What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Vick vs. Young in 2007 (1 Viewer)

Who ranks higher this year?

  • Michael Vick

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Vince Young

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

David Yudkin

Footballguy
I just picked up Michael Vick as the 15th or 16th QB drafted in a redraft league. I've seen Vick going as late as QB 20 and Young in the bottom of the Top 10. Vick has been a QB1 all 4 years he's been healthy and IMO he's quickly approaching a point where it will be nearly impossible for him to get suspended at any point this season. (There will basically only be 5 months until the season is over and he's yet to be charged with anything let alone convicted.)

Who will be the higher ranked QB at year's end?

 
Vick...he's more proven, has the better wrs and tes to throw to, and has the better rbs to keep defenses honest. Just as important as any of that vince young has to deal with the madden curse and that's nothing to mess with

 
I have them literally as even as two players can be. I wound up having Young 8th and Vick 9th, partly because I think VY will run for more TD's. Vick going 16th or 20th or anything like that is ridiculous. Excluding 2003 when Vick only played five games, he has finished 3rd, 10th, 12th and 4th in FBG scoring. He has never had WR's. I don't see any reason he will drop off the map. People need to realize if he runs for 800 yards and throws for 2400, that is like throwing for 4000 yards. You throw for 4000 yards and you are almost guaranteed to be in the top 10.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FF'ers seem to want their QB to pass instead of run. This is why Vick is underrated every year. Now add in the thought of him getting suspended and he moves down even more in the rankings. With a WR corps even worse than ATL, it makes me wonder why, since Vick has been so underrated by FF'ers for his career, why is VY so overrated?

 
Vick's a great option as long as he runs, almost like having another 1/2 RB on your team. If he doesn't run or score a TD somehow , then you're toast because 200 Yrds passing and no TDs will kill you

Young appears to be able to do both but won't be at the same level for another year or 2 especially with a year of teams watching tape on how to stop VY.

Vick has all the reasons in the world to have a great year and make people forget about the offseason.

 
Young averaged 159 passing yards, 1 passing TD, 1.1 INT, 47.7 rushing yards, and 0.636 rushing TD from Week 4 on (11 games).

Vick has averaged 156.5 passing yards, 1.07 passing TD, 0.8 INT, 55.2 rushing yards, 0.239 rushing TD the past 3 years (46 games).

TEN lost Bennett, Bobby Wade, still don't have Givens, and Travis Henry.

ATL added Joe Horn and return pretty much everyone else save Lelie.

 
My problem with Vick isn't any potential overhanging suspensions or his end of year totals. It's consistency. Had him on my team in '04 and '05. His per game stat line would read something like:

Week 1: 8 pts

Week 2: 11 pts

Week 3: 35 pts

Week 4: 9 pts

Week 5: 12 pts

Week 6: 20 pts

Week 7: 10 pts

Week 8: 40 points

Some games he'd practically guarantee a win on his own, but there were just as many that he was one of the prime reasons for a loss, or at least not being very comfortable come Monday morning, due to not outscoring the other guys sometimes-very-average QB1.

Now, if memory serves, last year he was more even in our league as far as his scoring went(I didn't own him), but when you're reliant on him running a lot to score you're taking a chance every week that he gets stonewalled in that regard. If he does, he almost never makes up for it throwing the ball.(Again, I think he was somewhat better in that scenario in '06)

I could see the same thing happening for Vince Young, but it's amplified by his lack of anything resembling a quality target in the passing game. He doesn't have a Crumpler or a Warrick Dunn/Norwood to dump off to. He doesn't have a guy like Horn who, while old, is still a reliable vet if he's on the field. I sort of like Brandon Jones, but outside of him talent-wise I just don't see much to work with in Tenn. The talent factor also enters into it from a defensive standpoint. DCs assuredly will "key" on stopping Vick...but can only do that to a certain degree since the Falcons have other playmakers that have to be montiored. Tennessee pretty much has Vince. Chris Brown may take some of the heat off, but at present.....I dunno. If Vince had more/better targets I'd feel better about him. I think he's a better passer than Vick is.

Having said all that, I don't see how Vick doesn't finish above Young without something unforeseen(injury or suspension) happening. However, if Vince could make his #s more even week-to-week than Vick has in the past, I could see an argument made for him being more valuable to own.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FF'ers seem to want their QB to pass instead of run. This is why Vick is underrated every year. Now add in the thought of him getting suspended and he moves down even more in the rankings. With a WR corps even worse than ATL, it makes me wonder why, since Vick has been so underrated by FF'ers for his career, why is VY so overrated?
New kid in town, IIRC Vick was "overrated" the same way at first.
 
Young averaged 159 passing yards, 1 passing TD, 1.1 INT, 47.7 rushing yards, and 0.636 rushing TD from Week 4 on (11 games).

Vick has averaged 156.5 passing yards, 1.07 passing TD, 0.8 INT, 55.2 rushing yards, 0.239 rushing TD the past 3 years (46 games).

TEN lost Bennett, Bobby Wade, still don't have Givens, and Travis Henry.

ATL added Joe Horn and return pretty much everyone else save Lelie.
No offense, but aren't you are comparing a what a QB did in his Rookie Season vs. what a QB who's been in the league what 6+ years? I don't think you can compare the two off of stats. For Young to do what he did in his rookie year, was amazing. Young will get better, I think we've seen the best of Vick. If you have a team that is solid and you need more of a proven player who will post solid numbers, then Vick is your guy. If you need someone to carry you albeit with more risk, I'd go with Young. Dynasty wise, it isn't even close for me...Young without hesitation...

 
ILoveMyLions said:
David Yudkin said:
Young averaged 159 passing yards, 1 passing TD, 1.1 INT, 47.7 rushing yards, and 0.636 rushing TD from Week 4 on (11 games).

Vick has averaged 156.5 passing yards, 1.07 passing TD, 0.8 INT, 55.2 rushing yards, 0.239 rushing TD the past 3 years (46 games).

TEN lost Bennett, Bobby Wade, still don't have Givens, and Travis Henry.

ATL added Joe Horn and return pretty much everyone else save Lelie.
No offense, but aren't you are comparing a what a QB did in his Rookie Season vs. what a QB who's been in the league what 6+ years? I don't think you can compare the two off of stats. For Young to do what he did in his rookie year, was amazing. Young will get better, I think we've seen the best of Vick. If you have a team that is solid and you need more of a proven player who will post solid numbers, then Vick is your guy. If you need someone to carry you albeit with more risk, I'd go with Young. Dynasty wise, it isn't even close for me...Young without hesitation...
There really is no fair way to compare them statistically. Vick only attempted 113 passes as a rookie and had a much more limited role than Young, so comparing their rookie seasons isn't particularly valid. Vick's first year as a primary starter was better than Young's, but I know some will say that isn't fair because Vick was in his second year. :sadbanana:
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.

Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).

I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.

 
joffer said:
Vick's an absolute steal right now, but i think VY finishes higher
:sadbanana: Antsports currently has Young's ADP at 7.07 in a 12-team redraft league. Vick is at 9.08. Like Joffer, I think Young will out perform Vick, but not by enough to justify going two rounds earlier in a fantasy draft. Young should post better numbers this season, but Vick is the wiser value pick.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.
:thumbup: David - the exact same nonsense is regurgitated by fans regarding their NFL teams too. Case in point 1: Last year Miami was supposed to go to the SB from the AFC only because they finished the last 4 games of the year before hot and on a roll with a winning streak....what happened last year in reality is now well documentedCase in point 2: I cannot believe how many people think Green Bay will be a very solid team this year because they finished the year with 4 straight wins.........amazing how not one of those guys seem to care that their 4 game win streak at the end of last year was against a Tavaris Jackson led Vikings (where Jackson had been given the starting QB job 4 days before the game) + Detroit Lions at home (Lions are one of the worse road teams the last 3 years in the history of the NFL ever) + 49ers (Ok that was an ok win but the 9ers were no world beaters last year.....they could not even get to the playoffs in the weakest division in football where no one wanted to win the division) + a Chicago Bears team that had zero interest to play the game with nothing on the line other than avoiding injuries on New Years Eve.But still people continue to extrapolate from one season to another based off what happened in the last few games of one season. Doing worse is never a consideration and those people are disappointed more often than not when they realize how the NFL does not simply carry over from one year to the next.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration.
I fail to see how a player who puts up the numbers Vince Young did at QB will not improve upon his rookie season. I cannot think of many QBs doing what he did, putting up the numbers he did, especially with the lack of talent around him last year and not improving. Would you not agree that QB is the most difficult for any rookie to transition to? Why would now the second year not cause him to improve as a QB? I can see the loss of some talent around him perhaps hurting his overall numbers, but it's not like these were elite players and now they're gone. I call it a wash with the improvement every rookie QB makes into their second year. The understanding of the offense alone will be improved.Look, I own both guys in different leagues, and I think it depends on the kind of league and team you have. Vick likely is as good as he ever will be and Young has room to improve upon his rookie season. Draft accordingly...
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration.
I fail to see how a player who puts up the numbers Vince Young did at QB will not improve upon his rookie season. I cannot think of many QBs doing what he did, putting up the numbers he did, especially with the lack of talent around him last year and not improving. Would you not agree that QB is the most difficult for any rookie to transition to? Why would now the second year not cause him to improve as a QB? I can see the loss of some talent around him perhaps hurting his overall numbers, but it's not like these were elite players and now they're gone. I call it a wash with the improvement every rookie QB makes into their second year. The understanding of the offense alone will be improved.Look, I own both guys in different leagues, and I think it depends on the kind of league and team you have. Vick likely is as good as he ever will be and Young has room to improve upon his rookie season. Draft accordingly...
This essentially is the point that I was trying to make . . . that Young doing worse is not even an option.Here were some other first time starters that were great out of the box after initially doing phenomenally well as a first time, full time starter but then did not do as well:Michael Vick 2002Mark Brunell 1995Kordell Stewart 1997Aaron Brooks 2000Jake Plummer 1997Brad Johnson 1996Ty Detmer 1996Kent Graham 1996Brian Griese 2000Shaun King 2000Rob Johnson 2000Tommy Maddox 2002Billy Volek 2004Vince Ferragamo 1980Bill Kenney 1983Scott Brunner 1982Jay Schroeder 1986Ken O'Brien 1985Don Majkowski 1989Billy Joe Tolliver 1990Neil O'Donnell 1992Jeff Blake 1994Tony Eason 1984Ty Detmer 1996Charlie Batch 1998Ray Lucas 1999Most of those guys were not as high profile or as talented as Young, but it does happen that players do not meet the same level of production. Again, I'm not saying it is impossible for Young to do as well or better, only that there is a chance that he WON'T do as well which seemingly gets ignored by many people.This year in particular there are several QB in this situation: Young, Romo, Campbell, Leinart, Cutler, Campbell,and Huard (maybe). They all did very well in a very small sample size and I don't see how all of them will be able to repeat what they did over 16 games.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration.
I fail to see how a player who puts up the numbers Vince Young did at QB will not improve upon his rookie season. I cannot think of many QBs doing what he did, putting up the numbers he did, especially with the lack of talent around him last year and not improving. Would you not agree that QB is the most difficult for any rookie to transition to? Why would now the second year not cause him to improve as a QB? I can see the loss of some talent around him perhaps hurting his overall numbers, but it's not like these were elite players and now they're gone. I call it a wash with the improvement every rookie QB makes into their second year. The understanding of the offense alone will be improved.Look, I own both guys in different leagues, and I think it depends on the kind of league and team you have. Vick likely is as good as he ever will be and Young has room to improve upon his rookie season. Draft accordingly...
This essentially is the point that I was trying to make . . . that Young doing worse is not even an option.Here were some other first time starters that were great out of the box after initially doing phenomenally well as a first time, full time starter but then did not do as well:

Michael Vick 2002

Mark Brunell 1995

Kordell Stewart 1997

Aaron Brooks 2000

Jake Plummer 1997

Brad Johnson 1996

Ty Detmer 1996

Kent Graham 1996

Brian Griese 2000

Shaun King 2000

Rob Johnson 2000

Tommy Maddox 2002

Billy Volek 2004

Vince Ferragamo 1980

Bill Kenney 1983

Scott Brunner 1982

Jay Schroeder 1986

Ken O'Brien 1985

Don Majkowski 1989

Billy Joe Tolliver 1990

Neil O'Donnell 1992

Jeff Blake 1994

Tony Eason 1984

Ty Detmer 1996

Charlie Batch 1998

Ray Lucas 1999

Most of those guys were not as high profile or as talented as Young, but it does happen that players do not meet the same level of production. Again, I'm not saying it is impossible for Young to do as well or better, only that there is a chance that he WON'T do as well which seemingly gets ignored by many people.

This year in particular there are several QB in this situation: Young, Romo, Campbell, Leinart, Cutler, Campbell,and Huard (maybe). They all did very well in a very small sample size and I don't see how all of them will be able to repeat what they did over 16 games.
There is always a chance that any player doesn't improve. However, most QBs do from their rookie year to their second year...Agreed?Look, three things ...(1) the part in bold is correct that most are not as talented as Young, (2) How many of those guys have Young's ability on the ground to gain yardage as well as through the air, and (3) How many were rookies and posted top 5 fantasy numbers over a 10 game period?

Answer those to my satisfaction and you'll win the arguement...I look forward to your response...

 
To me it is a "no-brainer" who I would take in redraft. Vick. Vick has the experience factor. He was QB 2-4 last year depending on your scoring system. In the 7-9th round he is a bargain right now for that performance. He gained Horn at WR over last year. Young has no real weapons and the worst WR core on paper in the NFL. I will take some inconsistency for a 7th round explosive QB because I already built up a consistent team with my RB's and WR's I was sucking up while others were taking early QB's.

 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.
This reminded me of some posts I made a couple offseasons ago, and I found one. The subject of the thread was Domanick Davis, and I was attempting to caution others not to simply take his part time performance in 2003 and scale it up to account for more games and improved play.
Performance in Season After Breakout

Since Davis finished as RB14 last season (per pro-football-reference.com), I decided to look at a large sample of players that had finished as RB14 or higher in their first feature season (rookie season or otherwise). Players who finished lower in their first feature seasons had a lot more room for improvement, thus making the comparison apples and oranges (or at least that is my operating theory here).

Incidentally, this criteria eliminates Ricky Williams and Travis Henry from the discussion, as neither finished in the top 14 in their rookie seasons (in which each was his team's feature back).

I used per game averages to allow for fluctuations in games played. Percent change in fantasy points per game from first feature season to next:

Emmitt Smith: +42.1%

Tomlinson: +39.1%

Terrell Davis: +22.8%

Portis: +16.6%

Abdul-Jabbar: +9.9%

Lewis: +8.7% (using third season instead of second, which was lost to injury)

James: +7.1%

Green: +5.1%

Robert Smith: +4.3%

Alexander: +3.7%

Watters: +0.4%

Jamal Anderson: +0.0%

Sanders: -0.8%

Bettis: -5.1%

Faulk: -5.1%

Martin: -5.4%

McAllister: -8.3%

George: -8.7%

Dillon: -13.7%

Holmes: -14.2% (missed 8 games, coaching decision or injury?)

Barber: -15.5%

Stephen Davis: -15.5%

Thomas: -18.1%

Dunn: -19.9%

Kaufman: -30.6%

Taylor: -34% (missed 6 games, per game numbers affected by injuries?)

Gary: -37.9% (only played 1 game in next season, so really not useful here)

Levens: -45.8% (missed 9 games, per game numbers affected by injuries?)

Mike Anderson: -67.4% (Davis return = RBBC, so really not useful here)

I pulled these names by looking at the top 14 in random seasons within the past several years, so hopefully there is no bias here. I don't have a database, so this was painfully manual... perhaps someone else could actually perform a more complete study...

Observations:

1. There is no clear trend, at least not to me. IMO that suggests that Davis could go either way... it is no given that his numbers will go up.

2. This is essentially the cream of the RB crop over the past decade. I am not at all certain that Domanick Davis belongs in this group, talent-wise. So he may lag the performance of this group.

3. Only 4 players out of the 29 named above achieved a 10% gain or better (LT, Portis, Emmitt, TD). I definitely don't see Davis belonging in this group. (Abdul Jabbar was right there at 9.9%, so that helps Davis's cause.)

4. 17 of 29 players declined, while only 11 gained. It is true that a number of the decliners suffered injuries or major changes in situations. But even if you weed out the injuries and major situation changes, the odds still don't seem favorable for improvement.

The bottom line is that any improvement seems fairly optimistic and a decline seems just as likely, if not moreso, no matter what the reason ultimately is for the decline.

Scaling Up

Many have chosen to first scale up Davis's numbers from last season and then apply predicted improvement to that.

There are a number of the players above who also did not claim the feature back role until partway through their breakout season and maintained essentially the same role & situation in their next season: Dillon, Lewis (one season removed to avoid the injury), Green, Alexander, and Portis. Again, a group of very talented backs, likely more talented than Davis. It seemed similarly promising to scale up the statistics of each of these guys, just as people are doing for Davis.

But here's the rub: These other backs averaged a gain of only 4.1% in fantasy points per game the season following their breakout season, and that is from their straight numbers, not from scaled up numbers.

I would say this shows that scaling up is probably too optimistic to begin with, much less applying any improvement on top of that.

I would be interested in seeing someone post success stories of players similar to Davis in their breakout season, particularly if the breakout season was their rookie season. The ones I posted above are the most similar I am aware of, and they don't suggest there will be much improvement for Davis.

Touches

Davis had 285 touches last season and was unable to stay healthy. Of the 5 RBs listed above whose situations most resembled Davis's situation, Dillon's touches rose the most the following season... by 11.5%. The others: Green (+8.9%), Portis (+7.2%), Lewis (+5.7%), Alexander (0%... +1 touch). So it seems that there is some history to suggest his touches aren't likely to rise above 320.
Not really on point, I guess, but perhaps interesting nonetheless.
 
There is always a chance that any player doesn't improve. However, most QBs do from their rookie year to their second year...Agreed?Look, three things ...(1) the part in bold is correct that most are not as talented as Young, (2) How many of those guys have Young's ability on the ground to gain yardage as well as through the air, and (3) How many were rookies and posted top 5 fantasy numbers over a 10 game period?Answer those to my satisfaction and you'll win the arguement...I look forward to your response...
Part of the issue here is the first line. IIRC, the last data/info I had seen was that sophomore QB that scored at a certain level actually have not done as well the second time around.I also recall that the numbers were hard to decipher because some first time starters did so poorly that they had no place to go but up (say Alex Smith, Troy Aikman, or Vinny Testaverde for example). But for the guys on the high side of the curve I believe they also fell down more into the midlde range.As a for instance, no QB has ever had back-to-back seasons with 7 or more rushing TD (which is how many Young had last year). While he may continue to run amok, he may not get in the end zone as often.And his receiving options are almost completely unproven with very little experience. I'd like his chances way more if he were on an established offense.As for who on that list were comparible, Vick and Stewart standout. Certainly a sample size of two players is nothing to form any lasting impressions, but those two had great numbers as a first time starter and then did not carry that over the following season.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.
Totally agree. Tenn. had some big losses on the offense and Young will have to be even better than last year to get the same production. I'm just not a buyer of anything Titan this year. I'd take Vick over him in a heartbeat this year. People often get too enamoured with potential upside of young players. Vick finished 4th last year in scoring and was 5th on a ppg basis and is being drafted as the 11th qb. When Vick has been healthy he's never finished lower than 12th so he's essentially being taken at his downside.
 
David Yudkin said:
Young averaged 159 passing yards, 1 passing TD, 1.1 INT, 47.7 rushing yards, and 0.636 rushing TD from Week 4 on (11 games).

Vick has averaged 156.5 passing yards, 1.07 passing TD, 0.8 INT, 55.2 rushing yards, 0.239 rushing TD the past 3 years (46 games).

TEN lost Bennett, Bobby Wade, still don't have Givens, and Travis Henry.

ATL added Joe Horn and return pretty much everyone else save Lelie.
I bolded the most important part. Vick, compared to other rushing QBs, has always been below average at scoring rushing TDs. Even if everything else is a push, Young will likely get 3-5 more rushing TDs than Vick. I think that Young is a vastly superior passing QB compared to Vick and he'll be more similar to McNabb with slightly better rushing stats and slightly weaker passing stats. As far as adding Joe Horn, he has been under-whelming the past few years and at some point people will have to give up on the "yeah, but they brought in a new, stud receiver this year..." argument with respect to Vick.

 
David Yudkin said:
Young averaged 159 passing yards, 1 passing TD, 1.1 INT, 47.7 rushing yards, and 0.636 rushing TD from Week 4 on (11 games).

Vick has averaged 156.5 passing yards, 1.07 passing TD, 0.8 INT, 55.2 rushing yards, 0.239 rushing TD the past 3 years (46 games).

TEN lost Bennett, Bobby Wade, still don't have Givens, and Travis Henry.

ATL added Joe Horn and return pretty much everyone else save Lelie.
I bolded the most important part. Vick, compared to other rushing QBs, has always been below average at scoring rushing TDs. Even if everything else is a push, Young will likely get 3-5 more rushing TDs than Vick. I think that Young is a vastly superior passing QB compared to Vick and he'll be more similar to McNabb with slightly better rushing stats and slightly weaker passing stats. As far as adding Joe Horn, he has been under-whelming the past few years and at some point people will have to give up on the "yeah, but they brought in a new, stud receiver this year..." argument with respect to Vick.
Vick had garbage last year and was ranked 4th (being drafted 11th this year) so he doesn't really need to improve anything to be a huge value, Young does for where he's being drafted (finished 12th ppg and being drafted as the #9 QB). I think it's pretty indisputable that the Titans downgraded their skill positions on offense this offseason so even if Vick added nothing Young lost talent which by my logic would make it more difficult to succeed.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.
Why do people immediately assume that losing a key receiver, running back or both will have a significantly negative impact on an offense? You're calling out people for an upward bias in projecting young players whereas it appears that you are assuming that the loss of key offensive players is automatically a negative factor without any justification. According to a recent article on Football Outsiders, 10 teams have lost their top rusher and receiver since 1966. In the subsequent year they slipped, on average, only 1 spot in scoring rankings and actually improved very slightly in yardage rankings.As far as partial year extrapolations, you pointed out that it didn't work with Vick; however if you look at Carson Palmer you'd come to a different conclusion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do people immediately assume that losing a key receiver, running back or both will have a significantly negative impact on an offense? You're calling out people for an upward bias in projecting young players whereas it appears that you are assuming that the loss of key offensive players is automatically a negative factor without any justification. According to a recent article on Football Outsiders, 10 teams have lost their top rusher and receiver since 1966. In the subsequent year they slipped, on average, only 1 spot in scoring rankings and actually improved very slightly in yardage rankings.
In most situations teams have good players in the wings when a player moves on, i.e. , T. Jones leaves Benson comes in, Dillon leaves Maroney steps in, that is not the case in Tenn. None of those backs are better than Henry was. On the WR side it doesn't matter as much since none were very good to begin with but it still doesn't help. In how many situations in that study did a team lose it's #1wr, #2 wr AND their #1 rb, not many I'd guess. The one good thing is that they don't have far to fall since they were ranked 27th offensively last year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.
Why do people immediately assume that losing a key receiver, running back or both will have a significantly negative impact on an offense? You're calling out people for an upward bias in projecting young players whereas it appears that you are assuming that the loss of key offensive players is automatically a negative factor without any justification. According to a recent article on Football Outsiders, 10 teams have lost their top rusher and receiver since 1966. In the subsequent year they slipped, on average, only 1 spot in scoring rankings and actually improved very slightly in yardage rankings.As far as partial year extrapolations, you pointed out that it didn't work with Vick; however if you look at Carson Palmer you'd come to a different conclusion.
IMO, there's a difference between losing your top producers and replacing your top producers were guys with virually no experience.I'm sure we could come up with examples in either direction, but in recent memory I can think of the Vikings, 49ers, and Packers that had players leave town and did not come close to being as productive.
 
The one thing I find most interesting on the boards is that people often think that young players or players that had a hot streak will do as well or better the following season--as if doing worse is not even a consideration. Some people use extrapolated numbers as the baseline and tack on production from there with the caveat that a player by default will do better with more experience.Vick ended his first year as a starter on an incredible hot streak and there were people (albeit unwise ones) that were in my leagues that took him in the first round the year after. Vick has yet to produce at the same level as he did in the final half of 2002 (athough he has still been a good to very good fantasy option since then).I obviously have no idea how Young will do this year, but it would not shock me to see him struggle compared to last season. I would be concerned about the youth and inrxperience across the Titans' offense, as Young will need help to be a fantasy stud this year.
Why do people immediately assume that losing a key receiver, running back or both will have a significantly negative impact on an offense? You're calling out people for an upward bias in projecting young players whereas it appears that you are assuming that the loss of key offensive players is automatically a negative factor without any justification. According to a recent article on Football Outsiders, 10 teams have lost their top rusher and receiver since 1966. In the subsequent year they slipped, on average, only 1 spot in scoring rankings and actually improved very slightly in yardage rankings.As far as partial year extrapolations, you pointed out that it didn't work with Vick; however if you look at Carson Palmer you'd come to a different conclusion.
IMO, there's a difference between losing your top producers and replacing your top producers were guys with virually no experience.I'm sure we could come up with examples in either direction, but in recent memory I can think of the Vikings, 49ers, and Packers that had players leave town and did not come close to being as productive.
I could also come up with reasons why a young, highly touted QB will do better in his second year than in his first year--"more comfortable with the speed of the NFL", "another off season to correct whatever weaknesses in their game", etc. The fact is that you're making subjective assessments that belie the historical statistics--which is the same mistake that you're point out that others are making in extrapolating stats or having an upward bias for young players. The fact that some people expect Young to improve next year isn't solely because they are extrapolating a hot streak.
 
You heard it here first, the Titans will have similar production out of their running backs this year that they did last year. VY and the O-line had as much to do with Travis Henry's running production as his talent did.

Edit:With Vick being indicted, it may make this choice real easy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering Vick may be playing against the prison guards he could rack up some nice stats.

 
My problem with Vick isn't any potential overhanging suspensions or his end of year totals. It's consistency. Had him on my team in '04 and '05. His per game stat line would read something like: Week 1: 8 ptsWeek 2: 11 ptsWeek 3: 35 ptsWeek 4: 9 ptsWeek 5: 12 ptsWeek 6: 20 ptsWeek 7: 10 ptsWeek 8: 40 pointsSome games he'd practically guarantee a win on his own, but there were just as many that he was one of the prime reasons for a loss, or at least not being very comfortable come Monday morning, due to not outscoring the other guys sometimes-very-average QB1.
Taking this further, I came across some interesting stats while doing research. Now I realize Vick is a top 10 QB when everything washes out at the end of the year, and every QB has their up and down games. These ups and downs can be accepted during the year, but in the playoffs they can kill you. Just taking a look at how Vick closed out the past 3 seasons would keep me from drafting him (this is just from FBG game logs, I did not run any comparisons vs. rest of league, Ds he played against etc):2006: 3 of last 4 he scored under 10 points2005: 3 of last 5 under 10 pts.2004: 3 of last 4 under 11 pts.Vick's scoring swings can even out over the course of a year, but he is way too much risk for me come playoff time. This is not to say I'd draft Young over Vick if it came down to it this year, just that I'd look for more consistency elsewhere. Besides, there's no way I could have Vick on my team and look my dog in the eyes.
 
raidergil said:
My problem with Vick isn't any potential overhanging suspensions or his end of year totals. It's consistency. Had him on my team in '04 and '05. His per game stat line would read something like: Week 1: 8 ptsWeek 2: 11 ptsWeek 3: 35 ptsWeek 4: 9 ptsWeek 5: 12 ptsWeek 6: 20 ptsWeek 7: 10 ptsWeek 8: 40 pointsSome games he'd practically guarantee a win on his own, but there were just as many that he was one of the prime reasons for a loss, or at least not being very comfortable come Monday morning, due to not outscoring the other guys sometimes-very-average QB1.
Taking this further, I came across some interesting stats while doing research. Now I realize Vick is a top 10 QB when everything washes out at the end of the year, and every QB has their up and down games. These ups and downs can be accepted during the year, but in the playoffs they can kill you. Just taking a look at how Vick closed out the past 3 seasons would keep me from drafting him (this is just from FBG game logs, I did not run any comparisons vs. rest of league, Ds he played against etc):2006: 3 of last 4 he scored under 10 points2005: 3 of last 5 under 10 pts.2004: 3 of last 4 under 11 pts.Vick's scoring swings can even out over the course of a year, but he is way too much risk for me come playoff time. This is not to say I'd draft Young over Vick if it came down to it this year, just that I'd look for more consistency elsewhere. Besides, there's no way I could have Vick on my team and look my dog in the eyes.
I always take "he doesn't score in the playoffs" thing with a grain of salt. Yes, it's our fantasy playoffs and it effects us but from the player/NFL POV it's another week in the season and the players aren't going to try any more or less in weeks 13-16. I'm just guessing but I'd bet it has more to do with matchups than anything else (probably a lot game vs. Carolina since they seem to kill him).
 
vick's indictment won't hurt him this year, now next year is a different story but vick is gonna be a steal in drafts this season

 
I just picked up Michael Vick as the 15th or 16th QB drafted in a redraft league. I've seen Vick going as late as QB 20 and Young in the bottom of the Top 10. Vick has been a QB1 all 4 years he's been healthy and IMO he's quickly approaching a point where it will be nearly impossible for him to get suspended at any point this season. (There will basically only be 5 months until the season is over and he's yet to be charged with anything let alone convicted.)Who will be the higher ranked QB at year's end?
Vick has never been a QB 1, unless your playing in a girls league. Stop the Madness stop the hype, call your NFL spoksman and tell him no more trackletes pretending to be QB'sThats all.
 
vick's indictment won't hurt him this year, now next year is a different story but vick is gonna be a steal in drafts this season
Yeah if you pick him up as the 56th QB Taken overall, he will make a great 4th string QB in a 20 man league. :shrug:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My problem with Vick isn't any potential overhanging suspensions or his end of year totals. It's consistency. Had him on my team in '04 and '05. His per game stat line would read something like: Week 1: 8 ptsWeek 2: 11 ptsWeek 3: 35 ptsWeek 4: 9 ptsWeek 5: 12 ptsWeek 6: 20 ptsWeek 7: 10 ptsWeek 8: 40 pointsSome games he'd practically guarantee a win on his own, but there were just as many that he was one of the prime reasons for a loss, or at least not being very comfortable come Monday morning, due to not outscoring the other guys sometimes-very-average QB1.
Taking this further, I came across some interesting stats while doing research. Now I realize Vick is a top 10 QB when everything washes out at the end of the year, and every QB has their up and down games. These ups and downs can be accepted during the year, but in the playoffs they can kill you. Just taking a look at how Vick closed out the past 3 seasons would keep me from drafting him (this is just from FBG game logs, I did not run any comparisons vs. rest of league, Ds he played against etc):2006: 3 of last 4 he scored under 10 points2005: 3 of last 5 under 10 pts.2004: 3 of last 4 under 11 pts.Vick's scoring swings can even out over the course of a year, but he is way too much risk for me come playoff time. This is not to say I'd draft Young over Vick if it came down to it this year, just that I'd look for more consistency elsewhere. Besides, there's no way I could have Vick on my team and look my dog in the eyes.
I always take "he doesn't score in the playoffs" thing with a grain of salt. Yes, it's our fantasy playoffs and it effects us but from the player/NFL POV it's another week in the season and the players aren't going to try any more or less in weeks 13-16. I'm just guessing but I'd bet it has more to do with matchups than anything else (probably a lot game vs. Carolina since they seem to kill him).
Thats cause your hanging on to the Vick Hype a little too hard, he would have won you two games out right last year and lost you about 4 due to exteamly poor play. He aint a QB, Repeat. Get off Vicks Johnson and quit pimpin that crap.
 
Everyone is always trying to hold Vince down, and he just keeps proving people wrong...

You can't throw with that wierd motion.

You can't beat OU.

You can't beat USC.

You will never be drafted as a QB, they will switch you to WR.

You should not be a High Draft pick with that wonderlic score.

You will fail as a NFL QB.

You cannot have success with the team built around you in Tenn.

Now its....

You will not improve on your rookie QB numbers.

The madden curse will get you.

You lost to many good players to have a good year.

This guys seems to overcome anything that is thrown to him. Now more questions pop up, and you know what...I expect him to have an even better year.

When has this guy failed to impress?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top