1st pick in draft

[He Like Me 0]

Would anyone consider taking Vick with the 1st pick? He blew away the competition last year in total fantasy points and that was just 12 games. Because the line isn't the greatest and he runs a lot, that worries me for injury sake, but man that could be huge. It would be like a #2 RB and a top QB in one player.

[NorthernVike 2,080]

Not even in my one league where passing TD's are worth 6pts. Somewhere mid first round meybe, but I'm not a fan of his.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

No. You would have to hit on nearly every other pick to make up for a bad first pick

[He Like Me 0]

No. You would have to hit on nearly every other pick to make up for a bad first pick

 

Frozenbeernuts makes a very good point. After looking at this for the past week or so, I think I'm going with Arian Foster. I think Peterson would be the safer pick, but I think there's so much more upside with Foster, plus in my league, we play with a salary cap, and the one on Foster is about $700k less than Peterson.

[p00h 85]

just was listening to mike and mike, last year, taking all his passing stats out of the equation, he was rb16 in standard scoring. Just his rushing stats. That is high end rb2...

 

HTH

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

Not even in my one league where passing TD's are worth 6pts. Somewhere mid first round meybe, but I'm not a fan of his.

Actually if you are playing in a league where all touchdowns are 6 points, it would make no sense to draft Vick at #1. Vick doesn't get more touchdowns than all other quarterbacks, he gets more rushing touchdowns and rushing yards than any other quarterback. So if you're in a league with 4 points per passing touchdowns it makes alot more sense to draft Vick. Passing yards I think only get 25% of what rushing yards get. And rushing touchdowns, in which Vick got 9 last year in limited time, get 6 points per touchdown. This is why Vick is so attractive. Unless you really fear an injury Vick is a legitmate #1 pick. I won my championship last year with Vick.

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

No. You would have to hit on nearly every other pick to make up for a bad first pick

 

Frozenbeernuts makes a very good point. After looking at this for the past week or so, I think I'm going with Arian Foster. I think Peterson would be the safer pick, but I think there's so much more upside with Foster, plus in my league, we play with a salary cap, and the one on Foster is about $700k less than Peterson.

 

Haha. What very good point does he make? Peterson is a sure thing? 1 hit wonder Foster is now a sure thing over Vick? You need to explain that one to me. I don't see a RB sure thing who convinces me he's the obvious choice over Vick.

 

No one has more potential than Vick does.

[p00h 85]

Haha. What very good point does he make? Peterson is a sure thing? 1 hit wonder Foster is now a sure thing over Vick? You need to explain that one to me. I don't see a RB sure thing who convinces me he's the obvious choice over Vick.

 

No one has more potential than Vick does.

 

 

Most people seemt to think of Vick as a 1 year wonder. Short memory. WHen he was playing before he headed to jail, he was a top 5 producer, EVERY YEAR! This was before he had all the weapons he has in philly, and before he was a half decent pocket passer, which he showed himself to be last year. Only deterent is the injury possibility, and you can't discount that. But the dude was the 16th best rb in the league in standard scoring formats! That's sick in itself. He's an rb2 before he even puts his qb pants on. He gave you 3/4 of production AP gave you last year, AS A RB ALONE!!!

 

WOW. Let him keep slipping to me, I'll take him in every league middle of 1st...Grabbed Orton in like the 13th as a backup, not worried if Vick misses 2-4 games at all. If he plays all 16, its gonna be sick...

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

Most people seemt to think of Vick as a 1 year wonder. Short memory. WHen he was playing before he headed to jail, he was a top 5 producer, EVERY YEAR! This was before he had all the weapons he has in philly, and before he was a half decent pocket passer, which he showed himself to be last year. Only deterent is the injury possibility, and you can't discount that. But the dude was the 16th best rb in the league in standard scoring formats! That's sick in itself. He's an rb2 before he even puts his qb pants on. He gave you 3/4 of production AP gave you last year, AS A RB ALONE!!!

 

WOW. Let him keep slipping to me, I'll take him in every league middle of 1st...Grabbed Orton in like the 13th as a backup, not worried if Vick misses 2-4 games at all. If he plays all 16, its gonna be sick...

I don't get why guys are so ready to write off last year as a fluke for Vick. Is it because they're afraid of him getting injured and all the other guys in the league will say "I told you so"? Did everyone not see the silly Madden type games Vick put up last year? Do they not realize that there is no other player in the NFL that has more fantasy potential than this guy?

[PackYourNut 47]

Most people seemt to think of Vick as a 1 year wonder. Short memory. WHen he was playing before he headed to jail, he was a top 5 producer, EVERY YEAR! This was before he had all the weapons he has in philly, and before he was a half decent pocket passer, which he showed himself to be last year. Only deterent is the injury possibility, and you can't discount that. But the dude was the 16th best rb in the league in standard scoring formats! That's sick in itself. He's an rb2 before he even puts his qb pants on. He gave you 3/4 of production AP gave you last year, AS A RB ALONE!!!

 

WOW. Let him keep slipping to me, I'll take him in every league middle of 1st...Grabbed Orton in like the 13th as a backup, not worried if Vick misses 2-4 games at all. If he plays all 16, its gonna be sick...

 

 

You are assuming that he "rushes" like he did last year, which based on his ACTUAL history is a HUGE assumption. Vick has rushed for 6 or more TD's 3 times in his career. He had 8 in 2002 and the next year rushed for 1. He had 6 in 2005 and the next year rushed for 2. In fact, he has rushed for 3 or less in 5 of his 8 years in the league.

 

Sure, he has potential but to assume that he goes off like he did last year is a HUGE gamble. Not to mention the fact that defenses started to figure him out late last year and will be even more prepared this year. Add the fact that he is an injury risk and I would hardly call him a sure thing.

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

You are assuming that he "rushes" like he did last year, which based on his ACTUAL history is a HUGE assumption. Vick has rushed for 6 or more TD's 3 times in his career. He had 8 in 2002 and the next year rushed for 1. He had 6 in 2005 and the next year rushed for 2. In fact, he has rushed for 3 or less in 5 of his 8 years in the league.

 

Sure, he has potential but to assume that he goes off like he did last year is a HUGE gamble. Not to mention the fact that defenses started to figure him out late last year and will be even more prepared this year. Add the fact that he is an injury risk and I would hardly call him a sure thing.

That's fair.

 

Now I'd like you to post the players you're picking ahead of Vick that you believe are better options so I can respond.

[mgs316 14]

Should be taken in the top 5 in most leagues (I have no idea about ppr) but he won't. I can see Foster, Peterson, but after that you seriously have to start considering him especially with CJ's situation. He should not last past 6 IMO. You can still get a possible elite WR, solid RB and take a slug of RB's with potential for RB#2.

[He Like Me 0]

You are assuming that he "rushes" like he did last year, which based on his ACTUAL history is a HUGE assumption. Vick has rushed for 6 or more TD's 3 times in his career. He had 8 in 2002 and the next year rushed for 1. He had 6 in 2005 and the next year rushed for 2. In fact, he has rushed for 3 or less in 5 of his 8 years in the league.

 

Sure, he has potential but to assume that he goes off like he did last year is a HUGE gamble. Not to mention the fact that defenses started to figure him out late last year and will be even more prepared this year. Add the fact that he is an injury risk and I would hardly call him a sure thing.

 

Kind of my thought as well as far as him duplicating the running stats. The injury risk as well with him beign a running type QB. Also if I select a running back such as Peterson or Foster first, I can get their handcuff in later rounds, and maybe see 75% or so of the production the #1 might have given. I don't think you're going to get that same type of production with the Vick back up, although with Young you do have the run threat(is he #2?). Also if you take Vick and go RBs with your next picks, your looking at maybe a player like Blount or Hillis. This makes for a week WR corpse, unless you take them or 1 at the turn, but then you've got the same problem with RB. I'd definitely consider pulling the plug at a later 1st Rd pick, but I just like the "safety" in choosing a RB #1 overall.

[p00h 85]

You are assuming that he "rushes" like he did last year, which based on his ACTUAL history is a HUGE assumption. Vick has rushed for 6 or more TD's 3 times in his career. He had 8 in 2002 and the next year rushed for 1. He had 6 in 2005 and the next year rushed for 2. In fact, he has rushed for 3 or less in 5 of his 8 years in the league.

 

Sure, he has potential but to assume that he goes off like he did last year is a HUGE gamble. Not to mention the fact that defenses started to figure him out late last year and will be even more prepared this year. Add the fact that he is an injury risk and I would hardly call him a sure thing.

 

fair point indeed, but NO ONE knows anything about what WILL happen. Because none of us can predict the future. FF is about potential, and evaluating that potential. Guess what, Vick has 3 seasons with more than 6 rushing TDs, that's more than what Foster brings to the table in terms of history/experience isn't it?!?!?!? Yet foster is basically pencilled in at 1.01 or 1.02. Why??? Because of the potential he brings to the table, and based on a small sample size. That's my point. When Vick plays, and that sample size is fairly large, he's a top 5 producer, EVERY YEAR. GO back and check. I know this because I used to coven him back in the days. If he averages 40 yards rushing/game, that's the equivalent of someone needing an extra 100 yards passing a game for the most part. TD's aside. And last year, he showed great potential for being a passer. The team is stacked with weapons. They are going to score a ton of points, and they're not exactly sporting a traditional running game either. All things point to the eagles having a monster offensive season, and if Vick stays healthy, he'll put up mind boggling numbers. Only reservation is the injury. You want to say he scored this many tds 1 year and next only had 2, that's your prerogative. However, it's not really dealing in any sort of logic. There is no math that after a big rushing td year he'll fall off. That's just how the cookie crumbles. Can he end up with 2 rushing tds this year?!?!?! Sure, he might end up with zero. However, the potential for 10 is there, and that's what FF is based on...

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

There's no such thing as a wrong pick at 1.

 

The teams that won last season most likely did it not because of the 1st round pick.

Here are some players that got drafted after the 4th round and off of waivers that made huge contributions.

 

Vick - Waiver

McFadden - 5th round

Nicks - 6-7th round

Lloyd - Waiver

Foster - all over the place but i saw one draft where he went in the 7-8th round in early August last year.

Bowe - 5th Round

Hillis - Waiver

Wallace - 6th Round

 

Vick is in the EXACT same situation last year, his numbers this year can't possibly be that far off from last year. The only thing that is a concern are injuries.

[skinsrule05 30]

just was listening to mike and mike, last year, taking all his passing stats out of the equation, he was rb16 in standard scoring. Just his rushing stats. That is high end rb2...

 

HTH

 

This seems a little inflated to me. He had 676yds and 9 TDs. That is the same as about 122 fantasy points in a standard scoring league (1pt/10 yds & 6pts/TD). That would rank him 24th last year.

 

Secondly, you have the same issue as with any player who suddenly performs so much greater then his career average. He could easily regress back to his average. For his career he has averaged 4 rushing TDs a season.

 

Lastly there is the injury risk. Compared to other QBs he probably has a slightly higher risk of injury.

 

Put all three together and I wouldn't take him in the 1st round.

[p00h 85]

This seems a little inflated to me. He had 676yds and 9 TDs. That is the same as about 122 fantasy points in a standard scoring league (1pt/10 yds & 6pts/TD). That would rank him 24th last year.

 

Secondly, you have the same issue as with any player who suddenly performs so much greater then his career average. He could easily regress back to his average. For his career he has averaged 4 rushing TDs a season.

 

Lastly there is the injury risk. Compared to other QBs he probably has a slightly higher risk of injury.

 

Put all three together and I wouldn't take him in the 1st round.

 

 

makes perfect sense. Foster, who's played 1 season, and put up monster numbers, will actually play above his average, but Vick...

 

 

Just pointing out the poor logic in this thought process. It's like everyone is predisposed to their own beliefs, and they plug in shaky logic to make their case. Only time will tell, but just know that if you agree that foster is the right 1.01 pick, then any logic you put forth regarding past numbers for ANY player goes out the window because you're banking on what currently amounts to a 1 year wonder without any reservation...

[Fantasy Noob 10]

I don't like it simply because of position scarcity at RB. Most leagues make you start 2 RB's each week and 1 QB. There are only so many viable RB's where as you will get a QB that gets you close to his totals most weeks in round 3 and if your lucky round 4, if your a genius and pick the right QB maybe as late as the 7th.

 

If you want him I would trade down to 5th or 6th pick if possible. I took him 10th in one league just to see what would happen, and my team is very weak at WR,TE, and I am not in love with my RB's either. Outside of an auction he just seems to cost too much in draft position value.

 

Having said all that if you really want Vick go ahead and take him, it is unlikely he makes it back to you at bottom of the second. And it is never a reach if the player you want is not going to be available when your turn to pick comes back up.

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

I don't like it simply because of position scarcity at RB. Most leagues make you start 2 RB's each week and 1 QB. There are only so many viable RB's where as you will get a QB that gets you close to his totals most weeks in round 3 and if your lucky round 4, if your a genius and pick the right QB maybe as late as the 7th.

 

If you want him I would trade down to 5th or 6th pick if possible. I took him 10th in one league just to see what would happen, and my team is very weak at WR,TE, and I am not in love with my RB's either. Outside of an auction he just seems to cost too much in draft position value.

 

Having said all that if you really want Vick go ahead and take him, it is unlikely he makes it back to you at bottom of the second. And it is never a reach if the player you want is not going to be available when your turn to pick comes back up.

 

Trading down might not be a bad idea if you really want Vick.

See if anyone would give you their 1 & 4/5 for it.

[PATSSOX 22]

Doesnt have too much to do with fantasy football but last year Vick as QB only beat one playoff team

[skinsrule05 30]

makes perfect sense. Foster, who's played 1 season, and put up monster numbers, will actually play above his average, but Vick...

 

 

Just pointing out the poor logic in this thought process. It's like everyone is predisposed to their own beliefs, and they plug in shaky logic to make their case. Only time will tell, but just know that if you agree that foster is the right 1.01 pick, then any logic you put forth regarding past numbers for ANY player goes out the window because you're banking on what currently amounts to a 1 year wonder without any reservation...

 

First off there is a big difference between RB & QB when you talk about career averages. The shelf life is much longer for a QB. So yes you need to take a leap of faith when you are talking about a RB.

 

Secondly, when you are talking about career averages there is a huge difference between a guy with one starting season under his belt and someone with 8. There can be an arguement made that you shouldn't put blinders on to what he has done the previous 7 seasons.

 

Lastly, who is projecting Foster to exceed his average? He only has one season as a starter. So last year is his average. And I haven't seen any projections having Foster exceed last year. In fact most I have seen has him doing less this year and that is still worthy of a top pick.

[Kent 228]

I'd have no problem taking Vick #1 overall.

 

Granted, if I get the #1 pick, I'm taking Arian Foster, but if someone in my league were to take Vick, I'd have zero issue with it.

 

When Vick was in Atlanta they had to have run more than what Philly does. Philly likes to throw all day. Vick has scary #1 overall potential.

[PackYourNut 47]

Potential is just that, potential. It is not, in and of itself, indicative of future results. Vick very well may throw for 3500 yards 20 TD's, have 1000 yards and and another 10 TD's rushing. Or he could have 2500 yards 15 TDs, 400 yards rushing and 2 TD's. That's my problem with him. The variance is HUGE.

 

FF is personal preference and I would much rather have Foster or Peterson and Rivers or Brady, then Vick and Blount or Forte.

 

That's just me.

[tanatastic 2,061]

Its so hard for me to think of taking vick 1st rnd over a guy like rivers in the 2nd. both are high reward but vick is med-high risk and rivers is low risk. thats the kind of thinking I use when debating the fantasy god that is vick vs more logical smarter choices. I kno he borderline cheats with his rush stats and thats awsome and all, but hes a risk to miss games wich is a terrible thing for a top qb. We expect rbs to get dinged but elite qbs getting hurt is more of a shock.

 

Chime in if you were one of the people who took vick in the 1st rnd last time his adp was that high. Remember that year? This is deja vu.

[rosslive99 1]

I don't think anyone (even the non-vick supporters) are arguing his potential. The problem for me at least is the price tag. Especially #1 overall!! Most leagues only require 1 QB to start...and while he may blow the rest of the QB's out of the water in terms of overall scoring, barring he even stays healthy, you take him number 1 and that's 23 players taken in between him and your next pick. That's quite a drop off of talent between grabbing someone like Foster/AP as your number 1 rb than taking Vick and your #1 RB then becomes like Hillis if you're lucky.

 

I have no qualms with Vick, it's the trickle down effect of taking a QB that high, it really forces you to hit on those late round picks. I have the #2 pick and I'm taking AP and not looking back.

[steel827 2]

When he is in the lineup he can put up monster numbers. He will take more hits than the average QBs and that will wear him down like it did last year. He gets the double whammy: blindside hits when he is in the pocket and defenders will aim for the thighs when he is running. Thigh injuries takes a toll. Happened last year. Defenses can and will react better this year. All that being said, he sure is tough to pass up.

[p00h 85]

First off there is a big difference between RB & QB when you talk about career averages. The shelf life is much longer for a QB. So yes you need to take a leap of faith when you are talking about a RB.

 

Secondly, when you are talking about career averages there is a huge difference between a guy with one starting season under his belt and someone with 8. There can be an arguement made that you shouldn't put blinders on to what he has done the previous 7 seasons.

 

Lastly, who is projecting Foster to exceed his average? He only has one season as a starter. So last year is his average. And I haven't seen any projections having Foster exceed last year. In fact most I have seen has him doing less this year and that is still worthy of a top pick.

 

 

like i said, people will back into logic that doesn't make sense to support their theory. You say rbs have shorter shelf life, so you have to take leap of faith. So 1 year is good enough?!?!? IF you tell me you like AP, or even CJ, I can dig it. They've done it for more than 1 year. Rememeber what happened last year when everyone jumped on ray rice wagon after 1 year or production...

 

But foster, not even that celebrated coming out of college or anything, jumps on the scene with a monster year and he's good to go a 1.01. Mind you, I'm not against foster going 1.01, just pointing out the flaw in logic. Meanwhile, go back in time and take a loot at top 10 FF scorers in the league when vick was playing, and find me a time he wasn't top 10. Now he's got more weapons, he's evolved/matured his passing game, yet his ceiling has already been exposed, only 1 way to go for him, that's down. Zero logic employed, predefined belief in place, lets make something up that supports our predisposed belief. Rinse/repeat...

[Joey Gladstone 33]

I'd feel safer picking Foster or Peterson.

 

I have no problem with taking Vick first overall, if he produces like he did last season he's more then worthy. I just dont see him having the same success. Just a gut feeling.

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

I tried in mock draft tonight taking Vick 1st with the #3 pick. Unfortunately, I just don't think I'd get this in my real draft next week.

I wanted to cover for Vick being injured (Stafford, and more importantly Vince Young). So, I think that works. I made sure I had 2 receivers to replace the 2 receivers on bye during week 6. I feel comfortable with the running back situation here with backups for the bye weeks. So, too bad this isn't my team.

 

1. (3) Michael Vick QB

2. (18) Calvin Johnson WR

3. (23) Vincent Jackson WR

4. (38) Dwayne Bowe WR

5. (43) DeAngelo Williams RB

6. (58) Philadelphia DEF

7. (63) Kellen Winslow TE

8. (78) Ahmad Bradshaw RB

9. (83) Felix Jones RB

10. (98) Matthew Stafford QB

11. (103) Steve Smith WR

12. (118) Jacoby Ford WR

13. (123) Beanie Wells RB

14. (138) Vince Young QB

15. (143) Adam Vinatieri K

[phlegmish 4]

Would anyone consider taking Vick with the 1st pick? He blew away the competition last year in total fantasy points and that was just 12 games. Because the line isn't the greatest and he runs a lot, that worries me for injury sake, but man that could be huge. It would be like a #2 RB and a top QB in one player.

 

In any 12 team, std scoring league I personally can't justify a qb before 9 or 10. Consistency aside its all about relative value at position. We all have ranking and are merely guessing at the future. Vick may blow away the history of FFL with a stupendous miracle season but if you draft him #1 he'd better, getting even 15% less means you're screwed...

 

Last year really does mean squat.. but we are hoping for something similar for every single guy we draft, where we draft them...

 

Food for thought with ANY qb at #1...IMHO the last/only time a qb was considered the consensus #1 player in FFL..

 

 

pass 271/3,466 30 tds 13 int

rush 118/942 5 tds

 

taken in numerous drafts that summer at #1

 

......... Randall Cunningham.... lasted less than one series....1 completion 4yds.... my roommate had #1 that year and was riding Jeff Hostetler for the rest of the season...he finished 2-12

[IGotWorms 3,391]

I don't think it is wrong to take Vick in the top half of the first round. He probably has more potential than any other fantasy player out there. And I think people are overstating the bust potential a little in this thread as well. Even if he plays a lot worse than he did last year he will still be a top shelf fantasy QB (he just might not be in the top 5 overall).

 

The only reason I personally would not take Vick that high is that I think it leaves you weak at other core positions. Say you take Vick #1. Then you are waiting until #24 to pick again. At that point you aren't getting a top shelf RB and you might even be stuck with a mid-grade RB2 depending on how RB-heavy the first couple rounds of your draft was. Now you can still get a pretty good WR at #24 or #25 but then you are waiting a LOOOONG time again to get your RB2.

 

I dunno, maybe you can draft Vick #1 overall and still end up with some decent strength at the other core positions, but that would be a hell of an achievement. If I'm going to take a QB early it probably wouldn't be until the fourth round after I've gotten two running backs and a wide receiver.

[Maroon Bells 18]

I don't think it is wrong to take Vick in the top half of the first round. He probably has more potential than any other fantasy player out there. And I think people are overstating the bust potential a little in this thread as well. Even if he plays a lot worse than he did last year he will still be a top shelf fantasy QB (he just might not be in the top 5 overall).

 

The only reason I personally would not take Vick that high is that I think it leaves you weak at other core positions. Say you take Vick #1. Then you are waiting until #24 to pick again. At that point you aren't getting a top shelf RB and you might even be stuck with a mid-grade RB2 depending on how RB-heavy the first couple rounds of your draft was. Now you can still get a pretty good WR at #24 or #25 but then you are waiting a LOOOONG time again to get your RB2.

 

I dunno, maybe you can draft Vick #1 overall and still end up with some decent strength at the other core positions, but that would be a hell of an achievement. If I'm going to take a QB early it probably wouldn't be until the fourth round after I've gotten two running backs and a wide receiver.

 

Agree. It's not "wrong," it's just a bit risky. Defenses finally figured out Vick when he was in Atlanta. And a couple of teams late last year may have written the strategy for containing him. If you take Vick at the top of 1, IMO, the best strategy would be to take two WRs next, then start loading up on breakout candidate RBs: Best, Greene, Mathews, Ingram...and hope you hit on one or two.

[p00h 85]

Agree. It's not "wrong," it's just a bit risky. Defenses finally figured out Vick when he was in Atlanta. And a couple of teams late last year may have written the strategy for containing him. If you take Vick at the top of 1, IMO, the best strategy would be to take two WRs next, then start loading up on breakout candidate RBs: Best, Greene, Mathews, Ingram...and hope you hit on one or two.

 

this is exactly what i did, but not out of the 1 slot, out of the 7 slot on 12 teamer. Got Fitz in 2nd, Vjax in 3rd, then got felix in 4th. 5th there was a TE run so I snatched up FInley, then got fred jackson, tolbert, and hightower. Out of those 4, i'll be able to start 2 each week and manage matchups. I think felix is gonna rise to rb1 status, so i'm down to worrying about only rb2, and I've got a premier QB, 2 premier WRs, and a premier TE. Not too unhappy with the draft, and my ability to make moves a week if not 3 ahead of the rest of the field will give me enough edge to believe I have one of the top 3 teams in the league. ALso got some nice pieces like Moore and cj spiller down the road in case they blow up, I can always trade from depth as well. However, taking vick and going rb/rb 2nd and 3rd is not bad either. More I think of it, though, the less sense it makes vick out of the 1 slot. Better off trading out of there if you can get something in return and grab him 5 or higher...

[JKAP21 0]

I tried in mock draft tonight taking Vick 1st with the #3 pick. Unfortunately, I just don't think I'd get this in my real draft next week.

I wanted to cover for Vick being injured (Stafford, and more importantly Vince Young). So, I think that works. I made sure I had 2 receivers to replace the 2 receivers on bye during week 6. I feel comfortable with the running back situation here with backups for the bye weeks. So, too bad this isn't my team.

 

1. (3) Michael Vick QB

2. (18) Calvin Johnson WR

3. (23) Vincent Jackson WR

4. (38) Dwayne Bowe WR

5. (43) DeAngelo Williams RB

6. (58) Philadelphia DEF

7. (63) Kellen Winslow TE

8. (78) Ahmad Bradshaw RB

9. (83) Felix Jones RB

10. (98) Matthew Stafford QB

11. (103) Steve Smith WR

12. (118) Jacoby Ford WR

13. (123) Beanie Wells RB

14. (138) Vince Young QB

15. (143) Adam Vinatieri K

 

Bradshaw in the 8th? Felix in the 9th? Beanie in the 13th?

 

Assuming that the league you play in is halfway decent, I wouldn't put much stock in this mock draft at all. In most leagues Bradshaw should be gone by late 3rd, Felix by the late 5th, and Beanie by the 7th or 8th (and any of them could easily go earlier than that.... I've seen Bradshaw go in the 2nd and Felix as high as the 3rd). If you're taking Vick in the first round (or any non-RB for that matter), two of your next three picks almost certainly need to be at RB. I could see justification in taking Calvin Johnson at 18 if he's there (or another one of the top 5 recievers) but regardless, you'll most likely be putting yourself in an unpleasant situation if you wait until the 5th round to take your first RB.

 

I just drafted last night and took Vick in the first round (8). I followed that up with RB, RB, WR, RB, TE, WR. We start 1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1RB/WR/TE, K, DEF (standard scoring, non-PPR). Here's how it went...

 

1. (8) Vick QB

2. (17) Hillis RB

3. (32) Bradshaw RB

4. (41) Lloyd WR

5. (56) F.Jones RB

6. (65) D.Clark TE

7. (80) Julio Jones WR

8. (89) Beanie Wells RB

9. (104) Hightower RB

10. (113) Stafford QB

11. (128) Lance Moore WR

12. (137) Roy Helu RB

13. (152) Danny Amendola WR

14. (161) Greg Little WR

15. (176) Vince Young QB

16. (185) Alex Henry K

17. (200) Atlanta

18. (209) Jamie Harper RB

[wildbluefan 0]

Bradshaw in the 8th? Felix in the 9th? Beanie in the 13th?

 

Assuming that the league you play in is halfway decent, I wouldn't put much stock in this mock draft at all. In most leagues Bradshaw should be gone by late 3rd, Felix by the late 5th, and Beanie by the 7th or 8th (and any of them could easily go earlier than that.... I've seen Bradshaw go in the 2nd and Felix as high as the 3rd). If you're taking Vick in the first round (or any non-RB for that matter), two of your next three picks almost certainly need to be at RB. I could see justification in taking Calvin Johnson at 18 if he's there (or another one of the top 5 recievers) but regardless, you'll most likely be putting yourself in an unpleasant situation if you wait until the 5th round to take your first RB.

 

I just drafted last night and took Vick in the first round (8). I followed that up with RB, RB, WR, RB, TE, WR. We start 1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1RB/WR/TE, K, DEF (standard scoring, non-PPR). Here's how it went...

 

1. (8) Vick QB

2. (17) Hillis RB

3. (32) Bradshaw RB

4. (41) Lloyd WR

5. (56) F.Jones RB

6. (65) D.Clark TE

7. (80) Julio Jones WR

8. (89) Beanie Wells RB

9. (104) Hightower RB

10. (113) Stafford QB

11. (128) Lance Moore WR

12. (137) Roy Helu RB

13. (152) Danny Amendola WR

14. (161) Greg Little WR

15. (176) Vince Young QB

16. (185) Alex Henry K

17. (200) Atlanta

18. (209) Jamie Harper RB

Exactly an argument for NOT taking Vick in the 1st round....You are SCREWED at WR !!!!