RMJ_12

2018 Biggest Busts

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

Except that Rodgers wasn't even the #1 QB in 2012 (#2), 2013 (#22), 2015 (#7) or 2017 (#29).

Where's all the other years that you omitted? And why were they omitted? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still not worth taking a QB that early.  Just looking over the last 4 years or so the difference between RB1 and RB12 is significantly bigger than the difference between QB1 and QB12.  Not only that but it's so much easier to pick up a decent QB off waivers than a RB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

BLUF: Unless you think Watson will sustain 30+ PPG, it's not worth drafting him in the third or fourth. If you think he can do that tho, fire away!

 

Here's a cut-and-paste value-over-replacement comparison I shared on another forum.

 

Positional comparisons with the numbers 1, 10, and 12 (with RB2 included since Gurley was absolutely stupid)

Rk - Pts - PPG

Standard

D1 - 195 - 12.2
D10 - 122 - 7.6
D12 - 115 - 7.2

QB1 - 350.4 - 21.9
QB10 - 264.4 - 16.5
QB12 - 259.3 - 16.2

RB1 - 326.3 - 20.4
RB2 - 261.6 - 16.4
RB10 - 181.7 - 11.4
RB12 - 173.0 - 10.8

WR1 - 219.8 - 13.7
WR10 - 154.8 - 9.7
WR12 - 150.3 - 9.4



.5 PPR

D1 - 208 - 13.0
D10 - 133 - 8.3
D12 - 119 - 7.4

QB1 - 347.9 - 21.7
QB10 - 260.7 - 16.3
QB12 - 255.3 - 16.0

RB1 - 351.3 - 22.0
RB2 - 299.1 - 18.7
RB10 - 190.2 - 11.9
RB12 - 188.2 - 11.8

WR1 - 261.8 - 16.4
WR10 - 194.2 - 12.1
WR12 - 188.7 - 11.8

 

Edit: I have Watson in my dynasty league and am super excited to see what he does this year and beyond, but I'm also trying to be realistic in my expectations.

Edited by JJRules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

I don't know if that's necessarily true. I've often found rounds 3 and 4 to be extremely polarized concerning end of season numbers. Just looking back to last year shows this. 

 

Dez, Pryor, Amari Cooper, TY Hilton, Lynch, Crowell, TY Montgomery, Mixon were all in that range last year. 

 

So were Fournette, McCaffrey, Hunt, Keenan, and Hopkins. 

 

Theres not a lot of middle ground in there. If you really like a 3rd round WR/RB, then fire it up. You might be getting a top 5 guy. If not though, Rodgers is a solid pick(assuming he doesn't lose the season to an injury of course).

 

 

 

What are your odds of drafting a top 5 RB?  What are your odds of drafting a top 5 QB?  That pretty much is enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

 

What are your odds of drafting a top 5 RB?  What are your odds of drafting a top 5 QB?  That pretty much is enough for me.

Hmmm. 

 

Watson currently has an ADP of 3.10. How many top 5 RBs do you think are available in that range? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Axe Elf said:

To some extent, that's true, but assuming you use the first 2-3 rounds on some stud RB/WRs, you're really not missing much at RB or WR by taking Watson in the 4th that you can't approximate with other RB/WRs available in the 5th-8th rounds.

You can also get a QB not much worse than Watson will be in the 10th round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

Hmmm. 

 

Watson currently has an ADP of 3.10. How many top 5 RBs do you think are available in that range? 

 

I don't know but since it's so hard to find a top 5 RB it's very important to grab as many decent guys as you can.  Other teams are also grabbing multiple RBs which makes the talent pool even shallower.  The pool for QBs is pretty good.  By the time bye weeks roll around most guys are dropping their back up QB for a replacement RB or WR.  That's a perfect time to grab a QB if the one you drafted didn't work out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Experienced Rookie said:

Where's all the other years that you omitted? And why were they omitted? 

 

Every year from the Precambrian Era up through 2004 was omitted because Aaron Rodgers was not a QB in the NFL until 2005.  2005, 2006, and 2007 were omitted because Rodgers was not a starting QB in the NFL until 2008.  2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 were omitted because the point I was making about how QB has become the new D has developed over the past five or six years, as opposed to the time before that, when it sometimes did make sense to draft a QB early for a much more reliable positional advantage.  2014 and 2016 were omitted because Rodgers actually WAS the QB1 those years, so if you drafted him early in those two years (and arguably in 2012 as well), it actually paid off--as opposed to the other years that I did not omit where spending an early pick on Rodgers was not a good decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JJRules said:

Unless you think Watson will sustain 30+ PPG, it's not worth drafting him in the third or fourth. If you think he can do that tho, fire away!

 

So if he just averages 27.3 PPG he's not worth drafting in the 3rd or 4th?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, RMJ_12 said:

You can also get a QB not much worse than Watson will be in the 10th round.

 

Opinions vary.

 

If by "not much worse" you mean within 14 points per week of Watson's production, then you may be correct.  If not in the 10th round, then at least off of waivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

Every year from the Precambrian Era up through 2004 was omitted because Aaron Rodgers was not a QB in the NFL until 2005.  2005, 2006, and 2007 were omitted because Rodgers was not a starting QB in the NFL until 2008.  2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 were omitted because the point I was making about how QB has become the new D has developed over the past five or six years, as opposed to the time before that, when it sometimes did make sense to draft a QB early for a much more reliable positional advantage.  2014 and 2016 were omitted because Rodgers actually WAS the QB1 those years, so if you drafted him early in those two years (and arguably in 2012 as well), it actually paid off--as opposed to the other years that I did not omit where spending an early pick on Rodgers was not a good decision.

Don't you think that's kind of relevant information to be leaving out?

 

In the last 6 years, he's played 4 fully healthy seasons. In those 4 seasons he has finished 1, 1, 2, and 7.

 

He was top 5 before getting hurt last year. In 2013 he played 8 complete games, and got knocked out of a 9th with 2 pass attempts. In those 8 games he had 2509 yards, 17 TDs, 6 INTs, and 120 rushing yards. That's on pace for 5018 yards, 34 TDs, 12 INTs, and 240 rushing yards. Those numbers would have made him the QB2, behind only Peyton's insane 55 TD season. 

 

Unless we're going to call him injury prone, he's far and away the best pick you can make at QB concerning ROI, and frankly it's not even close. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

Don't you think that's kind of relevant information to be leaving out?

 

In the last 6 years, he's played 4 fully healthy seasons. In those 4 seasons he has finished 1, 1, 2, and 7.

 

He was top 5 before getting hurt last year. In 2013 he played 8 complete games, and got knocked out of a 9th with 2 pass attempts. In those 8 games he had 2509 yards, 17 TDs, 6 INTs, and 120 rushing yards. That's on pace for 5018 yards, 34 TDs, 12 INTs, and 240 rushing yards. Those numbers would have made him the QB2, behind only Peyton's insane 55 TD season. 

 

Unless we're going to call him injury prone, he's far and away the best pick you can make at QB concerning ROI, and frankly it's not even close. 

 

No, it wasn't relevant information to the point that I was making, which concerned those times when one uses a high draft pick on a QB that doesn't end up giving them the expected advantage--which in Rodgers' case, would be half of the last six years.  But of course, if you think that picking Rodgers guarantees you a 10 point advantage over your leaguemates for every week that he's healthy, then you draft Rodgers in the 4th.  I'll say thank you, and take Watson myself for that very reason.

 

Edited by Axe Elf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Axe Elf said:

 

Opinions vary.

 

If by "not much worse" you mean within 14 points per week of Watson's production, then you may be correct.  If not in the 10th round, then at least off of waivers.

Welcome to 2018.

 

You sure are a sucker for recency bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

No, it wasn't relevant information to the point that I was making, which concerned those times when one uses a high draft pick on a QB that doesn't end up giving them the expected advantage--which in Rodgers' case, would be half of the last six years.  But of course, if you think that picking Rodgers guarantees you a 10 point advantage over your leaguemates for every week that he's healthy, then you draft Rodgers in the 4th.  I'll say thank you, and take Watson myself for that very reason.

 

I never said that. 

 

There's only one person on Rotoworld who is foolish enough to think that there's ANY QB who is going to finish 10 PPG ahead of the next guy. 

 

Even in Peyton Manning's insane 2013 where he broke the passing TD record, he only finished 7 PPG ahead of Drew Brees who was 2nd. 

 

Thats the greatest fantasy season on record, and you're out here predicting that Watson is not only going to beat that 7 PPG gap, but he's going to do it by 40%+ over the best ever. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

I never said that.

 

I didn't say that you did say that.  I said that if you believe that you are guaranteed a 10 point advantage over your leaguemates for every week that a given QB  is healthy (in this case Rodgers) then you should be drafting that QB in the 4th round (or whenever necessary).  If you don't believe that, then you should probably be waiting until the double digit rounds to draft your QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RMJ_12 said:

You sure are a sucker for recency bias.

 

So what's your affliction, recency blindness?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

I didn't say that you did say that.  I said that if you believe that you are guaranteed a 10 point advantage over your leaguemates for every week that a given QB  is healthy (in this case Rodgers) then you should be drafting that QB in the 4th round (or whenever necessary).  If you don't believe that, then you should probably be waiting until the double digit rounds to draft your QB.

If I believed that any QB was going to outscore the next QB by 10 freaking points per game, I certainly wouldn't be waiting until the 4th round to grab him, that's for damn sure. 

 

Just like that scenario I posed to you with holding the 12th pick. If you truly believe that Watson is going to be that good, you absolutely cannot gamble and hope he's there at 3.12. He have to take him at 2.01. 

 

I want you to be right. It would be tremendous for me. However, you're wrong. Had you just went with "Watson will be the #1 fantasy QB", I could get behind that. This whole 10 PPG stuff is just total nonsense though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

So what's your affliction, recency blindness?

Both are problematic but I see recency bias get people more than blindness. People look at last season instead of the last 10 or so. The game hasn’t changed all that much since the turn of the decade yet people let one season define everything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gohawks said:

Both are problematic but I see recency bias get people more than blindness. People look at last season instead of the last 10 or so. The game hasn’t changed all that much since the turn of the decade yet people let one season define everything. 

That's how Gurley ended up in the 2nd round last year. Hopkins in the 3rd. 

 

Crazy over reactions to the last year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

If I believed that any QB was going to outscore the next QB by 10 freaking points per game, I certainly wouldn't be waiting until the 4th round to grab him, that's for damn sure.

 

Why not?  If you can get him in the 4th, then taking him earlier than that is just going to make your team worse than it could have been if you had selected him in a more appropriate round.

 

3 minutes ago, Experienced Rookie said:

Just like that scenario I posed to you with holding the 12th pick. If you truly believe that Watson is going to be that good, you absolutely cannot gamble and hope he's there at 3.12. He have to take him at 2.01.

 

And as I said, I wouldn't gamble.  If I didn't think he would be available at 3.12 I would take him at 2.01.  If I think he'll be available well into the 4th, then I'll use a pick at the 3/4 corner on him.  If I think there's a chance he might last until the 10th round, I'll take him in the 9th.  This is really where auction drafts are superior to snake drafts, though.  In an auction draft, I never have to gamble.  I can buy Watson whenever he's nominated.  In a snake draft, you're stuck watching helplessly as every other owner gets the chance to draft your targets out from under you.  So I'm not likely to be facing that dilemma in any money leagues this season.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

Both are problematic but I see recency bias get people more than blindness. People look at last season instead of the last 10 or so. The game hasn’t changed all that much since the turn of the decade yet people let one season define everything. 

 

Yeah, you're right.  I should look at more than just last season.  So I checked it out, and it looks like Watson was pretty good in college, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

So what's your affliction, recency blindness?

Realistic expectations 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Axe Elf said:

 

Yeah, you're right.  I should look at more than just last season.  So I checked it out, and it looks like Watson was pretty good in college, too.

So was Tim Tebow just to poke a hole in your claim. Granted, not that it matters since that has nothing to do with my original point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gohawks said:

So was Tim Tebow just to poke a hole in your claim. Granted, not that it matters since that has nothing to do with my original point. 

 

Ok, so the past matters, or it doesn't matter...?  I'm confused now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now