Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Savatage79

2nd pick in a 10 man .5 ppr league, 6 pt QB TDs... Do i go against the grain for Manning?

Recommended Posts

Heres a question, people projected Manning last year to be just ok. Nobody projected what he did, why is what is being projected, even tho last year many got wrong, sort of really being taken as concrete?

So people think he will regress, what if he can throw another 50 TDs? What if he hits 5k yards easily?

I dunno, I just am throwing questions around simply for discussions sake. But I feel that people dismiss elite QBs way to quick. If manning does even 500 points, 80 less inthe lleague, that is still like having close to 2 elite backs.

On the other hand, let's flip it on its head. Who was the first QB on most lists last year? Probably Rodgers. Was supposed to be a sure thing, can't miss kind of player and look what happened.

To debate your point more directly, it's already been shown that historically QBs do not repeat these ridiculous seasons. Brady didn't and neither did Vick. Brees didn't either. Could Manning? Sure. But picking someone based on his ceiling (especially as he continues to get older) is not a wise strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres a question, people projected Manning last year to be just ok. Nobody projected what he did, why is what is being projected, even tho last year many got wrong, sort of really being taken as concrete?

So people think he will regress, what if he can throw another 50 TDs? What if he hits 5k yards easily?

I dunno, I just am throwing questions around simply for discussions sake. But I feel that people dismiss elite QBs way to quick. If manning does even 500 points, 80 less inthe lleague, that is still like having close to 2 elite backs.

On the other hand, let's flip it on its head. Who was the first QB on most lists last year? Probably Rodgers. Was supposed to be a sure thing, can't miss kind of player and look what happened.

To debate your point more directly, it's already been shown that historically QBs do not repeat these ridiculous seasons. Brady didn't and neither did Vick. Brees didn't either. Could Manning? Sure. But picking someone based on his ceiling (especially as he continues to get older) is not a wise strategy.

Oh im not saying its a guaranteed bet, like Rodgers, thats defintely how fantasy goes. But look at Charles, his best season TD wise...but now with a crippled O line, why are folks still so high if there are negatives pointing against him?

And remember early in this thread, like ive said i understand taking Manning first may not be the "best" strategy, but it can be a strategy and it can work, just as it can backfire as well.

See for me what i like is knowing my first pick is there for the long haul, i think if someone had the stat sheet on it, i would be willing to bet that the percentage of RBs lasting all season is a good deal lower than QBs lasting all season.

Guys like Brees and Manning, have been pretty ridiculously reliable, outside of Mannings one season hes been solid as it gets. Same with Brees, like 2 games since 2004 hes missed.

So i feel that accounts for something. I realize the better strategy in taking an RB first, honestly i do...i do it every year and one of my biggest money years that i won about 2,000 bucks i had McCoy and Rice, and its simply a strategy i condone. But i also feel there are times when its possible to bend the rules a bit, and while Manning is no guarantee....i feel that the reward could be incredible if i were to take that risk.

No pick is safe, but i believe some a lot safer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I just wanted to throw out a little info for you. It may help, it might not.

I also play in a similar league as you do with the bonus pts for TD length, also for going over 300+ yards.

In my league the top 5 QBs for 15 games were Manning(569), Brees (495), Dalton(381), Rivers(379), Stafford(371).

Top 5 RB Charles(325), Shady(306) Forte(283), Lynch(245), Moreno(241)

Top 5 WR Gordon(264), Calvin (250), Demaryius(249), A.J. Green(238), A. Brown(221)

What does this mean? Peyton Averaged 37.93 Pts a game... the next closest QB was Brees at 33 pts a game. Then it drops even further to Dalton at 25.4 pts a game, etc...

Let's do RBs.

Charles- 21.67/game, Shady-20.4, Forte-18.87, Lynch-16.33, Moreno-16.07, etc

You can do the same for WR.

Now I am not showing this for you to chase last years numbers. Just an idea of what Peyton did in comparision... he averaged almost 5 pts a game more than the next closest QB, and over 12 pts a game to the 3rd ranked QB! There will be regression, sure. But lets say he drops 80 pts from last year. Shoot, let's make it 100 pts. That puts him on par with what Brees scored this past year, and he was the 2nd ranked QB. You don't find that disparity in any other position, even from Jimmy Graham.

Let's take it a step further... we all want to know how consistant a QB is. Peyton was the "STUD" (top 3 scorer at position) 8 times last year, the next closest was Brees and Nick Foles.... at 4 games. This is taking into account of playing championship in week 16.

So, with me just throwing out some raw facts to you here quick, it not only makes sense as to why to take Peyton Manning at your #2 spot. It is actually encouraging to take him there. You can certainly fill in your team in the following round to make up for the points you may be missing out from your RB position. I hope this helps a bit.

These stats are quite misleading. You don't take RBs early because RB1 is better than RB5. You take RBs early because all the RBs down to say, RB45 or so are all rostered in a 10-team league and there are no replacements out there on the waiver wire barring the rare Samkon Gado kind of season.

On the other hand, while Manning is better than QB5, after QB10 or so all the QBs are more or less the same and quite a few of them are out there on the waiver wire. It's also misleading to throw out the stat that Manning was on X% of championship teams last year when he was taken in the 3rd round last year and put up a historic season. Now you're talking about drafting him two rounds higher for undoubtedly less production. If you really want to go early QB take a bounce-back candidate like Rodgers in the 3rd.

I'm not saying you can't win by taking Manning, but I'm saying that on average you are probably costing yourself more in total team talent by taking him than you are by not taking him.

mannings went 2nd rd in all my drafts early 2nd 12 team

and thats with standard scoing 6 pt tds i would assum the 60% league champ would increase

Considering that everyone is projecting Manning to regress from a record-breaking season as QBs historically have, why would you expect the percentage of ownership on championship teams to increase?

ha im saying that the % of champion ship teams would increase with 6 pt tds vs standard (4pt) as stated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To debate your point more directly, it's already been shown that historically QBs do not repeat these ridiculous seasons. Brady didn't and neither did Vick. Brees didn't either. Could Manning? Sure. But picking someone based on his ceiling (especially as he continues to get older) is not a wise strategy.

Brees didn't repeat his ridiculous season?

2011 (2nd in qb points) 5,476 passing yards, 46 passing TDs, 86 rushing yards, 1 Rushing TD, 14 INTs 479.6 fantasy points

2012 (1st in qb points) 5,177 passing yards, 43 passing TDs, 5 rushing yards, 1 Rushing TD, 19 INTs 431.6 fantasy points

He dropped a total of 299 passing yards, 81 rushing yards and 3 TDs from the previous year plus 5 more INTs, which resulted in a 48 point drop, or 3 points per game less, I think that's pretty much on the level of repeating. If you mean he didn't repeat because he didn't do better than the previous year, then of course...how could someone expect him to go beyond that, but I'd say he was as close as you possibly could get.

If Manning can just get around the same points Brees did that year (431) he'll avg around 27 points per game...I don't think that's out of the question at all.

The thing I think most don't get when it comes to the elite qbs is the upside. Everyone looks at this game as a year to year thing, where as it's a weekly game. Having a QB that can consistently drop 30-40 points is just as valuable as having an elite RB, except for the fact that the RB position is more injury prone, and more of the top RBs (top 10 ranked) bust than that of say the elite QB variety.

If you get a good qb in round 7ish or so because you waited, you'll likely get a few high 20 point games, maybe some 30 point games, but they aren't going to be consistent, and they'll be sprinkled around a bunch of avg or below avg performances. For instance last year Cam Newton (a qb that finished top 5 last year) has 3 games of under 12 points, 2 of those games were under 7 points. Also, last year Kaepernick (a lot of people's choice for a breakout QB last year) had 3 games under 6 points. If your QB scores less than 10 points for the week in a 6 pt TD league, you've likely lost, unless you just had some good fortune.

Do you know how many games Peyton Manning has had under 20 points in the last 2 years in Denver? Seven. So, 7 out of 32 games he put up less than 20 points, and only one of those was under 10 points (week 2 of 2012). 14 of those 32 games he had over 30 points. So what that means is that he had 14 games of 30+, 9 games of 20-29 points, and only 7 from 9-19 points.

You're getting every thing you pay for in a first round (even first overall pick) so long as he stays healthy, if he puts up around 4800-5000+ and 40 or more TDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shake great post man, I agree. That's why I've never been a fan of "just grab a QB late" , the difference is huge. And like you said RBs are more injury prone, which again means a huge chance to lose your first pick.

If the percentage is higher to keep your first pick with an elite QB, vs an elite RB, all season.. I'd rather have the reliability of a QB lasting all season.

And Brees is what I feel for manning, even if he gets in the ball park of it, it would be worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point about Brees, I thought the dropoff was larger but I didn't actually look it up.

Let me frame things a different way. There are some games where the odds are known ahead of time and betting on a low percentage play is rewarded with a larger payoff if it hits, like roulette. The less likely your bet is to hit the more money you stand to make, which keeps all the plays more or less even if you have enough time and money to stand there and play over and over. (Setting aside the 0 and 00 slots that give the house the edge.)

Then there are games like poker where the odds shift depending on what everyone else has and what's left in the deck, and the payout also shifts. Again, you can customize the amount of risk you'd like to take by only betting and raising when you believe there's sufficient money in the pot to make your change of winning the hand worth it.

Fantasy football doesn't work that way. No matter which path you take the payout is the same if you win. It doesn't shift at all with the odds. In that scenario the smart move is to take the high percentage play because over time you will win more often than if you consistently (or even inconsistently) take the low percentage shot. It doesn't mean you can't win with the low percentage shot, but the important thing to recognize is that winning with the low percentage play on some occasions doesn't make it the correct play in the long run.

So then the question is whether taking a RB or QB 1st overall gives you the highest chance of winning. It sounds like you agree with the general premise that on average taking a RB first gives you the better shot. If so, that's the move you should make, at least in a money league. In a fun league with friends anything goes. I have a friend who just basically drafts the entire Bears roster. On the other hand if you believe taking a QB first gives you best chance to win then that's the move you make, and you make it every time.

Personally I'm firmly on the RB side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But here's my counter, maybe RB is the best choice but I think it comes with the most dangerous negatives meaning every play a RB is in jeopardy. So its sort of like this, RB that stays healthy is a nice positive, but has a greater chance to get hurt and miss a season or time.

Where an elite QB, sure maybe you will struggle a bit at RB but you have almost 95% reliability for the elite QBs that hardly ever get hurt. I guess I just feel that should factor in somewhere.

Like look at RG3, he's just a loose cannon out there, always a chance to get hurt for how he games and runs and takes hit. Why do I want that? I'd rather a Brees or Manning or Rodgers that pretty much are healthy all the time, and its guaranteed points.

Again i realize the rationale for RBs, but I think people way to quickly dismiss elite QBs and how much of a bigger advantage one has having them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying look at the big picture. Factor in RB injuries however you want, QB upside however you want, etc.

At some level on a large scale one or the other of them gives you a higher percentage chance of winning. That should be your pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But wouldn't those variables change week to week?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But wouldn't those variables change week to week?

In that instance, you look to see where you can get consistant production, week by week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At that point, in all honesty I am not looking at Peyton to be my number 1 QB this year. If you want consistancy, I have two words for you. Drew. Brees. 3 Consecutive years of 5000+ yards passing with 39, 46 and 43 TDs. He also has another 5000 yard campaign in 2008. That is 4 years of 5000+ yards passing.

Did you know that the 5000 yard mark has been eclipsed by 4 other QBs.... once for each? He alone has the same amount of 5000+ yard seasons than all the other QBs combined. Drew Brees has not missed multiple games in a season since 2003 with SD.

If it was me selecting a QB in the first round... it would be Drew Brees. This is the guy who has finished in the top 3 in fantasy for I don't know how many years.

GOLDEN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh trust me dude, im all over the Brees-wagon as ive made it my mission to own him every year the last couple years, hes my favorite QB in the league for fantasy consistency. I have a few leagues, I def will be having my share of Brees no doubt. Im only simply starstruck by Mannings season last year is all, as im sure many is....and I feel there is something magical happening with that Denver offensive scheme, know what I mean? I just have that feeling with their weapons its going to be another 2 years or so id incredible football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But wouldn't those variables change week to week?

Again, I'm talking about the big picture.

With enough data you could do a statistical study of how often a team that takes ___ in the first round wins a championship.

I'm actually fascinated by this.

Let's say in a 12-team league there are on average 8 RB taken in the first round, 1 QB (Manning), 1 TE (Graham) and 2 WR. The first round was 67% RBs, 8% QB, 8% TE and 17% WR roughly. So all things being equal we would expect 67% of championship teams to have drafted a RB in the first round and so on.

Let's say we run the numbers and 87% of championship teams took a RB in the first round vs. only 4% that took a QB. That would suggest that on average (and again, I'm talking about aggregating a ton of end-of-season data, maybe even from multiple years) taking a RB gives you a greater chance of success.

On the other hand, let's say we find that 15% of championship teams drafted a QB first whereas only 52% drafted a RB first. That would suggest that drafting a RB first may not be the best plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I totally get where you are coming from. There is no question about what they have and they will be hurting defenses week by week. I would be inclined to take one of these two this year, as I draft #8 in my money league. However, I am keeping M. Stafford in the 10th round so I am saved from having to make that decision. What you gotta do is think if you can target the undervalued players later in the draft to make up for not getting that #1 Stud RB. Which I do beleive there are quite a bit out there.

I say go for it, you will be getting consistant production from him the whole year. Can I ask you one question? When you played against Peyton last year, were you sh*tting your pants or what? Imagine having that comfort for yourself for the whole year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing, as ive said the one thing I always know about fantasy football is that injuries come the quickest in my eyes with RBs. Its why I sometimes, not all the times, but sometimes shy away from RBs in the first round pending on where im at. See if I could grab Forte and then quickly get Brees on the wrap, then id be totally fine with that and would build accordingly.

My main concern more or less is this, i can gladly take Peterson with the 2nd pick as i love AP. But i just feel that i will miss out on the Manning, Rodgers, Brees grabs and i hate that. Now i realize i can hold probably for Brady, i know he will bounce back this year, im pretty confident, but i am simply a fan of elite QBs through and through. So thats mainly why im comtemplating a QB with the first pick, and i felt that Manning is the one that is moreso understandable for a first round early pick.

Ultimately i may end up just doing what i normally do, take my Peterson or Charles, and then get a higher end WR, and Brady on the way back perhaps.

Pre season just needs to start, that imho will change the landscape i feel of whos who and what is what i feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started to look at the list of winners over the years from leagues, and i am not really a stats/percentage kind of guy so im not sure if it actually has anything conclusive but i think it would definitely be interesting to see people grab QBs from their league winners of the last 10 years lets say, or 7 years maybe and see what elite QBs are in the winning teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody's league is a big enough sample size.

Still though, I'm interested to see what it would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going into last year he had one of the most favorable schedules for a QB. Sanders is fine but he is not as good as Decker. I still have Manning as my #2 QB but I definitely wouldn't draft him #2 overall. If I was considering drafting a QB that early I'd go with Brees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, let me sum up your 100 post conversation.

No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, let me sum up your 100 post conversation.

No.

Great post, definitely was worth waiting for.

In the end ill most likely take my RB as im "supposed to do", but i still believe that fantasy is to much luck based on almost every facet for it to really matter in the grand scheme of things. An elite RB doesnt guarantee success anymore than taking an elite QB in the first round, ill always believe that. As ive seen guys win with some of the worst looking teams. Hell back in 02-03, and im not lying, some dude drafted Adam Vinatieri in the first round because he didnt know and had zero idea how to play fantasy, and still managed to win solely based on matchups, luck, bad weeks from good teams, you name it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my personal thought process. I don't believe in any way does the first 2-3 rounds win you a league. There is so much chance and injury risk in the league. You take a look at those first couple rounds and every single person is getting elite players. Now some of them may go down to injury or just have a down year. It happens. Unless you are not an educated drafter, it is hard to screw up the first 2-3 rounds. I believe championships are won in the 4-9 rounds. That is where you need to evaluate, have some luck, and make wise decisions. Taking X player in the first round will not handicap you at other positions for the rest of the draft. You just balance it out throughout the rest of the draft, then later being active with the waiver wire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my personal thought process. I don't believe in any way does the first 2-3 rounds win you a league. There is so much chance and injury risk in the league. You take a look at those first couple rounds and every single person is getting elite players. Now some of them may go down to injury or just have a down year. It happens. Unless you are not an educated drafter, it is hard to screw up the first 2-3 rounds. I believe championships are won in the 4-9 rounds. That is where you need to evaluate, have some luck, and make wise decisions. Taking X player in the first round will not handicap you at other positions for the rest of the draft. You just balance it out throughout the rest of the draft, then later being active with the waiver wire.

Let me ask you this Unbreakable, is it far fetched to break rounds down almost by points that you gain per round instead of focusing on actual positions? Like i always think about how lets say the first 5 rounds, are where probably guys biggest point bulks are at...if you start to lay them out, is it to far fetched to think in those terms? Meaning if lets say my first pick regardless the position nets me 480 points as opposed to what the rest of the leagues first pick is getting them, and then the next position round 2 pick nets me 255 points at the end, maybe someone else is only getting 215 with theirs, and so on and so forth.

Again i just love the conversation aspect so its why i like to throw different sort of views from different vantage points around. I also agree that the draft while important, is not everything.

Like my cousin was saying yesterday, him and I seem to always find ways into the playoffs....and so many times our teams look drastically different by the end of the season, but we get there based on really playing the WW well and having those staple positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I wouldn't say that is far fetched at all. In a way, that is similar to the analytics method. I am actually doing something similar in looking at WRs and RBs in my money league. I am all about figuring out our own personal prefernce of drafting. For all of those people that just say "No, don't do it." "Draft a RB first." Well those people are just close minded and they can have fun sticking with a singular mind frame. I will say, it will take some brass balls to let's say, take Peyton 2nd when the other backs are there. The logic is certainly there to do it. Just depends on what you want your strategy to be.

I enjoy the conversation aspect as well, throw all sorts of ideas out there. What you are saying is the difference in being a successful fantasy player, which in turn makes it more fun and enjoyable. I will say, as I had before, having a STUD QB is such an advantage it really can't be understated.

I actually may do the whole looking back to see what positions, what rounds offer the best return. Now obviously there will be variance due to injury. It just may be interesting to see if there is any correlation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.