expert analysis this offseason, crunched the numbers, and am ready to announce that your football team will be helped greatly by drafting Tom Brady or Drew Brees."What are the alternatives?
No, I personally see no value in rolling out a QB who can only get me 17 points each week. I can add/drop guys off the waiver wire all year and still expect that type of production. I want a guy, whether he's a backup or a starter that has a better than average chance of putting up some strong games, and Garrard just hasn't shown to be that guy. Yes, he is consistently average. Who wants that?
The other funny part about that is the bolded. Chase "seems" to be saying this "might" be one of those weeks? Um, no, he's put out an APB on it, stating he expects top 5 numbers and to start your Jags, including Williamson. Fair enough, but jafo trying to downplay (defend) the "announcement" amused me.
I would expect similar numbers as last year, hopefully better. But those numbers are not QB1 numbers.
I'm certainly not downplaying it, just a poor choice of words on my part. Chase is certainly saying it is one of those weeks, but I feel it might be. I don't feel as strongly about his success this week as Chase, but I'm willing to roll the dice.
the 12th scoring QB isn't a QB1 or at least part of a QB1BC in a 12-team league? Everyone can't have Brady or Brees.
Maybe we have different definitions of QB1. How do you define it?
I typically consider top 10 numbers QB1. Garrard is almost there, and has enough upside my opinion to finish there if he plays good. I didn't draft him expecting Top 10 numbers but I will take it if he can pull it off. I took Big Ben a couple rounds before so I'm willing to play match ups to increase my chances.
The problem I believe, is that he's only the 12th ranked QB in total points, not points per game. So, on average per week, he's not a top 12 QB, so no he's not a QB1. You would stand a better chance of fielding a QB1 by filling in with other better PPG players. So, why handicap yourself in the first place by drafting a guy who is at best, the worst QB1 in your league most likely, or at worst, not as good as half of the other QB2s on a per game basis? That kind of conservative play just doesn't win too many fantasy leagues.
This is my QB trio as well. Declared Cutler as my keeper this year (LT was eligibility was expired, and retained R. White for one last season), drafted Garrard in the 10th, and ended up with Hass after I lost power during the draft and MFL drafted him according to ADP. I avoided a loss with Cutler as my starter last week, and I avoided Hass in the draft.Goona play wait and see, but I am leaning towards DG.
I've got the same Schaub or Garrard decision.I'm leaning towards Garrard.Schaub seems like a high risk play this week. Houston looked pathetic last week...at home. He now rolls into TN...not exactly an easy defense. Also, if you look at what Schaub did in TN last year...well, ugly.I'm not sure Garrard is going to throw for 300+ and 3 TDs, but I think he's a pretty solid play with upside. AZ is travelling all the way to the east coast for a 1 pm game. Historically, AZ just stinks in these games. I could totally see Garrard and JAX looking like world beaters Sunday.Schaub on the other hand could totally lay an egg. Worse, if Houston's coaches dont' wake up TN may knock Schaub out of the game.As for the love for Garrard, I think he's sneaky solid...over the course of an entire year. He ranked 10th last year in my scoring despite having no WRs and a lousy offensive line.KY
If he does poorly this week, sure. If he does great, will the Garrard hating please stop?
Schaub was horrible @TN last year. Three picks. No TDs. Less than 200 yards.This, along with what looked like a coaching staff incapable of making adjustments against a good D, has me thinking Garrard. KY
I'd like to think you're aware there are several options between Brady/Brees and Garrard.
Are there 12 QBs better than QB12?
12 team league, one team may be forced to start the 12th best QB. Garrard is a top 12 QB, maybe even a bottom top 10 this season. He isn't the most ideal starter, but for those who went after RBs and/or WRs very early and waited to take a QB, Garrard is a good option. A very solid one actually.
Exactly.You draft a Brees or Brady and you're going to suffer somewhere else.
Is having the QB12 in a 12 team league always the shark move?
Haha, go ahead and like a condescending *****. Garrard wasn't a top 12 QB last year in most formats. Maybe in total points he was but not in PPG, which is more important since you can fill in with a different QB when someone doesn't play. So Corky, I'll speak even slower for you. Garrard was not a QB1 in a 12 team league last year. What's even worse about your lack of ability to read is that I didn't comment on Tomarken's point. I responded to Rudnicki's post where he insinuated that you either have to get Brady/Brees or end up with Garrard. And you can do it without taking a QB in the third or fourth round.
If you're strong everywhere else on your roster because you waited on QB - possibly. There are lots of different ways to build a winning team.
True. Which is why I said there were a lot of options between Brees/Brady and Garrard. This site suggests every year to wait on a QB, grab value late, play QBBC, and avoid the studs early. I personally think that was terrible advice this year but to each his own. There is just as much "value" in the middle to late rounds for RB and WR as there is at QB. You just have to hit on the right guy.
So now the fact that Garrard plays every single week is a negative?What's it going to cost to draft two QB's who will each score more than Garrard on a points per game basis? And even if you pay that price, how confident are you that you'll start the right one each week?
Since the Perfect Draft sucks so much, please post your team (or most competitive league if you're in many) and let's see it.I'm in the boat that believes ANYONE who drafted both Garrard and Schaub as their QB's, will pretty much be hating this season by week 7 and be looking to:A) trade for a better optionB) complain about listening to the "Perfect draft" theoryC) probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues.Schaub has A. Johnson and Slaton...possibly put up some decent numbers. But the guy is as fragile as Shockey, and Garrard I have never seen anything in him that makes him worth drafting.For your sake, hopefully I'm wrong...but only time will tell.Good luck with all that and I'll be keeping an eye open to watch it unfold.
what does that have to do with the initial comment that "even if Garrard finishes the year as QB12, he's not a QB1"?obviously there are other QB1 options out there. I even indicated he was part of a QB1BC, meaning that you could start him for at least half the season and likely be fine.
Right, it is about value.It's been a while since I read that article, but I think the point was that Garrard was the best VALUE, as far as projected points vs. average draft pick.
There are different ways to skin this cat. Even if we accept that Garrard is a top 12 QB, and therefore, a certifiable starter, he is one sort of a value if he's your FFL team's top QB; he is of quite another value (a much higher value) if you drafted him as your 2nd QB, which you could easily have done by using Dodd's strategy as a guide. I think the strategy could be considered dangerous if you drafted Garrard, and ignored QBs the rest of the way for the most part. I think it can be a winning one if you grabbed a quality (even if not necessarily Breese or Brady) in the middle rounds, and got Garrard late. I ended up with McNabb and Garrard (like many in this thread), and felt very good about it (till McNabb got hurt). Plucked Sanchez off of the WW, as a precaution, but will start Garrard this week.
I never insinuated that at all. Not sure where you got that from my post. I don't even like Garrard and don't think I have him on any of my teams this year.
Really? I don't know if I believe this. Which of the following would you expect to produce more points than Garrard this week:
Never said the perfect drafts "sucks", I just feel that the Schaub/Garrard combo will leave many owners regretting the selection.And I don't play in redraft leagues, so my roster wouldn't be relevant. Good luck finding another person to bait into an E-argument though.Since the Perfect Draft sucks so much, please post your team (or most competitive league if you're in many) and let's see it.I'm in the boat that believes ANYONE who drafted both Garrard and Schaub as their QB's, will pretty much be hating this season by week 7 and be looking to:A) trade for a better optionB) complain about listening to the "Perfect draft" theoryC) probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues.Schaub has A. Johnson and Slaton...possibly put up some decent numbers. But the guy is as fragile as Shockey, and Garrard I have never seen anything in him that makes him worth drafting.For your sake, hopefully I'm wrong...but only time will tell.Good luck with all that and I'll be keeping an eye open to watch it unfold.
You said "ANYONE" who follows that advice will "probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues."That's saying (or implying rather) that the perfect draft sucks.NYCGangGreen said:Never said the perfect drafts "sucks", I just feel that the Schaub/Garrard combo will leave many owners regretting the selection.And I don't play in redraft leagues, so my roster wouldn't be relevant. Good luck finding another person to bait into an E-argument though.benbadman said:Since the Perfect Draft sucks so much, please post your team (or most competitive league if you're in many) and let's see it.NYCGangGreen said:I'm in the boat that believes ANYONE who drafted both Garrard and Schaub as their QB's, will pretty much be hating this season by week 7 and be looking to:A) trade for a better optionB) complain about listening to the "Perfect draft" theoryC) probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues.Schaub has A. Johnson and Slaton...possibly put up some decent numbers. But the guy is as fragile as Shockey, and Garrard I have never seen anything in him that makes him worth drafting.For your sake, hopefully I'm wrong...but only time will tell.Good luck with all that and I'll be keeping an eye open to watch it unfold.
Thanks for the assist. It amazes me why some people continue to frequent FootballGuys if they loathe their program so much. I understand some guys are cheap and don't want to pony up $25 for the sub, and come to the boards for the hit or miss content.And speaking of e-arguments, there aren't many than can top this flame war (scroll down to the pictures):You said "ANYONE" who follows that advice will "probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues."That's saying (or implying rather) that the perfect draft sucks.NYCGangGreen said:Never said the perfect drafts "sucks", I just feel that the Schaub/Garrard combo will leave many owners regretting the selection.And I don't play in redraft leagues, so my roster wouldn't be relevant. Good luck finding another person to bait into an E-argument though.benbadman said:Since the Perfect Draft sucks so much, please post your team (or most competitive league if you're in many) and let's see it.NYCGangGreen said:I'm in the boat that believes ANYONE who drafted both Garrard and Schaub as their QB's, will pretty much be hating this season by week 7 and be looking to:
A) trade for a better option
B) complain about listening to the "Perfect draft" theory
C) probably not even sniff the playoffs in their leagues.
Schaub has A. Johnson and Slaton...possibly put up some decent numbers. But the guy is as fragile as Shockey, and Garrard I have never seen anything in him that makes him worth drafting.
For your sake, hopefully I'm wrong...but only time will tell.
Good luck with all that and I'll be keeping an eye open to watch it unfold.
Actually, maybe I will start Campbell over Garrard. Who knows.karmarooster said:
Campbell vs. St Louis Orton vs. Clevelandkarmarooster said:
If you're playing in a best ball format, you could start him half the time and be fine. But you're assuming that you will make the right call every week on when to start him and when to sit him which is a big assumption, IMO.Aaron Rudnicki said:
