The year to wait and take your QB (1 Viewer)

[Zackattack]

I see 3 QB's going off the board in alot of mocks and probably in most real drafts in round 1.

2nd or 3rd round you have Cam and Stafford.

Then there's Vick and Romo usually rounds 3-5.

That leaves a large group of solid QB's who will likely fall to you in the 6th round.

Eli, Peyton, Ryan and Rivers!

I really can't see why I should take one of those guys early?

You could wind up picking 7th with the likes of

McFadden

Fitz

Bradshaw

Nicks

Gates

your choice of which QB falls.

I don't see how I won't go this route drafting 7th and 8th in two drafts coming up. You could change the picks there and grab 2 good RB's and 2 good WR's. In the 5th take the best available RB, WR or TE.

 

[butcher boy]

I've made up my own "75% rule" when it comes to QBs.

I want to have a starting QB that I can start with confidence at least 75% of the time. Playing QBBC every week seems easy in August but a lot of times is incredibly frustrating in practice.

So far, my cutoff for being able to start a QB 75% of the time is somehwhere in the Matt Ryan/Tony Romo tier. I will not be waiting any longer than that to take a QB.

 

[Voodoo Rage]

Do whatever you are comfortable with and obviously you need to look at your own league's scoring and roster requirements but while guys like Eli Manning (who had a career year) seem like perfectly solid QB's, the fact of the matter is that the elite guys at the top of the draft are predictably going to outscore him by a very significant margin. You also need to factor in that the running backs have become VERY risky draft picks. Look back over your drafts in recent years, in most leagues of the top RB's taken in the 1st and early 2nd rounds, only about half of them really produce as expected. Meanwhile Brady, Brees, and Rodgers have been producing at the top of their position for many years now. I am really sold this year on taking an elite RB and possibly even Graham or Gronk in the next round and just rolling a platoon of mediocre RB's all year.

It's also a myth that running backs are extremely hard to come by over the course of the season. The reality is that there is a lot of turnover in the position over the course of the year with lots of different undrafted guys popping into the top 20 in any given week. I think it's a very legitimate strategy to load up on a LOT of running backs during the draft and expect to get 2 reasonable starters out of the bunch.

 

[Zackattack]

The years I have won I usually get my QB later in the draft. If it doesn't pan out there are free agent QB's (Cam last year) or trades. You can get Forte, McFadden or MJD and the end of the first. They are proven with some risk yes. The number of good RB's is real small this year. I know there are plenty of good WR's available this year too.

 

[-jb-]

I'm admittedly a little too hell-bent on drafting Matt Ryan. He's the value-play this year. My original plan was to take a few mid-round QBs, and was looking hard at Peyton as a QB2. That's when I noticed something that everyone should be aware of if the plan is to grab a few mid-round QBs.

WEEK SEVEN BYES:

Rivers

Vick

Ryan

Manning

Four out of six of the lowr half of QB1s have byes. That's nuts.

 

[rubrink]

I LOVE the QB depth this year. And I've really started falling for Matt Ryan over the past week or so. You've got two WRs being picked in the top 10, and most of the time I see him going in the QB9-13 range.

If I end up with ANY of the top 12 QBs this year, I'll be happy. Match them up with Cutler and you're golden

 

[solorca]

Like others I think Ryan is the smart play this year. I think after last night though, his stock may rise. In a league that drafts qbs early, he may be a 5th or early 6 pick now.

I'll still take him at that value.

 

[-jb-]

Like others I think Ryan is the smart play this year. I think after last night though, his stock may rise. In a league that drafts qbs early, he may be a 5th or early 6 pick now. I'll still take him at that value.

My guess is he's a 4th in QB-friendly leagues now.

 

[Sweetness_34]

Ryan and Peyton Manning are the money plays....in a FFPC draft from the 2nd hole, I got Peyton in the 7th and I am thrilled.

 

[chiefs2929]

Matt Ryan will be mine in the fifth-6th round. I've seen him going pick 50-60 and he will probably move up and Julio will move to top 15

 

[David Yudkin]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year.

LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.

Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.

Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.

If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

 

[Instinctive]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year.

LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.

Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.

Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.

If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

That's not necessarily true, I feel. Because going QB early alters my draft strategy in the 2nd/3rd/etc...theoretically, sure my picks could be the same. Realistically? They won't be. I might start of Rodgers/SJax instead of DMC/Julio - see what I mean? You need to look at what happens at each position and compare the totals. It could turn out that going QB/WR/WR/RB ends up being your best bet if you go QB first, but going RB/RB/WR/QB is best if you're drafting a RB first - because your pick impacts runs, who will fall, and other factors. I don't think it is as simple as "plug the same two guys into round 2 and 3 and just compare the QB in 1 with RB in 4 vs RB in 1 and QB in 4."

 

[need2know]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year.

LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.

Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.

Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.

If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

That's not necessarily true, I feel. Because going QB early alters my draft strategy in the 2nd/3rd/etc...theoretically, sure my picks could be the same. Realistically? They won't be. I might start of Rodgers/SJax instead of DMC/Julio - see what I mean? You need to look at what happens at each position and compare the totals. It could turn out that going QB/WR/WR/RB ends up being your best bet if you go QB first, but going RB/RB/WR/QB is best if you're drafting a RB first - because your pick impacts runs, who will fall, and other factors. I don't think it is as simple as "plug the same two guys into round 2 and 3 and just compare the QB in 1 with RB in 4 vs RB in 1 and QB in 4."

good post. I am drafting from the 10 spot and am starting to like the QB/WR/WR/RB approach....

 

[David Yudkin]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year.

LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.

Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.

Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.

If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

That's not necessarily true, I feel. Because going QB early alters my draft strategy in the 2nd/3rd/etc...theoretically, sure my picks could be the same. Realistically? They won't be. I might start of Rodgers/SJax instead of DMC/Julio - see what I mean? You need to look at what happens at each position and compare the totals. It could turn out that going QB/WR/WR/RB ends up being your best bet if you go QB first, but going RB/RB/WR/QB is best if you're drafting a RB first - because your pick impacts runs, who will fall, and other factors. I don't think it is as simple as "plug the same two guys into round 2 and 3 and just compare the QB in 1 with RB in 4 vs RB in 1 and QB in 4."

My point in this was that in reality, those SHOULD be the only changes in evaluating the situation. Again, IN THEORY, the players would be available to both teams the rest of the draft, so CONCEPTUALLY the only difference should be those two picks.However, so many times people want to completely obscure the results by projecting crappy RBs and WRs to the guy that took the QB early and assign only the home run picks at RB and WR to the guy that waited on a QB.

I would argue that if I started off with a 200 point scoring advantage, I have more wriggle room to miss on some picks than the other team(s). At that point, I can rest easy thinking I have banked value points. If I DIDN'T start off like that, I may have my eye on a QB or two downstream . . . but what happens if someone else takes Vick or Ryan or Cutler. Then what?

So some how the argument becomes . . . if you draft a QB early, that owner instantly becomes brain dead and will draft horribly the rest of the draft, while the savy owner that waits on a QB will hit on every pick until he takes a QB.

 

[Instinctive]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year.

LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.

Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.

Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.

If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

That's not necessarily true, I feel. Because going QB early alters my draft strategy in the 2nd/3rd/etc...theoretically, sure my picks could be the same. Realistically? They won't be. I might start of Rodgers/SJax instead of DMC/Julio - see what I mean? You need to look at what happens at each position and compare the totals. It could turn out that going QB/WR/WR/RB ends up being your best bet if you go QB first, but going RB/RB/WR/QB is best if you're drafting a RB first - because your pick impacts runs, who will fall, and other factors. I don't think it is as simple as "plug the same two guys into round 2 and 3 and just compare the QB in 1 with RB in 4 vs RB in 1 and QB in 4."

My point in this was that in reality, those SHOULD be the only changes in evaluating the situation. Again, IN THEORY, the players would be available to both teams the rest of the draft, so CONCEPTUALLY the only difference should be those two picks.However, so many times people want to completely obscure the results by projecting crappy RBs and WRs to the guy that took the QB early and assign only the home run picks at RB and WR to the guy that waited on a QB.

I would argue that if I started off with a 200 point scoring advantage, I have more wriggle room to miss on some picks than the other team(s). At that point, I can rest easy thinking I have banked value points. If I DIDN'T start off like that, I may have my eye on a QB or two downstream . . . but what happens if someone else takes Vick or Ryan or Cutler. Then what?

So some how the argument becomes . . . if you draft a QB early, that owner instantly becomes brain dead and will draft horribly the rest of the draft, while the savy owner that waits on a QB will hit on every pick until he takes a QB.

Totally agree that that's a poor argument. I hate it when people pick the player who "busted" when the guys drafted right about that ADP either did what was expected or hit and the owner couldn't possibly have picked them.But I also think simple comparing your 1st round RB and 5th round QB to the 1st round QB and 5th round RB is wrong. You need to look at the whole picture because, as I said earlier, who you take has an impact on who will be available next time.

 

[Zackattack]

Last year I took Stafford in 3 leagues. I got him in the 5th or 6th rounds. I picked up Cam in 2 leagues after 1 week. It may not always work but it did last year. Ryan could be a top 5 guy this year. Rivers was 2 years ago. he could bounce back.

 

[Sabertooth]

I have the first pick so on that 24/25, unless Rodgers or Brady falls, I'm passing. They won't fall, but somebody else will. But the next time through, on the 48/49 I might look for a quarterback depending. I am perfectly comfortable with a guy like Cutler.

 

[aburt19]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year. LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

I disagree that it is a comparison of only two players on each team.I draft #1, you draft #2.First round, I take Foster, you take Rodgers (or Brees or Brady).Second round you take a RB and I match you with a RB.Third round I take a WR and you take a 2nd RB.Fourth round you take a WR and I take a WR.Fifth round I take a QB and you take a WRHere's the actual analysis of the differences. Since we both took running backs in the 2nd round, that's a push. In the 4th round we bothtook a WR and that's a push. The advantage to your team is from Rodgers to whoever I took in the 5th round. The advantage to my team is thedifference between Foster and the running back in round 3 plus the difference between the WR that I took in round three and the WR that you tookin round 5.I'm not saying that going with Foster in the 1st round is better, just that it's not just a comparison between two players on each team.

 

[David Yudkin]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year. LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

I disagree that it is a comparison of only two players on each team.I draft #1, you draft #2.First round, I take Foster, you take Rodgers (or Brees or Brady).Second round you take a RB and I match you with a RB.Third round I take a WR and you take a 2nd RB.Fourth round you take a WR and I take a WR.Fifth round I take a QB and you take a WRHere's the actual analysis of the differences. Since we both took running backs in the 2nd round, that's a push. In the 4th round we bothtook a WR and that's a push. The advantage to your team is from Rodgers to whoever I took in the 5th round. The advantage to my team is thedifference between Foster and the running back in round 3 plus the difference between the WR that I took in round three and the WR that you tookin round 5.I'm not saying that going with Foster in the 1st round is better, just that it's not just a comparison between two players on each team.

My point, for the third time, was that you still had the same decision making process and the same options to select from in either scenario. No matter what, each team had the same data set of players to chose from -- with the exception of the one player that would have been taken instead of the player that was actually selected in the first round. Since the same player could never be on 2 teams in the first place, you can't include all the other picks in other rounds in the analysis . . . that would have happened anyway. Again, this usually turns into people "guessing" which players would have been taken along the way, and each side will tend to "guess" in their favor based on which position they are arguing.It starts to get really hard to analyze when the 2 teams have different positions taken in the rounds in question. For example, say TEAM X took a QB in the 1st while TEAM Y took a RB. But in the 7th round TEAM Y took a QB, while TEAM X took a WR. I think the issue for me, anyways, is that people some how want to draft completely differently based on who they took with that first pick as if they now would not drop certain players that fell to them. Sure, I get you may have to fill different spots at different times, but if I took Rodgers in the first instead of a RB, I am not going to suddenly pass on Megatron if he were there in Round 2 because I feel like I HAVE to get a RB because I passed on one the first time.

 

[The Kuhn]

The big difference is drafting a QB early that you know will start the whole season (or at least has a strong history of doing so) vs. drafting someone who will likely miss some time. If you take a Brady/Rodgers/Brees very early, you're not only taking based on performance, but reliability. You know you won't need to use a mid-round pick to get a capable backup. If you end up with an unproven commodity- I'd still put Newton and Stafford in this group as they only have one solid season under their belt, Romo/Peyton due to injury risk- you need to use up a RB3/RB4/WR3/WR4 depth pick later for a QB2 for more security.

In terms of tiers:

QB1 Elite Tier- Brady/Brees/Rodgers (could almost get by with FA backup)- likely gone by end of rd 2

QB2/QB1-potential Tier- Stafford/Newton/Eli/Rivers (need more production to bump to QB1, possible cold streaks)- taken in rds 2-4

QB3/QB2 with higher risk Tier- Peyton/Romo/Ryan/Cutler/Vick/Roethlisberger/Schaub (injury risks, turnover penalty-prone, run-centric offense)- rd 5+

It's worth noting too that Brees, Stafford, and Ryan are playing in domes or fair weather for almost all of the 2nd half of the season.

 

[massraider]

Y'all better hope the top guys come back to the pack, or you're in serious trouble.

I'd like to hear what kind of PROJECTIONS people have for these bargain QBs, and where they plan on making up the difference.

Just because there is a lot of questions and no depth at RB, doesn't mean that rushing out and grabbing two RBs is the smart draft strategy. You can have the best backs, but if you are trotting out Matt Ryan and Jermaine Gresham every week, and you are playing some guy with Stafford and Graham, his backs may not even matter.

It's all about points. Points is what wins, not well-balanced rosters. Jimmy Graham scored more points than Chris Johnson and Matt Forte last year.

Aaron Rodgers scored as much as Matt Ryan did--if you add DeMarco Murray's point total to Matt Ryan.

What is more likely--that you can find a diamond in the rough in the middle to late rounds at RB (not to mention the waiver wire), or your 1st round RB scored 150 points more than the other guys top back, to make up the difference.

Forget position. Look at the points. Add them up. Give me the 11th or 12th pick, and I'll take Rodgers/Brady/Staff/Brees and Graham all day long. And let you figure out where you gonna make up my 350 point advantage at QB and TE.

 

[aburt19]

It's always 1) a numbers game and 2) a game of figuring out if this year will be a photocopy of last year. LAST YEAR, if you ended up with Rodgers, Brees, or Brady, you pretty much started off with a 150-200 point scoring advantage compared to those in the QB7-12 range (depending upon the socring system). The question then becomes, does waiting on a QB make up for that lost QB scoring? Given that in most leagues that 150-200 point scoring margin is more than a RB or WR even scores in a year, I would say probably not.Remember, the only real difference is a combination of TWO PLAYERS. All other picks could theoretically be the same. So take whatever other position you would have used instead of a few early QB and compare that to where you actually took a QB. THAT'S IT. RB/QB, WR/QB, or TE/QB. Add up the points and compare that to QB/RB, QB/WR, or QB/TE. That's the start of your answer.Certainly a case could (and should) be made that QBs may not score like they did last year and that the scoring differential from gods to humans may not be as big this season. But in the main, I still think that you can lose a lot of scoring from one of the early QBs compared to the second or third wave of QBs.If you think that this year there will be a lot of QB scoring again, I would suggest this is the year to NOT wait to take a QB. If people think the QB totals will go down, then I would seuggest that you are better off on waiting on a QB.

I disagree that it is a comparison of only two players on each team.I draft #1, you draft #2.First round, I take Foster, you take Rodgers (or Brees or Brady).Second round you take a RB and I match you with a RB.Third round I take a WR and you take a 2nd RB.Fourth round you take a WR and I take a WR.Fifth round I take a QB and you take a WRHere's the actual analysis of the differences. Since we both took running backs in the 2nd round, that's a push. In the 4th round we bothtook a WR and that's a push. The advantage to your team is from Rodgers to whoever I took in the 5th round. The advantage to my team is thedifference between Foster and the running back in round 3 plus the difference between the WR that I took in round three and the WR that you tookin round 5.I'm not saying that going with Foster in the 1st round is better, just that it's not just a comparison between two players on each team.

My point, for the third time, was that you still had the same decision making process and the same options to select from in either scenario. No matter what, each team had the same data set of players to chose from -- with the exception of the one player that would have been taken instead of the player that was actually selected in the first round. Since the same player could never be on 2 teams in the first place, you can't include all the other picks in other rounds in the analysis . . . that would have happened anyway. Again, this usually turns into people "guessing" which players would have been taken along the way, and each side will tend to "guess" in their favor based on which position they are arguing.It starts to get really hard to analyze when the 2 teams have different positions taken in the rounds in question. For example, say TEAM X took a QB in the 1st while TEAM Y took a RB. But in the 7th round TEAM Y took a QB, while TEAM X took a WR. I think the issue for me, anyways, is that people some how want to draft completely differently based on who they took with that first pick as if they now would not drop certain players that fell to them. Sure, I get you may have to fill different spots at different times, but if I took Rodgers in the first instead of a RB, I am not going to suddenly pass on Megatron if he were there in Round 2 because I feel like I HAVE to get a RB because I passed on one the first time.

The example that I used was the simplest way to show that the comparison goes beyond two players. Other examples would be much harder tocompare and could involve differences on both sides for many more players, based on when positions were drafted.ETA: It also assumes that players don't either exceed or fall short of the projection, don't get injured, etc.

 

[need2know]

Y'all better hope the top guys come back to the pack, or you're in serious trouble.

I'd like to hear what kind of PROJECTIONS people have for these bargain QBs, and where they plan on making up the difference.

Just because there is a lot of questions and no depth at RB, doesn't mean that rushing out and grabbing two RBs is the smart draft strategy. You can have the best backs, but if you are trotting out Matt Ryan and Jermaine Gresham every week, and you are playing some guy with Stafford and Graham, his backs may not even matter.

It's all about points. Points is what wins, not well-balanced rosters. Jimmy Graham scored more points than Chris Johnson and Matt Forte last year.

Aaron Rodgers scored as much as Matt Ryan did--if you add DeMarco Murray's point total to Matt Ryan.

What is more likely--that you can find a diamond in the rough in the middle to late rounds at RB (not to mention the waiver wire), or your 1st round RB scored 150 points more than the other guys top back, to make up the difference.

Forget position. Look at the points. Add them up. Give me the 11th or 12th pick, and I'll take Rodgers/Brady/Staff/Brees and Graham all day long. And let you figure out where you gonna make up my 350 point advantage at QB and TE.

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

 

[massraider]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

 

[hotboyz]

http://m.espn.go.com/general/fantasy/story?storyId=8048797

Here you go article addresses this topic

 

[Instinctive]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

Rodgers had a career year too. Just to be fair.And I like going QB/TE early.

 

[Late225]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

 

[Instinctive]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

And Fred Jackson and Ben Tate and Helu and BJGE and Lynch and McGahee and DBrown and...Let's not cherry pick. It is entirely possible to hit on RBs later. They don't all hit, and they don't all miss.

ETA: and Best was great for a few weeks. You could have found a replacement after that without too much trouble.

 

[Eminence]

This thread comes up every year. Yeah, there are huge values that can be found late. A few years back a Cutler + Warner combo in the 9th / 10th would have been gold for you; Schaub was in that same category. In my experience however, you cannot top stud production from a Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, etc.

If you want your 1st Rounder to hit, the safest bet is QB.

Go Rivers or Ryan late and you'd probably be set, both guys are going to have good deals and potentially flirt with 30+ TD. Toss in a flyer like Cutler, Roethlisberger, or RG3 a few rounds later and you're golden.

 

[hotboyz]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

Yea but Wat bout people who took Fred Jackson and marshawn lynch??

 

[We Tigers]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

Yeah--who exactly are these RBs that came off the wire last year? Maybe DeMarco Murray, maybe Marshawn Lynch? Maybe Kevin Smith and Toby Gerhart and Chris Ivory late? You can always find a few RBs off the wire--midway into the season, when starters get hurt. That doesn't usually help you from week 1 till week whenever. If you're being hyperbolic and actually talk about mid-round RB picks, this is a somewhat different story--but there are still good reasons to grab RBs.For example, the example (double example! what does it meeeeean?) of Turner isn't a great one--he was still a 2nd round pick last year, if I remember correctly. That is still a fairly heavy investment to end up 140 points below Rice. Trace it back out to the 5th and 6th rounds and you might have even worse results.

Part of what I'm saying here is that you do need to take a lot of shots at RB because it's a volatile position; you need to get a few hits or any advantage you pick up from your super QB is wiped out. That's part of why I still tend to believe in investing in RB early, and enjoying one of the strong second-tier QBs in the 5th or 6th round.

 

[massraider]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

As long as the guys who draft Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and Staff--as long as NONE of them hit on a mid round or waiver wire RB, then you are totally set.

 

[Itchy Amos]

Y'all better hope the top guys come back to the pack, or you're in serious trouble.

I'd like to hear what kind of PROJECTIONS people have for these bargain QBs, and where they plan on making up the difference.

Just because there is a lot of questions and no depth at RB, doesn't mean that rushing out and grabbing two RBs is the smart draft strategy. You can have the best backs, but if you are trotting out Matt Ryan and Jermaine Gresham every week, and you are playing some guy with Stafford and Graham, his backs may not even matter.

It's all about points. Points is what wins, not well-balanced rosters. Jimmy Graham scored more points than Chris Johnson and Matt Forte last year.

Aaron Rodgers scored as much as Matt Ryan did--if you add DeMarco Murray's point total to Matt Ryan.

What is more likely--that you can find a diamond in the rough in the middle to late rounds at RB (not to mention the waiver wire), or your 1st round RB scored 150 points more than the other guys top back, to make up the difference.

Forget position. Look at the points. Add them up. Give me the 11th or 12th pick, and I'll take Rodgers/Brady/Staff/Brees and Graham all day long. And let you figure out where you gonna make up my 350 point advantage at QB and TE.

I'm on board with this line of thinking. In the not too distant past, the difference between the top QBs and the mid-level QBs was pretty small. You used to be able to wait until rounds 8-10 to draft your QB. The improvements at RB & WR outweighed the points that you were giving up by dropping from the top tier QBs to the mid-tier QBs. From a point accumulation stand-point, it made very little sense to take a QB early. It seems that times have changed. If you dont have one of the top tier QBs, you are at a massive disadvantage that will not be easily made up by the incremental increases to your RBs & WRs that can be gained by waiting on QB.Unless you think that there is a QB available in the late rounds that can nearly keep pace with the top tier guys, you are starting off with a pretty significant point deficit compared to the guys that take one of the top tier QBs.

 

[massraider]

i agree. its all about points. these top qbs have a better shot at around or over 40 tds not to mention yards. the second and third tier guys struggle to get around 30 tds and less yards. its kind of simple math. RBs with similar production can be had later. I keep reading how the rbs are so thin. The top 3 rbs are great. after that the rbs look the same to me for several rounds... and the rbs at the back of round one are gross. I hate them all

The really funny part is that if there is one position that you can count on pulling some guy off the waiver wire, and getting consistent production, it's RB. Reaching for a back in the first, because you think you can get by with one of these other shlubs, if you want to convince me, make a case. How many POINTS will Matt Ryan score vs. Tom Brady this year? And is that 1st round RB going to score that much more?

In one of my leagues, the top RB was Ray Rice. The 13th RB was Michael Turner. (Anyone excited by Turner? No?) Rice outscored Turner by less than 140 points.

Aaron Rodgers scored 200 more points than the #8 QB, Eli Manning, who had a career year, blah blah blah. Almost 200 more than Matt Ryan.

People thought the same thing last year when they took Ingram and Jahvid Best in the middle rounds...

Yeah--who exactly are these RBs that came off the wire last year? Maybe DeMarco Murray, maybe Marshawn Lynch? Maybe Kevin Smith and Toby Gerhart and Chris Ivory late? You can always find a few RBs off the wire--midway into the season, when starters get hurt. That doesn't usually help you from week 1 till week whenever. If you're being hyperbolic and actually talk about mid-round RB picks, this is a somewhat different story--but there are still good reasons to grab RBs.

Marshawn Lynch finished as the 6th RB in my league. Right behind Darren Sproles. Reggie Bush was 8th. Less than 100 points separated Lynch from the #1 consensus 1st round pick last year. They were for the most part drafted, it's true. Not free agents. And were available to all teams, including the ones that took Brady and Rodgers early. Even leaving aside the waiver wire, the top RBs simply are NOT scoring much more than the other guys. And if you take out the very TOP RBs, which we are talking about in this thread (mid to late 1st), then there REALLY is no difference.

Two guys are making bets:

1. My first round RB is going to make up for your advantage at QB.

2. I can get a back later that will make up for the difference at your RB1.

The second bet seems more likely to me. Much, much more likely. Especially considering I am trying to get make up the advantage of a Chris Johnson, or DMC, or Forte, not a McCoy, Rice, or Foster.

 

[Run It Up]

Ive been going QBBC in every draft this year.

Either Cutler or Eli slip well into the 7-8.

Take one of them and supplement with Freeman and Fitzpatrick.

 

[Dez]

I seen 1 guy wait until round 14 then took Palmer.

Seen another guy wait until Round 11 took Peyton.

 

[gandalas]

In a recent dynasty startup that just began a few days ago, I started my draft RB-RB-RB-WR-WR-WR before going QB in the 7th. My team through 7.2?

QB: Vick (7.2)

RB: Foster (1.2)

RB: Peterson (2.11)

RB: Lynch (3.2)

WR: Demaryius Thomas (4.11)

WR: Marquise Colston (5.2)

WR: Dwayne Bowe (6.11)

I am certainly pleased with the results...will have to take another QB in the next few rounds to backup Vick and prepare for possible injuries, but I have among the strongest RB and WR corps in the league, and still feel my QB can compete with the big boys most weeks.

 

[-jb-]

massraider, here's some (very quick) analysis, that's based on Dodds' projections:

QB early:

Rd1: Rodgers - 448

Rd6: McGahee - 161

TOTAL - 609

QB late:

Rd1: McCoy - 249

Rd6: Ryan - 324

TOTAL - 573

We're not talking about 150 points difference. In this instance it's 36. Now imagine that Rodgers doesn't actually score the 42 TDs Dodds has him projected for (likely). Now also imagine that Ryan scores more than the 29 TDs Dodds has projected (aka 3 less TDs than last year, despite a more vertical OC, talk about involving a pass catching RB more, a maturing and healthy Julio, etc.) Those 36 points are a puff of smoke.

My own personal opinion is that Rodgers DOESN'T break 40 TDs, and Ryan BLOWS by 29 TDs.

I only have two concerns with this:

- There are at least 4 teams that won't even have a shot at a top 3 RB or elite QB. Potentially 6 teams, depending on where you draw the elite line on QB. Those teams have to have a strategy in place.

- I REALLY believe in Matt Ryan this year...but what if someone else does too?

 

[[icon]]

massraider, here's some (very quick) analysis, that's based on Dodds' projections:QB early:Rd1: Rodgers - 448Rd6: McGahee - 161TOTAL - 609QB late:Rd1: McCoy - 249Rd6: Ryan - 324TOTAL - 573We're not talking about 150 points difference. In this instance it's 36. Now imagine that Rodgers doesn't actually score the 42 TDs Dodds has him projected for (likely). Now also imagine that Ryan scores more than the 29 TDs Dodds has projected (aka 3 less TDs than last year, despite a more vertical OC, talk about involving a pass catching RB more, a maturing and healthy Julio, etc.) Those 36 points are a puff of smoke.

I don't think anyone is advocating taking a QB over the big 3 at RB. Let's look at the first point where it actually starts to make sense / where people are suggesting it be considered... QB early:Rd1: Rodgers - 448Rd6: McGahee - 161TOTAL - 609QB late:Rd1: MJD - 207 (selected because he's likely the new RB4 via ADP once Matthews Dips)Rd6: Ryan - 324TOTAL - 531While that's not a MASSIVE sum, you're looking at almost 5 points per game there..... That's significant.

 

[-jb-]

I don't think anyone is advocating taking a QB over the big 3 at RB. Let's look at the first point where it actually starts to make sense / where people are suggesting it be considered... QB early:Rd1: Rodgers - 448Rd6: McGahee - 161TOTAL - 609QB late:Rd1: MJD - 207 (selected because he's likely the new RB4 via ADP once Matthews Dips)Rd6: Ryan - 324TOTAL - 531While that's not a MASSIVE sum, you're looking at almost 5 points per game there..... That's significant.

Fair point.

 

[butcher boy]

It's friday and almost time to go home so I may be wrong, but I don't think it's correct to compare round 1 and 6 picks like that. In the MJD/Ryan case, it's that particular team's #1 QB and #1 RB. For the McGahee/Rodgers team, it's that teams #1 QB, but most likey #2 or #3 RB. I'd rather see an example that is more "here's the Rodgers team's entire RB and WR corps compare to Ryan team's entire RB and WR corps. Seems like it would be a more valid comparison.

 

[Run It Up]

To be honest even in the past 3 years of based god QBs ive still valued the position underneath that of RBs and WRs.

Ive been a lot more comfortable (and frustrated) running a QBBC, #1 disappointment not named Jermichael Finley is Joe Flacco.

But I usually am able to grab a QB that will blow up and finish top 8.

Stafford and Cam last year for example.

 

[LawFitz]

It's a given that a large percentage of guys who are banking on getting Matt Ryan will be disappointed. Not because he's going to disappoint (he might), but because they won't get him.

Throw out Vick's thumb and you have just 5 elite QBs.

That means there will be between 5-7 owners in most leagues targeting Ryan as their "come up" QB. Are you willing to take the chance that you'll get him if you are one of those owners? If you are, I suggest you look ahead of Rd 6 at this point.

 

[-jb-]

It's friday and almost time to go home so I may be wrong, but I don't think it's correct to compare round 1 and 6 picks like that. In the MJD/Ryan case, it's that particular team's #1 QB and #1 RB. For the McGahee/Rodgers team, it's that teams #1 QB, but most likey #2 or #3 RB. I'd rather see an example that is more "here's the Rodgers team's entire RB and WR corps compare to Ryan team's entire RB and WR corps. Seems like it would be a more valid comparison.

I'm going to use Brady, simply because it puts him square in the middle of the first round. Easier on ADP data:Team 1Rd1: Brady - 419Rd2: Charles - 198Rd3: Cruz - 160Rd4: Bryant - 155Rd5: VJackson - 155Rd6: McGahee - 161TOTAL - 1248Team 2Rd1: Chris Johnson - 214Rd2: Charles - 198Rd3: Cruz - 160Rd4: Bryant - 155Rd5: VJackson - 155Rd6: Ryan - 324TOTAL - 1206Difference is 42 points. If we used Rodgers as QB it would be 71 points, but then we would be looking at Peterson in round 2 which would bring it back down to 45.

 

[Run It Up]

Is Ryan the consensus value QB this year? Or just seems like it?

Ive seen Cutler either going really high or really low, same with Roethlisberger (who im staying away from), and Ryan.

 

[ens189]

I LOVE the QB depth this year. And I've really started falling for Matt Ryan over the past week or so. You've got two WRs being picked in the top 10, and most of the time I see him going in the QB9-13 range. If I end up with ANY of the top 12 QBs this year, I'll be happy. Match them up with Cutler and you're golden

That offense will be insane this year. I see them as a near clone of the Saints and Ryan hitting numbers similar to what Stafford had last year.

 

[-jb-]

It's a given that a large percentage of guys who are banking on getting Matt Ryan will be disappointed. Not because he's going to disappoint (he might), but because they won't get him.Throw out Vick's thumb and you have just 5 elite QBs.That means there will be between 5-7 owners in most leagues targeting Ryan as their "come up" QB. Are you willing to take the chance that you'll get him if you are one of those owners? If you are, I suggest you look ahead of Rd 6 at this point.

While I agree (see my concerns listed above), here are his rankings around the webodds - #10Henry - #7Wood - #11Tremblay - #7FFT - #7ESPN - #11NFL - #11Eisenberg - #10Richard - #11Zegura - #8

 

[-jb-]

Is Ryan the consensus value QB this year? Or just seems like it?

Gaining momentum, and shame on me for talking him up. Word can travel fast. Julio's performance last night certainly didn't help matters.

 

[LawFitz]

It's a given that a large percentage of guys who are banking on getting Matt Ryan will be disappointed. Not because he's going to disappoint (he might), but because they won't get him.Throw out Vick's thumb and you have just 5 elite QBs.That means there will be between 5-7 owners in most leagues targeting Ryan as their "come up" QB. Are you willing to take the chance that you'll get him if you are one of those owners? If you are, I suggest you look ahead of Rd 6 at this point.

While I agree (see my concerns listed above), here are his rankings around the webodds - #10Henry - #7Wood - #11Tremblay - #7FFT - #7ESPN - #11NFL - #11Eisenberg - #10Richard - #11Zegura - #8

Bro, you know as well as I do that in competitive leagues every year there are guys that "jump the shark."This year that phrase applies most to Julio Jones first and Matt Ryan second.

 

[-jb-]

It's a given that a large percentage of guys who are banking on getting Matt Ryan will be disappointed. Not because he's going to disappoint (he might), but because they won't get him.Throw out Vick's thumb and you have just 5 elite QBs.That means there will be between 5-7 owners in most leagues targeting Ryan as their "come up" QB. Are you willing to take the chance that you'll get him if you are one of those owners? If you are, I suggest you look ahead of Rd 6 at this point.

While I agree (see my concerns listed above), here are his rankings around the webodds - #10Henry - #7Wood - #11Tremblay - #7FFT - #7ESPN - #11NFL - #11Eisenberg - #10Richard - #11Zegura - #8

Bro, you know as well as I do that in competitive leagues every year there are guys that "jump the shark."This year that phrase applies most to Julio Jones first and Matt Ryan second.

Yeah...I think this next week will be interesting. Would love to get a combo of those two guys, and I'm willing to pay for it. We'll see.