Vick a 1st Round fantasy pick next year? (1 Viewer)

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft. If Vick stays in Philly he is a lock top 5 and likely #1 QB next year. No brainer 1st round pick.I predict he will routinely be a top 5 pick next year, never mind first round.

And that's the thing, 1st round is pretty vague. Can he be the 13 or 14th overall pick or the 15th or 16th overall pick in leagues that are 14 and 16 teams? Of courseIn two start QB leagues where the value of the QB is so high, can he be a first round pick? of courseIf he plays like this the rest of the season, he will most likely be the 1st or 2nd QB off the board. The 1st or 2nd QB off the board in A LOT of leagues does go in the first round, let's face it.So the question is will he be taken as one of the top 2 or 3 Qb's in your fantasy drafts, and the answer is yes if everything stays like it is right now. Top 2 or 3 Qb's Qb's go in the first round in many drafts, maybe not all but I were in a few where Rodgers went mid first and Brees at the very end.

 

[BassNBrew]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft. If Vick stays in Philly he is a lock top 5 and likely #1 QB next year. No brainer 1st round pick.I predict he will routinely be a top 5 pick next year, never mind first round.

I think he went at the 1.12/2.1 turn in the survivor championship draft. That's a far cry from top five. I took Rivers at the 2.12 spot and likely jumped the gun by a ful round.

 

[thehornet]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft. If Vick stays in Philly he is a lock top 5 and likely #1 QB next year. No brainer 1st round pick.I predict he will routinely be a top 5 pick next year, never mind first round.

I think he went at the 1.12/2.1 turn in the survivor championship draft. That's a far cry from top five. I took Rivers at the 2.12 spot and likely jumped the gun by a ful round.

you know how much things change leading up to drafts in august and september. not that it means anything, but prorate vicks stats out for a full 16 games season. it is laughable.

 

[BassNBrew]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft. If Vick stays in Philly he is a lock top 5 and likely #1 QB next year. No brainer 1st round pick.I predict he will routinely be a top 5 pick next year, never mind first round.

I think he went at the 1.12/2.1 turn in the survivor championship draft. That's a far cry from top five. I took Rivers at the 2.12 spot and likely jumped the gun by a ful round.

you know how much things change leading up to drafts in august and september. not that it means anything, but prorate vicks stats out for a full 16 games season. it is laughable.

I think he'll go in the late 1st, early 2nd in most leagues I play. The top picks will like a combo of ADP/Foster/Hillis/CJ and Rivers/Rodgers/Manning much more than Vick and Forte/Best/Moreno. The guys later in the first will think long and hard about locking up a guy who falls like AJ or SJax over Vick, figuring that Manning/Brady would be a nice consolation in the 3rd.I'd take Vick in the 1st in a start two league and consider him in the mid-2nd in a start one league.

 

[thehornet]

forget about his passing stats for a minute.

vick is on pace for almost 1000 rushing and 12 rushing tds this year.

sure that isn't sustainable and defenses will plan for it next year, but holy cow.

the rushing stats alone make him a viable RB2 play.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

The poll is missing an option:- Only the mentally handicapped draft a QB in the 1st round

ok, fine, I'm not going to blanketly say drafting a QB in the first round is horrible

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

The poll is missing an option:- Only the mentally handicapped draft a QB in the 1st round

ok, fine, I'm not going to blanketly say drafting a QB in the first round is horrible

It's consistent. But only you are either mentally handicapped and don't really know any better, or have been in a coma for 2 years and think "Vick? But he's in prison?

 

[Warbird]

Ya kidding me! As long as he stays in Philly, he's a definite top 10 pick. Even in the remote possibility he leaves, he still probably goes in the first. I have never taken a QB in round 1 but, if the top tier RB's are gone, you would have to consider him!

 

[stp-d]

For me there are 2 big questions

1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably

2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

Vick is playing behind a line that is playing well to his style, but he does take alot of shots every game. Many are unnecessary out of the pocket shots because he doesn't know how to slide, or chooses not to. If he doesn't change his style he will be very unlikely to last a full season & I'd rather have Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, Manning & Brady starting for my team, making Vick a late 2nd, or early 3rd rd pick. If he learns to slide feet 1st, he's likely a 1st in many formats.

 

[Banger]

forget about his passing stats for a minute.vick is on pace for almost 1000 rushing and 12 rushing tds this year.sure that isn't sustainable and defenses will plan for it next year, but holy cow. the rushing stats alone make him a viable RB2 play.

those are RB1 numbers.

 

[gianmarco]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft.

That's not my goal. If I can land a homerun, especially later in the 1st round, I'm going that route. Works just fine, even when I miss. "Not losing" your 1st round is a good way to be above average. Above average doesn't win championships usually.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

forget about his passing stats for a minute.

vick is on pace for almost 1000 rushing and 12 rushing tds this year.

sure that isn't sustainable and defenses will plan for it next year, but holy cow.

the rushing stats alone make him a viable RB2 play.

those are RB1 numbers.

exactly

 

[LHUCKS]

End of first

 

[thehornet]

For me there are 2 big questions1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running upVick is playing behind a line that is playing well to his style, but he does take alot of shots every game. Many are unnecessary out of the pocket shots because he doesn't know how to slide, or chooses not to. If he doesn't change his style he will be very unlikely to last a full season & I'd rather have Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, Manning & Brady starting for my team, making Vick a late 2nd, or early 3rd rd pick. If he learns to slide feet 1st, he's likely a 1st in many formats.

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

 

[CalBear]

For me there are 2 big questions1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

Actually, QBs miss more games than RBs on average.

 

[thehornet]

For me there are 2 big questions1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

Actually, QBs miss more games than RBs on average.

actually i think your statement is inaccurate. i cant even count how many running backs are injured from year to year, but i know it's a heck of a lot more than QB injuries.

 

[CalBear]

For me there are 2 big questions

1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably

2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

Actually, QBs miss more games than RBs on average.

actually i think your statement is inaccurate. i cant even count how many running backs are injured from year to year, but i know it's a heck of a lot more than QB injuries.

Actually, I think it's a better idea to look at the data than to assume you're correct.http://www.pro-football-reference.com/articles/iron.htm

 

[Saint]

Going into the playoffs and riding the Vick/Moreno/Forte train has been alright. As we seed on finish, I'll probably have a late draft pick in a 12-team league. The way our keeper works, you can keep 1 or 2, but you give up your 1st and 2nd round respectively. Our scoring is 6 pts per passing TD (same as rush/recv). Vick has been absolute gold for me. I drafted him as a backup to Kolb in the 15th round.

Thinking if I end up with 11th or 12th seed pick next year in the draft, I *have* to consider him as a late 1st rounder. As a comparison, he ranks 3rd among QBS with 258.42 pts (Rodgers and Rivers being 1-2 respectively). In terms of overall positions, he ranks as the #6 overall behind the 2 QBs listed earlier, Peyton Hillis, Arian Foster, and Adrian Peterson. Of those 6, the only 2 people in the 1st round were AP and Rodgers.

I may not have the total man-crush that Hipple does on him (Speaking of which is reminds me of Madden talking about Favre), but I can definitely see a solid argument for him being end of turn late first early second.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

For me there are 2 big questions

1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably

2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

Actually, QBs miss more games than RBs on average.

actually i think your statement is inaccurate. i cant even count how many running backs are injured from year to year, but i know it's a heck of a lot more than QB injuries.

Actually, I think it's a better idea to look at the data than to assume you're correct.http://www.pro-football-reference.com/articles/iron.htm

It's also better to understand data when you cite it. All that data says is that from 1988-1998 that was the case. Seeing as how the rules have been greatly changed to protect WR's and QB's from the 'ridiculously devastating hits' of the past, but it is still kosher to cream a RB helmet to helmet (as long as he's not catching a pass). I'm guessing if you ran the same data these days that RB would be the most injury prone, but am admittedly guessing. Especially since I haven't a clue how the recent attention/devotion to handling concussions seriously is going to differently impact the positions with respect to each other, and I doubt you do either.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Going into the playoffs and riding the Vick/Moreno/Forte train has been alright. As we seed on finish, I'll probably have a late draft pick in a 12-team league. The way our keeper works, you can keep 1 or 2, but you give up your 1st and 2nd round respectively. Our scoring is 6 pts per passing TD (same as rush/recv). Vick has been absolute gold for me. I drafted him as a backup to Kolb in the 15th round.Thinking if I end up with 11th or 12th seed pick next year in the draft, I *have* to consider him as a late 1st rounder. As a comparison, he ranks 3rd among QBS with 258.42 pts (Rodgers and Rivers being 1-2 respectively). In terms of overall positions, he ranks as the #6 overall behind the 2 QBs listed earlier, Peyton Hillis, Arian Foster, and Adrian Peterson. Of those 6, the only 2 people in the 1st round were AP and Rodgers. I may not have the total man-crush that Hipple does on him (Speaking of which is reminds me of Madden talking about Favre), but I can definitely see a solid argument for him being end of turn late first early second.

I wanna have his fantasy football babies NTTAWWTAre you telling me I should get a telestrator?BOOM

 

[thehornet]

For me there are 2 big questions

1. Will The Eagles re-sign him? Probably

2. Will he play more than 12 games a year? Doubtful if he keeps his style of running up

issue number 2 should be even more of an issue drafting a running back, but nobody frets about taking a RB with their first pick.

Actually, QBs miss more games than RBs on average.

actually i think your statement is inaccurate. i cant even count how many running backs are injured from year to year, but i know it's a heck of a lot more than QB injuries.

Actually, I think it's a better idea to look at the data than to assume you're correct.http://www.pro-football-reference.com/articles/iron.htm

this means nothing. FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.

there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries.

basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

 

[massraider]

Fellas, this is an incredibly boring argument.

 

[thehornet]

Fellas, this is an incredibly boring argument.

It is but I was just trying to show that VIck in the first is no more risky than taking Frank Gore, Deangelo Williams, Steven Jackson or any other potential first round running back. They all get hurt.

 

[zoonation]

End of first

If he stays healthy he puts up top 2 overall points. Awesome value at the end of the first.I actually won't mind drafting late this year if this turns out to be right.

 

[zoonation]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft.

That's not my goal. If I can land a homerun, especially later in the 1st round, I'm going that route. Works just fine, even when I miss. "Not losing" your 1st round is a good way to be above average. Above average doesn't win championships usually.

So you're saying you will try and hit a "homerun" rather than take Vick at the end of the first next year?Vick is the home run, guy.Every RB or WR taken at the end of the first, early second this year either hit into a double play or, at most legged out a solid double. And that is because there was no Vick in this draft. Vick is easily a 1000 yard 8TD rusher if he plays the full slate. This is a no brainer. You watch, the guy will routinely go top 5, and if he doesn't, I'm taking him for sure if he slides to the second half of the draft (and over every other QB).

 

[CalBear]

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year. there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries. basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Right, with similar constraints for QBs. Certainly backup QBs are less likely to get hurt than backup RBs, because backup QBs never see the field. But starting QBs are more likely to get hurt than starting RBs. This year, here are QBs who've started at least one game this year, and missed at least one game due to injury:KolbVickStafford (twice)Shaun HillAlex SmithVince YoungGarrardHasselbeckRomoDelhommeJason CampbellBruce GradkowskiMatt MooreTrent EdwardsDennis DixonChad HenneSeneca WallaceColt McCoyCharlie BatchMax HallBrian St. PierreThat's 21 QBs who've gone down this year. In a 32-team league, I think it's safe to say that QB is a position with a high risk of injury.

 

[gianmarco]

The goal in drafting in the first round is to not lose the draft.

That's not my goal. If I can land a homerun, especially later in the 1st round, I'm going that route. Works just fine, even when I miss. "Not losing" your 1st round is a good way to be above average. Above average doesn't win championships usually.

So you're saying you will try and hit a "homerun" rather than take Vick at the end of the first next year?Vick is the home run, guy.

Every RB or WR taken at the end of the first, early second this year either hit into a double play or, at most legged out a solid double. And that is because there was no Vick in this draft. Vick is easily a 1000 yard 8TD rusher if he plays the full slate.

This is a no brainer. You watch, the guy will routinely go top 5, and if he doesn't, I'm taking him for sure if he slides to the second half of the draft (and over every other QB).

Hey, guy, I have no idea where you drew the inferences from in my post about Vick not being that guy.

I simply took part of your post (you know, the part that I quoted) and responded to that portion. Good luck even finding the name Vick or "him" or any reference to him in my post. I have absolutely no idea how you went from point A (my post) to point B (your 2nd post).

As an FYI, I own Vick in quite a few leagues this year and he is absolutely a 1st round pick, IMO. He IS the homerun pick. When you stated the goal was not to lose the 1st round, I disagreed mainly because I'd take the risk of drafting Vick 10 times out of 10 in order to hit the homerun.

Your reply to me just now made no sense whatsoever.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.

there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries.

basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Right, with similar constraints for QBs. Certainly backup QBs are less likely to get hurt than backup RBs, because backup QBs never see the field. But starting QBs are more likely to get hurt than starting RBs. This year, here are QBs who've started at least one game this year, and missed at least one game due to injury:Kolb

Vick

Stafford (twice)

Shaun Hill

Alex Smith

Vince Young

Garrard

Hasselbeck

Romo

Delhomme

Jason Campbell

Bruce Gradkowski

Matt Moore

Trent Edwards

Dennis Dixon

Chad Henne

Seneca Wallace

Colt McCoy

Charlie Batch

Max Hall

Brian St. Pierre

That's 21 QBs who've gone down this year. In a 32-team league, I think it's safe to say that QB is a position with a high risk of injury.

way to deftly field his softball sized objection while ignoring my rather poignant one.

They have massively changed the rules that directly effect that study. The data is useful for comparisson, but largely useless to todays nfl.

 

[thehornet]

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year. there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries. basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Right, with similar constraints for QBs. Certainly backup QBs are less likely to get hurt than backup RBs, because backup QBs never see the field. But starting QBs are more likely to get hurt than starting RBs. This year, here are QBs who've started at least one game this year, and missed at least one game due to injury:KolbVickStafford (twice)Shaun HillAlex SmithVince YoungGarrardHasselbeckRomoDelhommeJason CampbellBruce GradkowskiMatt MooreTrent EdwardsDennis DixonChad HenneSeneca WallaceColt McCoyCharlie BatchMax HallBrian St. PierreThat's 21 QBs who've gone down this year. In a 32-team league, I think it's safe to say that QB is a position with a high risk of injury.

twice as many rb's have gone down

 

[CalBear]

way to deftly field his softball sized objection while ignoring my rather poignant one.

They have massively changed the rules that directly effect that study. The data is useful for comparisson, but largely useless to todays nfl.

The data I just provided is for this year.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

The data I just provided is for this year.

this means nothing.

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.

there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries.

basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

It's also better to understand data when you cite it. All that data says is that from 1988-1998 that was the case. Seeing as how the rules have been greatly changed to protect WR's and QB's from the 'ridiculously devastating hits' of the past, but it is still kosher to cream a RB helmet to helmet (as long as he's not catching a pass). I'm guessing if you ran the same data these days that RB would be the most injury prone, but am admittedly guessing. Especially since I haven't a clue how the recent attention/devotion to handling concussions seriously is going to differently impact the positions with respect to each other, and I doubt you do either

 

[CalBear]

The data I just provided is for this year.

I'm talking about the data I provided about 21 QBs from this year, 2010, who have started at least one game and missed at least one game due to injury.

 

[plyka]

It's also better to understand data when you cite it. All that data says is that from 1988-1998 that was the case. Seeing as how the rules have been greatly changed to protect WR's and QB's from the 'ridiculously devastating hits' of the past, but it is still kosher to cream a RB helmet to helmet (as long as he's not catching a pass). I'm guessing if you ran the same data these days that RB would be the most injury prone, but am admittedly guessing. Especially since I haven't a clue how the recent attention/devotion to handling concussions seriously is going to differently impact the positions with respect to each other, and I doubt you do either.

But that's the problem, you're "GUESSING" as you yourself stated, while he actually provided FACTS. The FACTS were a 10 year period from 88 to 98, which is a massive sample size. Could some rule changes have altered this? Sure, anything is POSSIBLE, but any rational individual would believe that those stats more closely resemble today than any guess you may have.

"way to deftly field his softball sized objection while ignoring my rather poignant one.

They have massively changed the rules that directly effect that study. The data is useful for comparisson, but largely useless to todays nfl."

Um, no, they haven't. They have changed a rule that may or may not have an effect on anything. And even if it does, the effect may not be large enough to alter the analysis. Again, you're basing your objections on your "guess" (again, as you called it) that this rule change affects the results of that analysis, and furthermore you're "guessing" that it affects it in your argument's favor. Both are GUESSES as you correctly point out, woefully inadequate against the hard factual analysis which the prior individual posted.

 

[plyka]

this means nothing.

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.

there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries.

basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Yeah, and then he did the same thing for QB's:

"[same fine print as the RBs and WRs, but the minimum fantasy point production needed for inclusion was 9 points per game for the 1-year data and 8 points per game for both years for the 2-year data.] "

Basically he was attempting to find fantasy RELEVANT players, you know, the guys that are important to our analysis.

 

[thehornet]

The data I just provided is for this year.

I'm talking about the data I provided about 21 QBs from this year, 2010, who have started at least one game and missed at least one game due to injury.

how many rb's have missed at least 1 game due to injury this year? It's way more than 21. Sorry, but RB;s get hurt more than QB's. It's just fact. Let's end this.

 

[CalBear]

The data I just provided is for this year.

I'm talking about the data I provided about 21 QBs from this year, 2010, who have started at least one game and missed at least one game due to injury.

how many rb's have missed at least 1 game due to injury this year? It's way more than 21. Sorry, but RB;s get hurt more than QB's. It's just fact. Let's end this.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.Edit to add: I left out Derek Anderson, so 22 injured QBs in 13 weeks.

But really, please, do the same analysis for RBs for this year; how many RBs who have started a game, have also missed at least one game due to injury?

 

[Phurfur]

The data I just provided is for this year.

I'm talking about the data I provided about 21 QBs from this year, 2010, who have started at least one game and missed at least one game due to injury.

how many rb's have missed at least 1 game due to injury this year? It's way more than 21. Sorry, but RB;s get hurt more than QB's. It's just fact. Let's end this.

I will need to see those stats before I believe you.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Semi-related

In a non-dynasty keeper (keep 2 to 7 players, so you're keeping 1 QB at most), would you rather keep Vick or Rodgers/Rivers?

Vick will probably score more PPG over the next couple years.

But once you let Rodgers/Rivers go, you're never getting them back and they'll be elite QBs for 5 years longer. And they may have less chance of injury.

 

[footballnerd]

I hope so, more RBs and WRs for me.

 

[Banger]

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year. there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries. basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Right, with similar constraints for QBs. Certainly backup QBs are less likely to get hurt than backup RBs, because backup QBs never see the field. But starting QBs are more likely to get hurt than starting RBs. This year, here are QBs who've started at least one game this year, and missed at least one game due to injury:KolbVickStafford (twice)Shaun HillAlex SmithVince YoungGarrardHasselbeckRomoDelhommeJason CampbellBruce GradkowskiMatt MooreTrent EdwardsDennis DixonChad HenneSeneca WallaceColt McCoyCharlie BatchMax HallBrian St. PierreThat's 21 QBs who've gone down this year. In a 32-team league, I think it's safe to say that QB is a position with a high risk of injury.

GrantHardestyTateBarberMcFaddenBushF. TaylorS MorrisMaroneyMorenoMattewsBestP. thomasR. BushSpillerAddaiD. WilliamsD. BrownTorrainPortisSnellingJ. StewartM. BarberB. WellsBuckhalterM. Hartthat's 26 RBs that have missed at least one game and those are from my head. It's likely not scratching the surface of the RB injuries....

 

[One]

I'd gladly take him in the mid to late 1st.

 

[thehornet]

1st in pro bowl voting. Sure it doesnt mean anything for fantasy, but I'm taking him in the first round.

 

[BassNBrew]

Regarding injury risk...

1. Vick is more likely to be injured than his peers drafted in the same area.

2. Let's assume the injury risk is roughly the same. Most leagues start 2+ RBs and 1 QB. I want to spend more capital at the RB position because of this. Drafting Vick in the first reduces the capital available.

 

[LHUCKS]

With the relative lack of stud WRs and RBs this year, QBs in general will go relatively high in 2011 IMHO.

 

[LHUCKS]

Regarding injury risk...1. Vick is more likely to be injured than his peers drafted in the same area.2. Let's assume the injury risk is roughly the same. Most leagues start 2+ RBs and 1 QB. I want to spend more capital at the RB position because of this. Drafting Vick in the first reduces the capital available.

Vick has never had an injury where he's missed half a season or something like that, so although he may miss a few games here or there, his ppg will make him fairly attractive IMO.Remember, just because he's out doesn't mean you don't get to start your backup.

 

[CalBear]

FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year. there are so many RB's not even inlcuded on this list that have sustained injuries. basically any running back who didnt play more than 8 games or score over 6 fantasy points isnt included.

Right, with similar constraints for QBs. Certainly backup QBs are less likely to get hurt than backup RBs, because backup QBs never see the field. But starting QBs are more likely to get hurt than starting RBs. This year, here are QBs who've started at least one game this year, and missed at least one game due to injury:KolbVickStafford (twice)Shaun HillAlex SmithVince YoungGarrardHasselbeckRomoDelhommeJason CampbellBruce GradkowskiMatt MooreTrent EdwardsDennis DixonChad HenneSeneca WallaceColt McCoyCharlie BatchMax HallBrian St. PierreThat's 21 QBs who've gone down this year. In a 32-team league, I think it's safe to say that QB is a position with a high risk of injury.

GrantHardestyTateBarberMcFaddenBushF. TaylorS MorrisMaroneyMorenoMattewsBestP. thomasR. BushSpillerAddaiD. WilliamsD. BrownTorrainPortisSnellingJ. StewartM. BarberB. WellsBuckhalterM. Hartthat's 26 RBs that have missed at least one game and those are from my head. It's likely not scratching the surface of the RB injuries....

A good number of those RBs, possibly as many of 10 of them, have not started a game, thus the numbers aren't comparable, and they still look better for RBs than QBs.

 

[jackdubl]

Regarding injury risk...1. Vick is more likely to be injured than his peers drafted in the same area.2. Let's assume the injury risk is roughly the same. Most leagues start 2+ RBs and 1 QB. I want to spend more capital at the RB position because of this. Drafting Vick in the first reduces the capital available.

Vick has never had an injury where he's missed half a season or something like that, so although he may miss a few games here or there, his ppg will make him fairly attractive IMO.Remember, just because he's out doesn't mean you don't get to start your backup.

Vick broke his leg one season. Running, I believe. Not sure when in the season it happened.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Vick has never had an injury where he's missed half a season or something like that

wat

 

[BassNBrew]

Regarding injury risk...1. Vick is more likely to be injured than his peers drafted in the same area.2. Let's assume the injury risk is roughly the same. Most leagues start 2+ RBs and 1 QB. I want to spend more capital at the RB position because of this. Drafting Vick in the first reduces the capital available.

Vick has never had an injury where he's missed half a season or something like that, so although he may miss a few games here or there, his ppg will make him fairly attractive IMO.Remember, just because he's out doesn't mean you don't get to start your backup.

In 2003 he only played five games.He's on pace this year on a per game basis for his highest rushing yard and rushing TD total. First of all, I'm not going to project back to back career rushing years for a guy over 30. He's also on pace on a per game basis for the most rushing attempts in his career. That trend has to reverse if he wants to have any longevity in his career.Once again I point to the FBG Ultimate Survivor championship draft. He went at the 1/2 turn the week after his 56 point ff effort. That's where the sharks will look to acquire him. Since that week, Rodgers has outscored him by 20 pts, Brady by 11. Brees is 3 pts down, Manning 12 down. Please draft him in round 1 and I'll take the leftovers of Rodgers, Brees, Manning, Rivers, Brady in the 3rd round.

 

[Vision6]

I might not take him that high but I think in most drafts there will be at least one owner willing to pull the trigger that early. He has the highest potential of any one player.