Why QBs taken so low in recent Dynasty Drafts (1 Viewer)

[KellysHeroes]

Look at some of these results...

12 team Dynasty Draft http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=308871&hl=

Manning taken @ 2.04 / #16

Palmer taken @ 2.06 / #18 (thats about right.. maybe a little high)

Brees taken @ 4.05 / # 41

14 teamer http://football8.myfantasyleague.com/2007/...=55418&O=17

Manning taken @ 1.13 / #13

Palmer taken @ 3.02 / # 30

Brees taken @ 4.01 / # 43

16 teamer http://football8.myfantasyleague.com/2006/...=59002&O=17

Manning taken @ 1.14 / # 14

Palmer taken @ 2.13 / # 29

Brees taken @ 2.16 / # 32 (actually a little early)

I always thought it was a rule of thumb to take a QB earlier than usual in Dyansty leagues..

Guess I was wrong

 

[Beaumont]

A lot of people subscribe to the theory that one QB to another makes not that much difference vs. one RB to another ...

It depends on league scoring IMHO ...

 

[kevinray]

Look at some of these results...

12 team Dynasty Draft http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=308871&hl=

Manning taken @ 2.04 / #16

Palmer taken @ 2.06 / #18 (thats about right.. maybe a little high)

Brees taken @ 4.05 / # 41

14 teamer http://football8.myfantasyleague.com/2007/...=55418&O=17

Manning taken @ 1.13 / #13

Palmer taken @ 3.02 / # 30

Brees taken @ 4.01 / # 43

16 teamer http://football8.myfantasyleague.com/2006/...=59002&O=17

Manning taken @ 1.14 / # 14

Palmer taken @ 2.13 / # 29

Brees taken @ 2.16 / # 32 (actually a little early)

I always thought it was a rule of thumb to take a QB earlier than usual in Dyansty leagues..

Guess I was wrong

It depends on the league size and scoring obviously, but the difference between the 7th and 16th Qb normally is nominal, and they tend to move up and down in that range each year. If you can get 2 or 3 7-22 range QB's then you will be able to compete at QB and then you can spend the earlier rounds getting good running backs and Wr's. The key to Dynasty Qbs is to get at least 2 guys who are secure in their jobs for the next 3 years because the turnover rate for QB's in the NFL isn't great and there are normally only 2-3 guys drafted each year who are guaranteed a shoot to start so if you miss out in rookie drafts or draft busts you can get screwed quickly and only have one true starter going into a season. Gunning for an elite guy can work but you have to hit with the RB's that fall or you'll be in a bad spot at the position where there’s much more of a drop off from tier to tier.

 

[duaneok66]

also, usually it takes longer for QBs to

a) start for their teams

and

b) make a fantasy factor . . .

RBs, for example, yield quick dividends in comparison. . .

 

[mtffl2]

A lot of people subscribe to the theory that one QB to another makes not that much difference vs. one RB to another ...

... it also depends upon how many keepers you have

 

[coolnerd]

A lot of people subscribe to the theory that one QB to another makes not that much difference vs. one RB to another ...

... it also depends upon how many keepers you have

DYNASTY implies that he is keeping his entire squad from year to year unless a player is dropped or traded.

 

[gman8343]

Lots of solid choices at QB, not as many at RB or even WR IMO. Guys like Vince Young, Cutler or Matt Leinart could end up being top 5 guys within the next year or two.

 

[-OZ-]

also, usually it takes longer for QBs to a) start for their teams and b) make a fantasy factor . . .RBs, for example, yield quick dividends in comparison. . .

Shouldn't this logic lead to us taking a stud QB higher and drafting rookie RBs?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Uh....because they're quarterbacks?

 

[dgreen]

Manning taken @ 2.04 / #16 Manning taken @ 1.13 / #13Manning taken @ 1.14 / # 14

Excluding his rookie year, Manning's average overall ranking is 17th.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Manning taken @ 2.04 / #16 Manning taken @ 1.13 / #13Manning taken @ 1.14 / # 14

Excluding his rookie year, Manning's average overall ranking is 17th.

Hes been a 1st rounder most likely since 2003

 

[ravnzfan]

there is so much depth at the position (translation, VBD #'s on QB's are low compared to other positions), it makes no sense to draft a QB w/a 1st or even 2nd round pick...the numbers just don't support it---consider:

in my Misfit dynasty leagues, Manning was QB1--329 points, and Losman QB14--218 points...VBD=111

RB1 Tomlinson (427) - RB 28 Alexander (136) = 291 VBD points

RB1 LT - RB9 RJohnson (215) = 212 VBD points

while Manning (Palmer/Brees) are nice commodities to have, they are waayyy too expensive as somebody always overpays w/a 1st or 2nd for these guys

a better way....let somebody else overpay and have a sucky squad, then offer a QB/picks etc in trade to acquire Manning/Palmer/Brees, etc

a case in point....my MOX-IV team---I draft LJ w/the 1.12 2 yrs ago, when the Padre is still starting, then RMoss 2.3

I take TGreen later on (6.12), and get Penny in a trade w/Housh for a guy hot on "upside RB's" Musa Smith and Ryan freakin' Moats---after making the playoffs, mind you, because Holmes was shelved as I expected and Johnson was the full-time starter in KC

the Carson Palmer owner is struggling, and needs some help...I offer Penny, Campbell, Housh + '07-1st & '08-2nd round rookie for Palmer, Mark Clayton & Furrey (all starters for me)

(I had traded Moss for Reggie Wayne and 2 picks...over the last 2 yrs, I've grabbed Brunell, Campbell, Grossman and Huard off the WW @QB)

so I deal RMoss, Moats, Musa Smith to get Penny/Housh, then deal them + 2 picks for Wayne (+ 2 picks, so picks = net 0) Palmer, Mark Clayton and Furrey

...to go w/Larry Johnson!

...and 6.12 Trent Green for me that year? result = QB12 (238)

QB1 Palmer (293) out scored Green by 55 and QB3 Manning (267) by 29

the initial draft that year:

Manning......1.3

Culpepper...1.4--he loves that pick, huh?

Palmer.......5.10(draft was in January, prior to his being named starter by Lewis)

Green........6.12

so give me QB12 (238) @6.12 over the QB3's (267), selected 1.3 any day---AND the ability to land Palmer w/ late picks and scrub RB's/WW fodder (my appologies to Mr Houshmazillie!)

 

[Warhogs]

Also, many leagues start 1 QB but start anywhere from 2-4 RB with flex spots. There are not enough RB to go around while there are many starting QBs sitting on the bench.

 

[Buckna]

Few leagues equal out the QB relative to other positions. Hopefully we will see a move to more QB friendly dynasty leagues in the future. The move to cancel out the over-reliance on stud RB has already started with leagues trying to increase the value of WR's & TE's (more flex spots, start 3WR, PPR, etc.)

 

[Colin Dowling]

there is so much depth at the position (translation, VBD #'s on QB's are low compared to other positions), it makes no sense to draft a QB w/a 1st or even 2nd round pick...the numbers just don't support it---consider:

While I understand that there is plenty of talent in a redraft for a person to wait on a QB, I am of the opposite opinion in keeper/dynasty. In redraft, you can be the 12th team of 12 to get a QB and still end up in the top-3rd in points scored, negating the VBD a great deal.However, in dynasty/keeper, stock-piling starters can significantly widen the gap between the has and has nots. In a 12 team keeper/dynasty, a person could assemble 3 or 4 good starting QBs pretty easily (by taking, for example, Palmer, Manning, Smith, Vince) in successive years. While at first glance it would be easy to say, "but you missed out on so much other talent!" the ADP of those guys in rookie drafts shows that the top-skill players (especially RBs) are long gone when the top-drafted QB comes off the board. Having a stable of that kind of talent would be sick and set you up for a long time. Even more importantly, it is reasonable to think that you would have 2 or 3 of the top-15 QBs for the next half decade, a very powerful position in which to be.I am a big fan of taking QBs in dynasty once the top-notch RBs are gone.