Aaron Brooks

[NAn 39]

We've seen topics on him already, and sure we'll see more, but I don't think the pts toward end of post pertaining to his career ff rankings and closer look at last year have been covered yet (at least I don't think so).

 

The previous comments:

Potential solid rushing game behind him plus coaching staff that wants to run the ball and HC in Art Shell, OLC in Jackie Slater who should improve OL.

 

Talent at wr, including great deep threat/s (aside from Moss, Porter/Gabriel legit deep threats) with a coaching staff that wants to stretch the field with long ball.

 

Unlike Collins, (1) is mobile enough to keep some plays alive when OL is beaten, (2) has actually had seasons with 24+ tds (3).

(Collins never had more than 22 and only had 20+ tds 3 of 9 full seasons)

 

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Year  TM |   G |  Comp   Att   PCT	YD   Y/A  TD INT |  Att  Yards  TD |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| 2000 nor |   8 |   113   194  58.2  1514   7.8   9   6 |	41   170   2 |
| 2001 nor |  16 |   312   558  55.9  3832   6.9  26  22 |	80   358   1 |
| 2002 nor |  16 |   283   528  53.6  3572   6.8  27  15 |	61   256   2 |
| 2003 nor |  16 |   306   518  59.1  3546   6.8  24   8 |	54   175   2 |
| 2004 nor |  16 |   309   542  57.0  3810   7.0  21  16 |	58   173   4 |
| 2005 nor |  13 |   240   431  55.7  2882   6.7  13  17 |	45   281   2 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
|  TOTAL   |  85 |  1563  2771  56.4 19156   6.9 120  84 |   339  1413  13 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

 

'New' comments:

Since becoming starter(note: no minuses for ints)...

'01, finished 6th amongst qbs

'02, 6th amongst qbs

'03, 5th amongst qbs

'04, 8th amongst qbs

 

'05, finished 16th but if you project out his per game totals over full season (he didn't play last 3 games), would have finished 6th.

 

Of course, this is dependent on him being the starter and staying there for most/all of season but from history alone, pts toward a 6-8 finish.

A potential great value at an ADP of 9.1, avg 18th qb taken.

 

Discuss.

[LSUtiger 9]

Dude, crunch the numbers all you want but I've watched Aaron Brooks for the past five years and he is nothing but a P.O.S.

 

He's not a leader, not a winner and he's STUPID - which is the main problem.

 

From someone who's personally watched his career degenerate over the past four seasons, draft him at your own risk. He's garbage.

[NAn 39]

Dude, crunch the numbers all you want but I've watched Aaron Brooks for the past five years and he is nothing but a P.O.S.

 

He's not a leader, not a winner and he's STUPID - which is the main problem.

 

From someone who's personally watched his career degenerate over the past four seasons, draft him at your own risk. He's garbage.

 

 

Due respect tiger, but aside from last year, I didn't crunch numbers...I just listed them.

 

I didn't do some extrapolation of stats...I just listed where he finished.

 

Also, believe me, as a Raider fan I definitely have serious concerns about his leadership, decision making, etc. as a NFL qb, but I'm talking about him as an FF qb.

 

TO is an ass and no leader...doesn't keep him from being an FF stud.

 

Moss?Culpepper? same thing.

[LSUtiger 9]

I agree with you on T.O. but you're talking apples and oranges here. T.O. is a WR and relies on another player to get him the ball. With T.O., there is nothing to think about, just run my route, catch the ball and score - that's what he plays to do. For himself, and that's great for fantasy.

 

But for a quarterback, he has to have those intangible qualities to make that great play, or make that great read, or find that open receiver, etc etc etc. Brooks never had any of that. His numbers may seem respectable but don't let them fool you. He is stupid (literally) and will only make you nuts.

[Buttmonkey 8]

I agree with you on T.O. but you're talking apples and oranges here. T.O. is a WR and relies on another player to get him the ball. With T.O., there is nothing to think about, just run my route, catch the ball and score - that's what he plays to do. For himself, and that's great for fantasy.

 

But for a quarterback, he has to have those intangible qualities to make that great play, or make that great read, or find that open receiver, etc etc etc. Brooks never had any of that. His numbers may seem respectable but don't let them fool you. He is stupid (literally) and will only make you nuts.

 

It's freaking fantasy football. Who the f cares about "intangibles". Nan's point was is Brooks is a very consistent fantasy QB He'll probably finish top 5 this year because of the change and upgrade in offensive weapons. Who cares if the Raiders go 1-15, as long as Brooks as 28 TDs, 4,000 yards and 200 yards rushing - that's all that matters.

[SoloMatisse 0]

You guys should take a look at Drew Bledsoe's career and what he did when he moved to Buffalo. FFwise, similar Qs with a history of putting up #s. Then a move with some nice targets and decent running game with new offense. Of course, Bledsoe is nowhere near as 'stupid' as Brooks.

[HeirCoryell 0]

But for a quarterback, he has to have those intangible qualities to make that great play, or make that great read, or find that open receiver, etc etc etc. Brooks never had any of that. His numbers may seem respectable but don't let them fool you. He is stupid (literally) and will only make you nuts.

 

You could take out the name Brooks and insert the name Culpepper and that statement would be just as true. The bottom line is that for Fantasy Football purposes, I'll take a Brooks/Culpepper type over someone like Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer.

[SoloMatisse 0]

In Bledsoe's 1st year in Buffalo, he attempted over 600passes at a 61.5% clip for over 4300yds and 24TDs. He also rushed for 2TDs. I forget what Buffalo's record was his 1st year there, but my main problem with Brooks in Oakland is simply that he is in a divisioin with far superior competition, and he wont get enough wins for this team to stick with him. I think he can put up #s, but its being locked in the basement of that division and the threat of the 'jumpsuit Godfather' benching him that would worry me.

[scrotch 0]

I'd like to see his stats over 16 games in a given season. Was he consistent? Or did he have monster games followed up by abysmal efforts? I had Hasselbeck last year, and while he was a fantasy monster in December (when it really counted), he was a fantasy pedestrian a lot of the rest. I need a good reliable QB who I can get (somewhat) late that will consistently put up good #s. I had been considering targeting Brooks, possibly as a 2nd QB. If I were able to get Hasselbeck in the 5th/6th and Brooks in the 9th/10th I'd be really excited. I believe I got Hasselbeck in the 6th and Leftwich in the 12th last year. I don't believe Brooks will last that long. It really doesn't matter how many INTs he throws (only minus 1 in my league). I have a feeling someone will bite on Brooks way earlier in the 6-8 round range, just because of the Moss factor.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Player page with game logs:

 

Aaron Brooks

 

If Brooks is really going as the 18th QB off the board that is exceptional value. Personally I can't stand the guy but I think the Raiders will stick with him all season as they have little else to fall back on. As much as people like to bash on Kerry Collins he did finish in the top 10 last year, and Brooks should accomplish at least equal to that, and I would expect better.

 

Anything beyond QB12-14 and I'll probably be targetting Brooks in all my leagues, most likely as my 2nd QB drafted soon after my 1st QB who I waited on until all other teams already picked up their starting QB.

[LSUtiger 9]

You guys should take a look at Drew Bledsoe's career and what he did when he moved to Buffalo. FFwise, similar Qs with a history of putting up #s. Then a move with some nice targets and decent running game with new offense. Of course, Bledsoe is nowhere near as 'stupid' as Brooks.

 

As I said buddy, take him at your own discretion. You would surely know more than I would about the guy, right? But of course keep in mind you ARE talking about a guy who threw for 13 TDs/ 17 INTs last year and only 21 TDs/ 16 INTs the year before - not exactly stellar play. Which is the reason I'm dumbfounded over how people are oodling over the supposed "fantasy potential" this year. Yes, having Randy Moss will do something but when you just plain suck as a QB, like AB does, it won't make that much of a difference.

[biscuitman357 0]

Good analysis of the overrall numbers but with a guy set to be drafted that low for QBs, I think you have to be realistic that in a 10 team league, hes probably going to be a backup or in a rotation with another QB.

 

So, as a reserve, the overrall numbers will probably mean less than the game to game numbers.

 

Brooks is like a light switch, when hes on hes on and he can sling it with anyone in the league. Offensively he can have himself a monster day given the right game situation. ( i.e. facing another team with no defense and no running game) But alot of times he just disappears. I think for a league that only starts 1 QB, you'd be better off with those same numbers pushing out consistently over a season. The boom / bust with Brooks would cost you too many games. In a league starting 2 QBs, I think hes a decent risk.

 

I'd see him as strictly a backup for certain matchups or bye week fill in.

[esoitl 0]

i hate a lot of these players, the guys that have unimpressive years but are top 10 in the listing

Collins, Brooks, Green, and Bledsoe... they all have a great year but week to week they are a pain

 

look at those game logs

5 weeks of the 13 he didnt get a TD

6 weeks of the 13 he threw more INTs than TDs

 

i dont know how the FFpts are calculated in that link but all i can say is in my league, those are negative or single digit weeks, not something i want for my starting QB

the plethora of fumbles isn't even considered in that as well, i'm looking to stay away

[cmh6476 759]

i foresee many INTs, as well as sacks and fumbles lost

[cmh6476 759]

OPENING DRIVE

(May 30, 2006) -- By most accounts, the Oakland Raiders will go with Aaron Brooks as their starting quarterback this season.

 

However, it is likely that Brooks will operate on a fairly short leash. Andrew Walter, who sat out his rookie season in 2005 due to a sports hernia, should get plenty of exposure at quarterback during the preseason. If he clearly outperforms Brooks, he could end up with the No. 1 job.

 

With so much of Walter's game in need of development, it seems more likely that he will use this summer to establish the framework of becoming the Raiders' starter in 2007 and beyond.

 

Brooks can be erratic, but his edge in experience, terrific mobility and determination to make the most of a second chance after his disappointing career with the New Orleans Saints figures to work to his advantage -- at least for one season.

 

"Nothing is promised to anybody," Raiders coach Art Shell said earlier in the offseason. "But (Brooks) is a part of where we're headed. I like him. …I think he brings leadership. He's a guy that's been under the center and played in this league, a guy who has thrown a lot of touchdowns in this league. So he brings a lot to the table."

 

Shell also likes what he has seen of Walter.

 

"I was really excited about him throwing the football," Shell said. "I remember watching (videotape of Walter's preseason appearances last year) and calling (offensive coordinator) Tom (Walsh) and saying, 'Come look at this.' The kid has a lot of talent, a lot of confidence in his abilities."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9469690

[NAn 39]

i hate a lot of these players, the guys that have unimpressive years but are top 10 in the listing

Collins, Brooks, Green, and Bledsoe... they all have a great year but week to week they are a pain

 

look at those game logs

5 weeks of the 13 he didnt get a TD

6 weeks of the 13 he threw more INTs than TDs

 

i dont know how the FFpts are calculated in that link but all i can say is in my league, those are negative or single digit weeks, not something i want for my starting QB

the plethora of fumbles isn't even considered in that as well, i'm looking to stay away

 

as stated in beginning, the rankings I listed are for 'NO minuses for INTs/FUMs' so I totally understand in a league where those are taken into acct how his value is obviously lower.

 

Back to rankings with NO minuses for INTs/FUMs and 'consistency':

Brooks '04 (last full season)

0-9 ff pts...zero games

10-15...8 games

16-20...5 games

21-25...3 games

26+...zero games

 

Mcnabb '04

0-9 ff pts...3 games

10-15...4 games

16-20...zero games

21-25...2 games

26+...6 games

 

If anything Brooks is more consistent than Mcnabb was that year...you deal with Mcnabb's low games b/c of the number of high games, but with Brooks, he may not win a week but doesn't look to lose you one either.

 

Brady '05 (currently avg 3rd-4th qb taken)

0-9 ff pts...1 games

10-15...6 games

16-20...5 games

21-25...2 games

26+...2 games

 

Similiar to Brooks and Brady again, is 3rd-4th qb avg being taken. Again, it's about value of Brooks for where he's being taken.

[HawgWild 0]

I am not wild about Brooks (had him in the past) but I would take him as my backup QB but never as my starter... I agree that his value may be higher than where he is getting drafted...

[Jimmy "Superfly" Snuka 0]

And don't forget he has to learn a NEW OFFENSE this year.

[gatorbait7391 0]

Dude, crunch the numbers all you want but I've watched Aaron Brooks for the past five years and he is nothing but a P.O.S.

 

He's not a leader, not a winner and he's STUPID - which is the main problem.

exactly what i think

[Da Bomb 0]

And don't forget he has to learn a NEW OFFENSE this year.

 

yeah, should be tough.

 

art: aaron, this is randy. throw him the ball.

[Kilroy 0]

I have two views on Aaron Brooks.

 

1. He should be a good fantasy QB this season.

2. He pretty much sucks as an NFL quaterback.

 

Since this is a fantasy football site, I assume when we discuss players values that we are referring to their fantasy value and that is something you can't deny Brooks has at least a bit of going into this season. With Randy Moss, Jerry Porter and Doug Gabriel around, Brooks should have more than a handful of 250-300 yard passing games. He should also have quite a few multi TD performances this year.

 

When you factor in how poorly Oakland's defense has been in the past, it only lends more support to the belief that Brooks will put up good numbers this season. Oakland won't be winning too many games, but Brooks should hit at least 3600 yards passing and 22 TDs this year. That's not outstanding, but if you consider that to be his worst case scenario (assuming he plays at least 14 games this year) then I'd say you got yourself a good QB. At the very least he'll make a great back-up and probably one that you will end up starting or be able to trade for something worthwhile by the end of the season.

 

yeah, should be tough.

 

art: aaron, this is randy. throw him the ball.

 

Exactly. Brooks won't need to know the offense all that well with Randy Moss around.

[whoisjgalt 0]

'05, finished 16th but if you project out his per game totals over full season (he didn't play last 3 games), would have finished 6th.

 

Pet peeve of the day - if you choose to project him over 16 games then you also need to do the same for the others who missed some games (Bulger, McNabb, Warner to name a few off the top of my head).

[TD Ryan2 314]

as stated in beginning, the rankings I listed are for 'NO minuses for INTs/FUMs' so I totally understand in a league where those are taken into acct how his value is obviously lower.

 

 

this is pretty much the cornerstone of the entire thread.

 

If you don't get penalized, Brooks may be a decent Fantasy QB (but still a suck NFL QB)

if you do get penalized, Brooks won't be a decent Fantasy QB (and is still a suck NFL QB)