Why shouldn't Manning be a 1st round pick? (1 Viewer)

[-OZ-]

If we look at the FBG projections as an absolute end result, Manning would have a value score of 50 points.

THere are 9 RB, 10 WR, 1 TE, and 2 DEF projected with higher value scores. Manning is projected as the 23rd most valuable player based on the lowest scoring starter model (actually WR30 for WR).

The big concern people have is that by taking Manning in the 1st, your team will suffer at RB. The other concern is that it is far easier to get a decent starting QB in the middle rounds and there is very little chance to draft a starting RB that late (unless there are injuries to guys higher on the depth chart).

So while taking Manning earlier onthe surface may seem like it is the less risky play, for fantasy purposes it most likely MORE risky.

I assume you aren't suggesting we draft a DEF in the top 22 picks.Given that in any year, a good portion of the 1st round picks bust, and you can generally find good RBs later, I have no problem taking Manning as a late 1st round pick.

 

[(HULK)]

I think the point is that even a 20 point additional difference over the course of the year makes Manning have more value, but still not enough to justify a first round pick.  It's a bad pick even in 6pt passing TD leagues.

I am certain that if plug the couple of last years actual stats into a VBD excel sheet, Manning would be in the top 10 at least twice, based on VBD.

if you give me the scoring/roster numbers that you want to see i can give you his exact position.

8 teams (I think this makes a big difference, because the RB baseline is RB16, not RB24), 6 points all tds, 1 point 10 yards rush/receiving, 1 point 20 yards passing.The past couple of years his VDB has been fairly high. I think last year was a little lower than the couple before it.

without looking, those numbers will increase his X-value no doubt. I'm assuming start 1/2/3/1/1 (no flex).

2005 - QB3, overall VBD rank of 22, 153 points behind Alexander

2004 - QB1, overall VBD rank of 1, 4 points ahead of Culpepper

2003 - QB1, overall VBD rank of 22, 151 points behind Holmes

2002 - QB3, overall VBD rank of 28, 146 points behind Holmes

So, his average VBD rank is 18th. Still, when you factor in his reliablity you could do much worse than picking him in the late first or early second. Looks like your not likely to hit a homerun with him though (other than 2004). Still, safety with my early picks is a big deal to me. Picking Kevan Barlow in the second round a few years ago still stings.

 

[The Jerk]

In general, I have really enjoyed Manning on my team. He is consistently really good which allows you to not even worry about a backup. I have also had trouble drafting RB's late in the 1st round. I need a 1st rounder to produce at a high level, not necessarily the highest level (although it is helpful), but if your 1st rounder dogs you, trouble is brewing.

How successful has your team been? That's the goal. If you have found success drafting Manning early, then maybe you should stick with it. If not, then maybe you should try something else.You're not the only person to have trouble drafting a RB late in the first round who lives up to the draft slot. You might need to be a little more conservative here (stay away from overhyped players like the Joneses in 2005) or consider a WR. It's not just take a RB or Manning.

However, you're right that a first round RB bust doesn't help anything!

 

[Liquid Tension]

Having started the other thread, I will say that taking a QB early is a dicey proposition based mostly on the fact that even if you were fortunate to take the QB that ranks #1, he may not be worth taking him in the first round (looking only at yearend value).

That's why I suggested that how you project players will factor into all of this, and if you are sold on your own projections, you can make a case (or throw it out) depending upon the numbers.

I happen to think that the Colts will miss James a lot more than many are suggesting, that the Colts will struggle more than in seasons past, that Manning will play every week instead of sitting at the end of the year, and that he will have to pass more for the Colts to do well.  All that to me equlas Manning does better than normal (although not 2004 better).

I also see other QBs with some issues (see what I had in the thread) and there are some guys that are risky to start from week to week.

As others have pointed out, even if Manning would be worth a first round pick, if QBs fall in your league you still may be able to get him in the 2nd or 3rd.  If that's the case, then burning a first rounder makes no sense.

Given where other QB are going and the fact that guys I am high on are going late, late, I probably will stick with RB and WR early and wait on QBs.

I still think Manning will end up having first round value this year.  Where people want to draft him is another story.

With your logic DY, however the FBG projections value Manning as the 10th pick in the draft according to my rules.BTW, changing the thread a little, if Manning is not worth a 1st round pick than people should be changing their scoring rules IMO. It doesn't make sense to me.

If we look at the FBG projections as an absolute end result, Manning would have a value score of 50 points.THere are 9 RB, 10 WR, 1 TE, and 2 DEF projected with higher value scores. Manning is projected as the 23rd most valuable player based on the lowest scoring starter model (actually WR30 for WR).

The big concern people have is that by taking Manning in the 1st, your team will suffer at RB. The other concern is that it is far easier to get a decent starting QB in the middle rounds and there is very little chance to draft a starting RB that late (unless there are injuries to guys higher on the depth chart).

So while taking Manning earlier onthe surface may seem like it is the less risky play, for fantasy purposes it most likely MORE risky.

DY, according to FBG's prjections, Manning gets a value score of 77 with my scoring rules.

 

[Liquid Tension]

In general, I have really enjoyed Manning on my team.  He is consistently really good which allows you to not even worry about a backup.  I have also had trouble drafting RB's late in the 1st round.  I need a 1st rounder to produce at a high level, not necessarily the highest level (although it is helpful), but if your 1st rounder dogs you, trouble is brewing.

How successful has your team been? That's the goal. If you have found success drafting Manning early, then maybe you should stick with it. If not, then maybe you should try something else.You're not the only person to have trouble drafting a RB late in the first round who lives up to the draft slot. You might need to be a little more conservative here (stay away from overhyped players like the Joneses in 2005) or consider a WR. It's not just take a RB or Manning.

However, you're right that a first round RB bust doesn't help anything!

In the last two years I have made the SB in both my leagues and won 2 of the 4. The one loss last year was a disaster with Manning, TO, LT, KJ and Ronnie Brown either rested or hurt. I was lucky to get to the SB as the hottest team put up a zero game against me.With our scoring Manning is a better option than KJ, Jones, McGahee, DD, etc... and possibly a better option than Caddy, Ronnie, and Sjax as well.

 

[Post Corner]

A load of RBs at end of first round look too risky relative to a proven, iron-man Manning. Manning will play all year and give you solid production. I like him at the end of first round. Safe pick.

 

[The Jerk]

In general, I have really enjoyed Manning on my team.  He is consistently really good which allows you to not even worry about a backup.  I have also had trouble drafting RB's late in the 1st round.  I need a 1st rounder to produce at a high level, not necessarily the highest level (although it is helpful), but if your 1st rounder dogs you, trouble is brewing.

How successful has your team been? That's the goal. If you have found success drafting Manning early, then maybe you should stick with it. If not, then maybe you should try something else.You're not the only person to have trouble drafting a RB late in the first round who lives up to the draft slot. You might need to be a little more conservative here (stay away from overhyped players like the Joneses in 2005) or consider a WR. It's not just take a RB or Manning.

However, you're right that a first round RB bust doesn't help anything!

In the last two years I have made the SB in both my leagues and won 2 of the 4. The one loss last year was a disaster with Manning, TO, LT, KJ and Ronnie Brown either rested or hurt. I was lucky to get to the SB as the hottest team put up a zero game against me.With our scoring Manning is a better option than KJ, Jones, McGahee, DD, etc... and possibly a better option than Caddy, Ronnie, and Sjax as well.

Then don't mess with your approach. Don't worry about the consensus of the board here. In many cases, your league might differ from the norm in one area or another. In other cases, some of the posters are so indoctrinated in the "stud RB" theory that they can't see another option as ever being better. Good luck!

 

[perry147]

In general, I have really enjoyed Manning on my team. He is consistently really good which allows you to not even worry about a backup. I have also had trouble drafting RB's late in the 1st round. I need a 1st rounder to produce at a high level, not necessarily the highest level (although it is helpful), but if your 1st rounder dogs you, trouble is brewing.

How successful has your team been? That's the goal. If you have found success drafting Manning early, then maybe you should stick with it. If not, then maybe you should try something else.You're not the only person to have trouble drafting a RB late in the first round who lives up to the draft slot. You might need to be a little more conservative here (stay away from overhyped players like the Joneses in 2005) or consider a WR. It's not just take a RB or Manning.

However, you're right that a first round RB bust doesn't help anything!

In the last two years I have made the SB in both my leagues and won 2 of the 4. The one loss last year was a disaster with Manning, TO, LT, KJ and Ronnie Brown either rested or hurt. I was lucky to get to the SB as the hottest team put up a zero game against me.With our scoring Manning is a better option than KJ, Jones, McGahee, DD, etc... and possibly a better option than Caddy, Ronnie, and Sjax as well.

Then don't mess with your approach. Don't worry about the consensus of the board here. In many cases, your league might differ from the norm in one area or another. In other cases, some of the posters are so indoctrinated in the "stud RB" theory that they can't see another option as ever being better. Good luck!

Stick with what works for you and your league.

 

[David Yudkin]

Having started the other thread, I will say that taking a QB early is a dicey proposition based mostly on the fact that even if you were fortunate to take the QB that ranks #1, he may not be worth taking him in the first round (looking only at yearend value).

That's why I suggested that how you project players will factor into all of this, and if you are sold on your own projections, you can make a case (or throw it out) depending upon the numbers.

I happen to think that the Colts will miss James a lot more than many are suggesting, that the Colts will struggle more than in seasons past, that Manning will play every week instead of sitting at the end of the year, and that he will have to pass more for the Colts to do well.  All that to me equlas Manning does better than normal (although not 2004 better).

I also see other QBs with some issues (see what I had in the thread) and there are some guys that are risky to start from week to week.

As others have pointed out, even if Manning would be worth a first round pick, if QBs fall in your league you still may be able to get him in the 2nd or 3rd.  If that's the case, then burning a first rounder makes no sense.

Given where other QB are going and the fact that guys I am high on are going late, late, I probably will stick with RB and WR early and wait on QBs.

I still think Manning will end up having first round value this year.  Where people want to draft him is another story.

With your logic DY, however the FBG projections value Manning as the 10th pick in the draft according to my rules.BTW, changing the thread a little, if Manning is not worth a 1st round pick than people should be changing their scoring rules IMO. It doesn't make sense to me.

If we look at the FBG projections as an absolute end result, Manning would have a value score of 50 points.THere are 9 RB, 10 WR, 1 TE, and 2 DEF projected with higher value scores. Manning is projected as the 23rd most valuable player based on the lowest scoring starter model (actually WR30 for WR).

The big concern people have is that by taking Manning in the 1st, your team will suffer at RB. The other concern is that it is far easier to get a decent starting QB in the middle rounds and there is very little chance to draft a starting RB that late (unless there are injuries to guys higher on the depth chart).

So while taking Manning earlier onthe surface may seem like it is the less risky play, for fantasy purposes it most likely MORE risky.

DY, according to FBG's prjections, Manning gets a value score of 77 with my scoring rules.

Then draft where the value is. This goes for you and all others and all leagues. Not all rules and scoring systems are the same. Obviously, your league rules differ from others and QB are not highly regarded in terms of value--so don't throw away good money for bad. Take someone that fits your rules and your scoring system.I've debated people all offseason on certain players, but when you factor in weighted scoring or alternate starting rosters, sometimes guys leap in the rankings. In start 2QB leagues, QB are much more valuable, as are TE in 2 PPR leagues for TE.

People should look to exploit the scoring system and find players that will score the most in that system, simple as that.

 

[Warpig]

I did a little math and came up with some numbers that are very impressive and you'd be hard-pressed to find a QB that could compare as consistently as Manning.

In his 8 years Manning has thrown for 244 TD's and if you include his rushing td's (9) in that same span that gives you 253. Divide that out over a 16 game season over 8 years and you get 2 TD's a game. I also added up his passing yards and came up with over 33,000 yards and then divided that and came up with 259 yds a game.

259 yds and 2 td's a game! That is MONEY! Sure, if you are fortunate enough to have a high draft pick and you can get LJ or LT or SA and they have the ability to get you numbers close to that, but after those 3, no running back can compare to Manning's stats!

In a league where all td's are 6 pts then this guy deserves SERIOUS consideration as a first round pick. Especially with all the RB's out there that can get you 8-10 td's in the 2nd, 3rd, and maybe even 4th rounds (since after the top 3, if you get 10 td's outta your RB you should be happy!).

 

[David Yudkin]

I did a little math and came up with some numbers that are very impressive and you'd be hard-pressed to find a QB that could compare as consistently as Manning.

In his 8 years Manning has thrown for 244 TD's and if you include his rushing td's (9) in that same span that gives you 253. Divide that out over a 16 game season over 8 years and you get 2 TD's a game. I also added up his passing yards and came up with over 33,000 yards and then divided that and came up with 259 yds a game.

259 yds and 2 td's a game! That is MONEY! Sure, if you are fortunate enough to have a high draft pick and you can get LJ or LT or SA and they have the ability to get you numbers close to that, but after those 3, no running back can compare to Manning's stats!

In a league where all td's are 6 pts then this guy deserves SERIOUS consideration as a first round pick. Especially with all the RB's out there that can get you 8-10 td's in the 2nd, 3rd, and maybe even 4th rounds (since after the top 3, if you get 10 td's outta your RB you should be happy!).

I've invested more of my recent life on Manning than I want, but there are holes in this argument. For starters, Manning's 2004 numbers dramatically influence the results of these numbers. Exclude those, and Manning is still excellent, just not be as much.As far as HOW MUCH BETTER, you still are ignoring that there are guys that are 90% of Manning available way later--sometimes 6-8 rounds later. Is 90% of Manning almost 100 picks later not a better option? How many RB 100 later will be 90% of a first round pick production wise. Close to none if not none.

Marc Bulger has averaged 277 yards and 1.4 TD per game as a starter. That's almost exactly the same as Manning. Why isn't Bulger a first round pick (because he gets hurt)?

The fact of the matter is, that unless Manning has another year like 2004, he likely will not outscore the other QBs by a ton. Yes, he's reliable, but I'd rather take my chances on later round guys at QB and not mess around by being weak at RB.

I might be inclined to look at Manning in the 2nd or 3rd rounds, as he could very well be there in the leagues I play in. I could see me going LT, Randy Moss, Manning with my first 3 picks, as that would be a solid start to a draft.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I did a little math and came up with some numbers that are very impressive and you'd be hard-pressed to find a QB that could compare as consistently as Manning.

In his 8 years Manning has thrown for 244 TD's and if you include his rushing td's (9) in that same span that gives you 253.  Divide that out over a 16 game season over 8 years and you get 2 TD's a game.  I also added up his passing yards and came up with over 33,000 yards and then divided that and came up with 259 yds a game.

259 yds and 2 td's a game!  That is MONEY!  Sure, if you are fortunate enough to have a high draft pick and you can get LJ or LT or SA and they have the ability to get you numbers close to that, but after those 3, no running back can compare to Manning's stats! 

In a league where all td's are 6 pts then this guy deserves SERIOUS consideration as a first round pick.  Especially with all the RB's out there that can get you 8-10 td's in the 2nd, 3rd, and maybe even 4th rounds (since after the top 3, if you get 10 td's outta your RB you should be happy!).

I've invested more of my recent life on Manning than I want, but there are holes in this argument. For starters, Manning's 2004 numbers dramatically influence the results of these numbers. Exclude those, and Manning is still excellent, just not be as much.As far as HOW MUCH BETTER, you still are ignoring that there are guys that are 90% of Manning available way later--sometimes 6-8 rounds later. Is 90% of Manning almost 100 picks later not a better option? How many RB 100 later will be 90% of a first round pick production wise. Close to none if not none.

Marc Bulger has averaged 277 yards and 1.4 TD per game as a starter. That's almost exactly the same as Manning. Why isn't Bulger a first round pick (because he gets hurt)?

The fact of the matter is, that unless Manning has another year like 2004, he likely will not outscore the other QBs by a ton. Yes, he's reliable, but I'd rather take my chances on later round guys at QB and not mess around by being weak at RB.

I might be inclined to look at Manning in the 2nd or 3rd rounds, as he could very well be there in the leagues I play in. I could see me going LT, Randy Moss, Manning with my first 3 picks, as that would be a solid start to a draft.

DY, this is not accurate with teh 6 pts for TD leagues. These are the numbers over teh last 3 years for Manning and as I stated previously, he finished 2nd in the 4th year (not counted). These are average points per year

Manning 394Green 313Culpy 306Brady 302Hasselback 301Favre 284Mcnabb 282 Plummer 274Brooks 270Delhomme 269

Manning was 26% better than the next best guy. This 90% is not accurate. Yes, the rest are closely bunched, but Manning has been significantly better.

 

[David Yudkin]

I did a little math and came up with some numbers that are very impressive and you'd be hard-pressed to find a QB that could compare as consistently as Manning.

In his 8 years Manning has thrown for 244 TD's and if you include his rushing td's (9) in that same span that gives you 253.  Divide that out over a 16 game season over 8 years and you get 2 TD's a game.  I also added up his passing yards and came up with over 33,000 yards and then divided that and came up with 259 yds a game.

259 yds and 2 td's a game!  That is MONEY!  Sure, if you are fortunate enough to have a high draft pick and you can get LJ or LT or SA and they have the ability to get you numbers close to that, but after those 3, no running back can compare to Manning's stats! 

In a league where all td's are 6 pts then this guy deserves SERIOUS consideration as a first round pick.  Especially with all the RB's out there that can get you 8-10 td's in the 2nd, 3rd, and maybe even 4th rounds (since after the top 3, if you get 10 td's outta your RB you should be happy!).

I've invested more of my recent life on Manning than I want, but there are holes in this argument. For starters, Manning's 2004 numbers dramatically influence the results of these numbers. Exclude those, and Manning is still excellent, just not be as much.As far as HOW MUCH BETTER, you still are ignoring that there are guys that are 90% of Manning available way later--sometimes 6-8 rounds later. Is 90% of Manning almost 100 picks later not a better option? How many RB 100 later will be 90% of a first round pick production wise. Close to none if not none.

Marc Bulger has averaged 277 yards and 1.4 TD per game as a starter. That's almost exactly the same as Manning. Why isn't Bulger a first round pick (because he gets hurt)?

The fact of the matter is, that unless Manning has another year like 2004, he likely will not outscore the other QBs by a ton. Yes, he's reliable, but I'd rather take my chances on later round guys at QB and not mess around by being weak at RB.

I might be inclined to look at Manning in the 2nd or 3rd rounds, as he could very well be there in the leagues I play in. I could see me going LT, Randy Moss, Manning with my first 3 picks, as that would be a solid start to a draft.

DY, this is not accurate with teh 6 pts for TD leagues. These are the numbers over teh last 3 years for Manning and as I stated previously, he finished 2nd in the 4th year (not counted). These are average points per year
Manning 394Green 313Culpy 306Brady 302Hasselback 301Favre 284Mcnabb 282 Plummer 274Brooks 270Delhomme 269Manning was 26% better than the next best guy. This 90% is not accurate. Yes, the rest are closely bunched, but Manning has been significantly better.

Let's try ths again. If you exclude 2004 as a once in a lifetime occurance, Manning is not that much greater than all the other QB. His 2004 season was nowhere at all like all of his other seasons.This is a bit like some people using Jamal Lewis' 2000 yard rushing season as a baseline for his standard performance level. That is the exception, not the rule.

If you really think Manning will throw almost 50 TD again, then, yes, he is a great 1st round pick in 6 pt for TD leagues.

 

[David Yudkin]

As for Manning and the 90% production level . . .

(Using 4 pt for passing TD)

Last year, Manning had 294 points. 90% = 264. There were 11 other QB with at least 260.

In 2003, Manning scored 322 points. 90% = 289. The Top 11 other QB all scored 269 or better (roughly 84% of Manning's total).

I suspect that if you compare the dropoff in RB production from the players available at RB with your first round pick and the RBs available later that you would have had to taken instead that the production dropoff would be greater, especially when you consider that the other QB could be had MUCH later than Manning.

So to reiterate, unless you think Manning is going to light it up big time, he probably is an iffy first round pick.

 

[Liquid Tension]

As for Manning and the 90% production level . . .

(Using 4 pt for passing TD)

Last year, Manning had 294 points. 90% = 264. There were 11 other QB with at least 260.

In 2003, Manning scored 322 points. 90% = 289. The Top 11 other QB all scored 269 or better (roughly 84% of Manning's total).

I suspect that if you compare the dropoff in RB production from the players available at RB with your first round pick and the RBs available later that you would have had to taken instead that the production dropoff would be greater, especially when you consider that the other QB could be had MUCH later than Manning.

So to reiterate, unless you think Manning is going to light it up big time, he probably is an iffy first round pick.

DY, Why would you use the 4 point when the entire discussion is about the 6 point (which BTW all people should be using as 4 just doesn't do justice to the position). I don't think it is fair to exclude his great year because it was an aberration, because people WON SB's just because of him, but if I do that and use the 3 years around him, he is still the clear leader. it is not fair to use the 11 QB's who finshed behind him because you don't know who that is year from year. My example showed all QB's. But pulling out that year but leaving everyone else puts Manning as a 10% improvement over the #2 guy and it goes up form there.

Manning 394 (adjusted 344)

Green 313

Culpy 306

Brady 302

Hasselback 301

Favre 284

Mcnabb 282

Plummer 274

Brooks 270

Delhomme 269

Your point still escapes me in a 6 pt per TD league? Also, the forecast for Manning was 31 TD's and the Value of him puts him at 10th overall according to VBD. Taking the injury risk into account and the guarantee of 344 points should be enough???

Who would you draft with the 9th or 10th pick?

 

[smcindoe]

I recently asked MFL if they could post what the percentage breakdown was of their leagues that use 6 and 4 pt TDs. The 6 pt TD leagues outnumber the 4 pt TD leagues by a fair margin.

By the way, this result is consistent with polls that have been done in the past in this forum. The whole "most leagues give four points for passing TDs" thing is a myth. A lot do, but it's certainly not most. It's possible that most of the expert leagues do, so the experts that do the web sites and magazines assume that everyone else does too. We don't.

 

[David Yudkin]

As for Manning and the 90% production level . . .

(Using 4 pt for passing TD)

Last year, Manning had 294 points.  90% = 264.  There were 11 other QB with at least 260.

In 2003, Manning scored 322 points.  90% = 289. The Top 11 other QB all scored 269 or better (roughly 84% of Manning's total).

I suspect that if you compare the dropoff in RB production from the players available at RB with your first round pick and the RBs available later that you would have had to taken instead that the production dropoff would be greater, especially when you consider that the other QB could be had MUCH later than Manning.

So to reiterate, unless you think Manning is going to light it up big time, he probably is an iffy first round pick.

DY, Why would you use the 4 point when the entire discussion is about the 6 point (which BTW all people should be using as 4 just doesn't do justice to the position). I don't think it is fair to exclude his great year because it was an aberration, because people WON SB's just because of him, but if I do that and use the 3 years around him, he is still the clear leader. it is not fair to use the 11 QB's who finshed behind him because you don't know who that is year from year. My example showed all QB's. But pulling out that year but leaving everyone else puts Manning as a 10% improvement over the #2 guy and it goes up form there.

Manning 394 (adjusted 344)

Green 313

Culpy 306

Brady 302

Hasselback 301

Favre 284

Mcnabb 282

Plummer 274

Brooks 270

Delhomme 269

Your point still escapes me in a 6 pt per TD league? Also, the forecast for Manning was 31 TD's and the Value of him puts him at 10th overall according to VBD. Taking the injury risk into account and the guarantee of 344 points should be enough???

Who would you draft with the 9th or 10th pick?

For starters, I created an entire thread arguing your side on Manning, so obviously I am not disagreeing with you. But even in a 6 pt per TD league I believe that Manning would need a decent jump on the other QB to really cement his case as a bonafide first round pick given the potential decrease in production at other positions and the potential to get a decent QB much later on that still is good to very good production wiseAs for the injury risk issue for other QB, IMO, that's also a somewhat of a moot point unless someone is going to miss the entire season. For example, getting back to Bulger and the stats I posted earlier, his per game fantasy scoring is similar to Manning's. If he DIDN'T play for your team, you might have to stick in a more "average" QB for a couple of weeks. It's not like you get a zero from your QB spot--you can just insert another QB and there should be plenty to chose from. In start 1 QB leagues, there are normally NFL starting QB on the waiver wire that could be used if no one else on your roster could play.

So if you got 14 games x 20 points from Bulger and then 2 games x 15 points from someone else, that's still 310 points from your QB spot and not far from Manning without investing your first round pick to do it.

By comparison, if a stud RB goes down, there may be a guy on waivers that might be able to step in (if you had no one else), but the odds are slim.

As for your point about missing on your late round QB selections, maybe I just have good insight or dumb luck as I have never had problems plucking QB from out of nowhere (or at least in later rounds) that have fared well. Remember, part of the strategy in waiting on QB is to gain an advantage at other positions, so if my team WITHOUT Manning is more solid elsewhere than yours WITH Manning, your advantage may be wiped out entirely (or could swing to my favor).

As I outlined in the other thread, I happen to think Manning WILL do much better than projected, so therefore I think he warrents consideration in the slots that you just inquired about at the end of Round 1.

 

[BigRed]

So what the heck is everyone's issue?

Lemmings who just can't break away from the "RB stud" bit OK....actually I admit over the last few years I've slowly gravitated that way myself, but IMO Manning at 1.10+ is a solid - even smart - pick due to likelihood of consistency, reliability, upside for a huge year, seperation from pack, etc. If you buy big into the "you can't win your league with that first pick but can lose it" thing, it shouldn't be hard to see why Manning makes sense.

 

[The Jerk]

I suspect that if you compare the dropoff in RB production from the players available at RB with your first round pick and the RBs available later that you would have had to taken instead that the production dropoff would be greater, especially when you consider that the other QB could be had MUCH later than Manning.

As you know from my earlier posts in this thread, I see merit on both sides of this issue. That said, one of the key assumptions here on the side of NOT drafting Manning in the first round is that the RB (or WR) selected will actually play like a first round selection. Many people drafted Kevin Jones or others who didn't come near to performing at that level. When you dig through all the layers of any strategy, it always comes down to "draft good players in each round" or you're going to have a tough season.I think you can win with Manning as a first round pick but you can also win with a 9th or 10th round QB. It's not just what you do in the first round but what you do with the entire draft and of course free agency as the season progresses.

 

[Routilla]

If there were a great number of stud RBs I would say stay away from Manning. But there are alot of RBs at the end of the 1st rd that can be considered far from a "lock" as far as stud status is concerned. Aside from Rudi Johnson(and he might be w/out Palmer for awhile), I see either young RBs(Caddy, R. Brown) or vets with either injury concerns or the problem of playing on a poor team (McGahee, D. Davis, Westbrook). At the end of the 1st RD you could do a lot worse than getting the top QB or top WR(Smith, TO) and grabbing W Parker, J. Jones, J. Lewis etc in the 3rd-4th rounds. Just my opinion.

 

[David Yudkin]

If there were a great number of stud RBs I would say stay away from Manning. But there are alot of RBs at the end of the 1st rd that can be considered far from a "lock" as far as stud status is concerned. Aside from Rudi Johnson(and he might be w/out Palmer for awhile), I see either young RBs(Caddy, R. Brown) or vets with either injury concerns or the problem of playing on a poor team (McGahee, D. Davis, Westbrook). At the end of the 1st RD you could do a lot worse than getting the top QB or top WR(Smith, TO) and grabbing W Parker, J. Jones, J. Lewis etc in the 3rd-4th rounds. Just my opinion.

I'll give you Lewis as a 3rd or 4th rounder, but I can't see Parker or Jones falling that far in most drafts. Jones' ADP is currently 21 and Parker's is 26.

 

[Routilla]

If there were a great number of stud RBs I would say stay away from Manning.  But there are alot of RBs at the end of the 1st rd that can be considered far from a "lock" as far as stud status is concerned.  Aside from Rudi Johnson(and he might be w/out Palmer for awhile), I see either young RBs(Caddy, R. Brown) or vets with either injury concerns or the problem of playing on a poor team (McGahee, D. Davis, Westbrook).  At the end of the 1st RD you could do a lot worse than getting the top QB or top WR(Smith, TO) and grabbing W Parker, J. Jones, J. Lewis etc in the 3rd-4th rounds.  Just my opinion.

I'll give you Lewis as a 3rd or 4th rounder, but I can't see Parker or Jones falling that far in most drafts. Jones' ADP is currently 21 and Parker's is 26.

I forgot about league size. I'm in a 10 teamer so all of those guys are 3rd rd although Parker is the 1st in the 3rd so we may as well consider him 2nd rd if the pick is towards the end of the 3rd. It just seems like there are more ?s at RB after the first 4 guys or so than in years past. I still think you could do a lot worse than nabbing a top QB/WR this year in the 1st rd instead of a somewhat risky 1st rd RB. The RBs look like similar value to me in the 3rd/4th with C. Taylor, R. Bush etc.

 

[Liquid Tension]

As for Manning and the 90% production level . . .

(Using 4 pt for passing TD)

Last year, Manning had 294 points.  90% = 264.  There were 11 other QB with at least 260.

In 2003, Manning scored 322 points.  90% = 289. The Top 11 other QB all scored 269 or better (roughly 84% of Manning's total).

I suspect that if you compare the dropoff in RB production from the players available at RB with your first round pick and the RBs available later that you would have had to taken instead that the production dropoff would be greater, especially when you consider that the other QB could be had MUCH later than Manning.

So to reiterate, unless you think Manning is going to light it up big time, he probably is an iffy first round pick.

DY, Why would you use the 4 point when the entire discussion is about the 6 point (which BTW all people should be using as 4 just doesn't do justice to the position). I don't think it is fair to exclude his great year because it was an aberration, because people WON SB's just because of him, but if I do that and use the 3 years around him, he is still the clear leader. it is not fair to use the 11 QB's who finshed behind him because you don't know who that is year from year. My example showed all QB's. But pulling out that year but leaving everyone else puts Manning as a 10% improvement over the #2 guy and it goes up form there.

Manning 394 (adjusted 344)

Green 313

Culpy 306

Brady 302

Hasselback 301

Favre 284

Mcnabb 282

Plummer 274

Brooks 270

Delhomme 269

Your point still escapes me in a 6 pt per TD league? Also, the forecast for Manning was 31 TD's and the Value of him puts him at 10th overall according to VBD. Taking the injury risk into account and the guarantee of 344 points should be enough???

Who would you draft with the 9th or 10th pick?

For starters, I created an entire thread arguing your side on Manning, so obviously I am not disagreeing with you. But even in a 6 pt per TD league I believe that Manning would need a decent jump on the other QB to really cement his case as a bonafide first round pick given the potential decrease in production at other positions and the potential to get a decent QB much later on that still is good to very good production wiseAs for the injury risk issue for other QB, IMO, that's also a somewhat of a moot point unless someone is going to miss the entire season. For example, getting back to Bulger and the stats I posted earlier, his per game fantasy scoring is similar to Manning's. If he DIDN'T play for your team, you might have to stick in a more "average" QB for a couple of weeks. It's not like you get a zero from your QB spot--you can just insert another QB and there should be plenty to chose from. In start 1 QB leagues, there are normally NFL starting QB on the waiver wire that could be used if no one else on your roster could play.

So if you got 14 games x 20 points from Bulger and then 2 games x 15 points from someone else, that's still 310 points from your QB spot and not far from Manning without investing your first round pick to do it.

By comparison, if a stud RB goes down, there may be a guy on waivers that might be able to step in (if you had no one else), but the odds are slim.

As for your point about missing on your late round QB selections, maybe I just have good insight or dumb luck as I have never had problems plucking QB from out of nowhere (or at least in later rounds) that have fared well. Remember, part of the strategy in waiting on QB is to gain an advantage at other positions, so if my team WITHOUT Manning is more solid elsewhere than yours WITH Manning, your advantage may be wiped out entirely (or could swing to my favor).

As I outlined in the other thread, I happen to think Manning WILL do much better than projected, so therefore I think he warrents consideration in the slots that you just inquired about at the end of Round 1.

Appreciate the explanation DY. I haven't had bad luck with QB's later either as I grabbed Leftwich in the 7th round. I do think that there seems to be many unsure RB's this year and you can get some guys later than normal. Og course keeper leagues strategy differs than redraft leagues.The Jerk is right though, you have to have a good draft outside of the 1st round to be effective.