Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Fumbleweed

**Round Seven & Eight Commentary**

Recommended Posts

I already question my selection here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting into the middle rounds now...

 

This is where I shine!

 

If only I could shine for rounds 2-5 too..:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with robb. I blew my 7th round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rice...you would have lost your damn mind had I done what I was going to do (Rivers and Ryan back to back). I've had every one of my other picks hijacked and decided to just ensure my QB would get decent points no matter what. Changed it right at the last second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rice...you would have lost your damn mind had I done what I was going to do (Rivers and Ryan back to back). I've had every one of my other picks hijacked and decided to just ensure my QB would get decent points no matter what. Changed it right at the last second.

 

If you picked Rivers and Ryan, I probably would have picked a TE or RB and picked 3 straight QBs in the 9th 10th and 11th.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And probably send out a hit for your head. ;)

 

 

AFFECT THE HEAD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were the last 2 Qb in my list. Still good options left but rivers was the last guy I would have accepted as my 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were the last 2 Qb in my list. Still good options left but rivers was the last guy I would have accepted as my 1

One more very fine option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...did not expect you to take Rivers with Newton already picked...this kinda messed up my draft a bit...

 

Never understood this; someone spends a high pick on a QB obviously thinking they're a "franchise QB" so why in the world would you take another QB so soon. JMHO but it says, I don't trust my "franchise QB".

 

And this is not a comment specifically for shovel. I've seen it many times before and it never makes sense to me. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never understood this; someone spends a high pick on a QB obviously thinking they're a "franchise QB" so why in the world would you take another QB so soon. JMHO but it says, I don't trust my "franchise QB".

 

And this is not a comment specifically for shovel. I've seen it many times before and it never makes sense to me. :blink:

 

have to say i agree, i've never understood this either. if you take a QB in the top 3 rounds, that should be the guy you are expecting to be your starter for 16 weeks unless injury. Your sacrifice at RB and or WR should be offset by the fact you can wait until round 12 or beyond for your backup.

 

jmho

 

ive had people in the past tell me they were doing it to hurt their competition as much as help themselves and i don't see that either.

 

but i will say that the reason i took Eli when i did rather than wait until my next turn (and i almost did) was that I felt confident at least 1 owner was going to take their 2nd QB early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have to say i agree, i've never understood this either. if you take a QB in the top 3 rounds, that should be the guy you are expecting to be your starter for 16 weeks unless injury. Your sacrifice at RB and or WR should be offset by the fact you can wait until round 12 or beyond for your backup.

 

jmho

 

ive had people in the past tell me they were doing it to hurt their competition as much as help themselves and i don't see that either.

 

but i will say that the reason i took Eli when i did rather than wait until my next turn (and i almost did) was that I felt confident at least 1 owner was going to take their 2nd QB early.

Happens every year! It is Russian Roulette waiting. It happened last year. It also is likely a factor that his #1 QB uses his legs alot and some insurance was deemed prudent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never understood this; someone spends a high pick on a QB obviously thinking they're a "franchise QB" so why in the world would you take another QB so soon. JMHO but it says, I don't trust my "franchise QB".

 

And this is not a comment specifically for shovel. I've seen it many times before and it never makes sense to me. :blink:

 

Normally I would agree with you guys, and I usually take QBs late. So here's my reasoning.

 

- As someone pointed out, with as much as Cam runs the ball you never know if an injury is right around the corner.

- Throughout this draft, I've had multiple picks yanked out from under me. I had to do something nonstandard to get in front of it and solidify at least 1 position.

- I needed another WR and Meachem was sitting there. Why not try for the QB/WR hookup.

- What else was really available? Tier 4 WRs, Tier 4 RBs and Tier 2 TEs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- As someone pointed out, with as much as Cam runs the ball you never know if an injury is right around the corner.

 

I fully understand the getting ahead of the curve draft strategy but (and this is the rub for me) if he's an injury concern due to his style of play then he's not worth selecting in the 2nd round. NO early round pick should need to be backed up in the 6th/7th round, if so then they're not worth an early round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoops...sorry, for some reason I thought I had seen all the picks in the sixth. My mistake.

 

Just a second...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivers and Ryan were great value here. I was set to take whichever one fell to me. As it turns out, neither did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have to say i was hoping that Britt magically made it back to me to complete my injury team. nice pick fumble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never understood this; someone spends a high pick on a QB obviously thinking they're a "franchise QB" so why in the world would you take another QB so soon. JMHO but it says, I don't trust my "franchise QB".

 

And this is not a comment specifically for shovel. I've seen it many times before and it never makes sense to me. :blink:

 

I am known for doing what shovel did and I would've done it again here if either Rivers or Ryan were still available.

 

Two reasons:

 

If we're treating this like a normal draft, I am an old school VBD guy. If I see a guy with early fifth round value sitting there in the 7th, I take him. Almost without exception. Doesn't matter the position. In a real league, I can always trade him down the road for something else I need.

 

If we're factoring the No-Hassle/best ball format into this, it's also a GREAT strategy. Having two outstanding QBs will almost always give you a leg up on everybody week in and week out.

 

If you've ever spent the better part of a fantasy season without an elite QB, it can be painful. Some guys like the idea of having two guys for insurance purposes and to play matchups with. I am one of those guys. It just so happens that after Ryan and Rivers, my projections really drop off at QB making other positions more important for now.

 

I love what shovel did. It's VBD drafting at its core. Get the best player available. Ask questions later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, GREAT pace today. Easily our best day yet in terms of # of picks made.

 

US Open begins tomorrow, so my commenting may be a little less frequent for a few days. I am just about as passionate about professional golf as I am fantasy football, so I will be torn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am known for doing what shovel did and I would've done it again here if either Rivers or Ryan were still available.

 

Two reasons:

 

If we're treating this like a normal draft, I am an old school VBD guy. If I see a guy with early fifth round value sitting there in the 7th, I take him. Almost without exception. Doesn't matter the position. In a real league, I can always trade him down the road for something else I need.

 

If we're factoring the No-Hassle/best ball format into this, it's also a GREAT strategy. Having two outstanding QBs will almost always give you a leg up on everybody week in and week out.

 

If you've ever spent the better part of a fantasy season without an elite QB, it can be painful. Some guys like the idea of having two guys for insurance purposes and to play matchups with. I am one of those guys. It just so happens that after Ryan and Rivers, my projections really drop off at QB making other positions more important for now.

 

I love what shovel did. It's VBD drafting at its core. Get the best player available. Ask questions later.

 

I happen to think this is an example where VBD falls short, unless you play in a league where a QB can be your flex. I prefer to use a modified VBD where you factor in your starting requirements. VBD is not going to take into account that you just spent and 6th/7th round pick on a bench player when you might still have starting spots to fill. I also happen to think it is more valuable to back up your RB's/WR's where you start more, thus increasing the amount of bye weeks and potential injuries/poor play you have to manage.

 

i dont think it gives any advantage in the no hassle format other than maybe the security of having another solid option in a league where adding and dropping isn't allowed. But the same thing holds true for all positions.

 

Having 2 great options at QB really gives you no more of a leg up on the competition. You still only take the single highest score which is what you were probably shooting for when you took a QB in your first 2-3 picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am known for doing what shovel did and I would've done it again here if either Rivers or Ryan were still available.

 

Two reasons:

 

If we're treating this like a normal draft, I am an old school VBD guy. If I see a guy with early fifth round value sitting there in the 7th, I take him. Almost without exception. Doesn't matter the position. In a real league, I can always trade him down the road for something else I need.

 

If we're factoring the No-Hassle/best ball format into this, it's also a GREAT strategy. Having two outstanding QBs will almost always give you a leg up on everybody week in and week out.

 

If you've ever spent the better part of a fantasy season without an elite QB, it can be painful. Some guys like the idea of having two guys for insurance purposes and to play matchups with. I am one of those guys. It just so happens that after Ryan and Rivers, my projections really drop off at QB making other positions more important for now.

 

I love what shovel did. It's VBD drafting at its core. Get the best player available. Ask questions later.

 

I understand your reasoning and I used to do the same, but VBD is flawed without factoring/weighing need. Your surplus only works if someone else has a void at the same position. But in this case if everyone just takes the next best on their list then it effectively nullifies any trade value for Rivers. And the assumption is that Cam will outscore Rivers, which is why he was drafted much earlier. So if Cam outscores him and Rivers has no trade value because no one else has a need then it's a wasted pick. Rivers only has value if a QB gets hurt but you can't draft for that because every player has the same injury factor, so relatively speaking that's a wash across the board and thus a non-factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to think this is an example where VBD falls short, unless you play in a league where a QB can be your flex. I prefer to use a modified VBD where you factor in your starting requirements. VBD is not going to take into account that you just spent and 6th/7th round pick on a bench player when you might still have starting spots to fill. I also happen to think it is more valuable to back up your RB's/WR's where you start more, thus increasing the amount of bye weeks and potential injuries/poor play you have to manage.

 

i dont think it gives any advantage in the no hassle format other than maybe the security of having another solid option in a league where adding and dropping isn't allowed. But the same thing holds true for all positions.

 

Having 2 great options at QB really gives you no more of a leg up on the competition. You still only take the single highest score which is what you were probably shooting for when you took a QB in your first 2-3 picks.

 

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to think this is an example where VBD falls short, unless you play in a league where a QB can be your flex. I prefer to use a modified VBD where you factor in your starting requirements. VBD is not going to take into account that you just spent and 6th/7th round pick on a bench player when you might still have starting spots to fill. I also happen to think it is more valuable to back up your RB's/WR's where you start more, thus increasing the amount of bye weeks and potential injuries/poor play you have to manage.

 

i dont think it gives any advantage in the no hassle format other than maybe the security of having another solid option in a league where adding and dropping isn't allowed. But the same thing holds true for all positions.

 

Having 2 great options at QB really gives you no more of a leg up on the competition. You still only take the single highest score which is what you were probably shooting for when you took a QB in your first 2-3 picks.

 

As the guy who has scored the No-Hassle league for a number of years, I would respectfully disagree with your final point. When you have two breakout QBs, your chances of netting 25-35 points a week at QB go way up. It's an advantage...trust me.

 

Incidentally, I read your post about your draft at the main site, and I couldn't agree more with what you had to say. In a good league, you MUST swing for the fences at the 12 hole. A conservative draft from that spot will get you nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your reasoning and I used to do the same, but VBD is flawed without factoring/weighing need. Your surplus only works if someone else has a void at the same position. But in this case if everyone just takes the next best on their list then it effectively nullifies any trade value for Rivers. And the assumption is that Cam will outscore Rivers, which is why he was drafted much earlier. So if Cam outscores him and Rivers has no trade value because no one else has a need then it's a wasted pick. Rivers only has value if a QB gets hurt but you can't draft for that because every player has the same injury factor, so relatively speaking that's a wash across the board and thus a non-factor.

 

But, what if you like playing matchups. Let's say you see six weeks where Rivers will likely go off based on matchups. And four of those weeks fall on weeks that Newton has a far less attractive matchup. Having two good QBs really allows for some flexibility if you're not afraid to mix and match based on what you perceive to be the likely outcomes. I personally LOVE having two very good QBs to work with in setting a lineup. I understand what you're saying, but understand also that there's a different perspective that also makes good sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Open

 

This is tennis.......right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the guy who has scored the No-Hassle league for a number of years, I would respectfully disagree with your final point. When you have two breakout QBs, your chances of netting 25-35 points a week at QB go way up. It's an advantage...trust me.

 

Incidentally, I read your post about your draft at the main site, and I couldn't agree more with what you had to say. In a good league, you MUST swing for the fences at the 12 hole. A conservative draft from that spot will get you nowhere.

 

i absolutely respect your opinion (why i love being your teammate in the ibl) and I do agree that having 2 breakout QB's would increase your chances at 25-35 point weeks. I guess my issue is... why draft Cam, or any other QB for that matter, in round 2 or 3? Because you think they have a good shot to score 25-35 each week. So I don't agree with taking a second QB before the rest of your roster is rounded out just to marginally increase your QB point odds. And thats all it is, marginal. Unless ofcourse you don't think your early investment at QB will score big most weeks, at which point, why did you draft them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember having this same fricking discussion 2 years ago when I drafted a 3rd QB! I used the argument that since it is "best ball", you stood to reap the benefits of a hot hand that week. And, if I remember correctly, I got shot down pretty bad.

 

And......the proof is, I didn't win ###### so maybe my logic (i.e. shovel's) is flawed and a backup QB is not the way to go. Time shall tell. Hey shovel, will you keep track which QB did how well each week and let us know how it went at the end of the season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan:

Nice selection in Pettigrew....I was hoping to match him up with Stafford, but wouldn't have taken him this early. I can't fault you taking him, good choice.

 

He was my last thought as to a TE, guess I'll go much later now without taking one as I see no value in anyone left this early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember having this same fricking discussion 2 years ago when I drafted a 3rd QB! I used the argument that since it is "best ball", you stood to reap the benefits of a hot hand that week. And, if I remember correctly, I got shot down pretty bad.

 

And......the proof is, I didn't win ###### so maybe my logic (i.e. shovel's) is flawed and a backup QB is not the way to go. Time shall tell. Hey shovel, will you keep track which QB did how well each week and let us know how it went at the end of the season?

 

No problem. I should probably monitor it more in depth though. IE..monitor and compare the 10 RBs/WRs that got drafted right after Rivers. Or...take note of the days that Rivers outperformed Cam and see if it made any difference in the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, what if you like playing matchups. Let's say you see six weeks where Rivers will likely go off based on matchups. And four of those weeks fall on weeks that Newton has a far less attractive matchup. Having two good QBs really allows for some flexibility if you're not afraid to mix and match based on what you perceive to be the likely outcomes. I personally LOVE having two very good QBs to work with in setting a lineup. I understand what you're saying, but understand also that there's a different perspective that also makes good sense.

 

But you're not factoring in the lost value on the other end. In 2011 Cam averaged ~27.5 pts/gm, Rivers 21.5 pts/game. Now at first glance you think Rivers is my insurance of keeping my QB pts between 27.5 - 21.5. Wrong answer. The loss is that there are roughly 5-6 QBs who could be had 5 to 6 round later who only averaged 2pts less per game than Rivers. So grabbing one of those instead keeps your QB range between 27.5 - 19.5. Now look at the pts diff from say a WR in the 6th versus one in the 11/12th. First off, picking a WR in the 12th is a crapshoot, compared to a QB in that range as you still know they're the starter. And IF you hit on a WR that late in 2011 the ones that produced averaged ~3pts less than those taken in the 6th round. However if you averaged the hits and the misses it's more like 7pts/game.

 

So if you hit on a WR you'd still net -1pt in the backup range to the starter, and if you missed on that WR you're talking a net effect of ~11 pts diff. Bottom line is the net effect at best is roughly a push, but there's much more risk in taking WR/RB later than taking QB. Factor these things together and you're much better off grabbing the backup QB later in the draft (lower risk v WR/RB, and smaller drop off in pts/game) and taking your starting position players earlier.

 

 

:dropskeyboardswalksoff:

 

 

 

 

ETA: If you really wanted to keep your QB numbers high, which I can understand the strategy of since they are the highest scoring position, then I'd grab two studs in the first few rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i absolutely respect your opinion (why i love being your teammate in the ibl) and I do agree that having 2 breakout QB's would increase your chances at 25-35 point weeks. I guess my issue is... why draft Cam, or any other QB for that matter, in round 2 or 3? Because you think they have a good shot to score 25-35 each week. So I don't agree with taking a second QB before the rest of your roster is rounded out just to marginally increase your QB point odds. And thats all it is, marginal. Unless ofcourse you don't think your early investment at QB will score big most weeks, at which point, why did you draft them?

 

Here's a hypothetical...Rivers vs. Newton

 

Rivers: 22, 16, 29, 20, 18, 35, 31, 15, 23, Bye, 21, 24, 17, 34, 28, 19, 20 = 372 points

 

Newton: 19, 30, 27, 16, 38, 31, 22, 17, 29, 27, Bye, 42, 18, 16, 26, 21, 33 = 412 points

 

I didn't even look to compare weeks...created those two possibilites totally independent of each other. In a best ball format, this would give you 475 points. That is a great best ball total. What might you get with Newton and say...Alex Smith. Probably about 430.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you're not factoring in the lost value on the other end. In 2011 Cam averaged ~27.5 pts/gm, Rivers 21.5 pts/game. Now at first glance you think Rivers is my insurance of keeping my QB pts between 27.5 - 21.5. Wrong answer. The loss is that there are roughly 5-6 QBs who could be had 5 to 6 round later who only averaged 2pts less per game than Rivers. So grabbing one of those instead keeps your QB range between 27.5 - 19.5. No look at the pts diff from say a WR in the 6th versus one in the 11/12th. First off, picking a WR in the 12th is a crapshoot, until a QB in that range as you still know they're the starter. And IF you hit on a WR that late in 2011 the ones that produced averaged ~3pts less than those taken in the 6th round. However if you averaged the hits and the misses it's more like 7pts/game.

 

So if you hit on a WR you'd still net -1pt in the backup range to the starter, and if you missed on that WR you're talking a net effect of ~11 pts diff. Bottom line is the net effect at best is roughly a push, but there's much more risk in taking WR/RB later than taking QB. Factor these things together and you're much better off grabbing the backup QB later in the draft (lower risk v WR/RB, and smaller drop off in pts/game) and taking your starting position players earlier.

 

 

:dropskeyboardswalksoff:

 

You're assuming that you can't "hit" on a receiver in the next round. If you feel good about some of your sleepers, and can still get them, why not go after the best player available?

 

There's definite validity to what you're saying. I'm not really arguing against it. I'm saying that I don't see either strategy as high-risk. I have, however, experienced losing a top tier QB for the season and being in hell all year getting 15 a game from my run of the mill back-up while guys like Brady, Brees, Rodgers, and Manning blow right past week in and week out, netting my opponent a 20 point advantage at that position many weeks. I think having a solid #3 RB is more important than a top tier backup QB, yes...but I put getting a solid second QB ahead of trying to hit on receivers in every single middle round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you kidding? This is what I love about this draft. Some of the debates over the years have been legendary. I'm very stubborn about all things FF as is Remote and a few others. JScott is generally more sensible, level-headed, and flexible in his approach to things- more pragmatic if you will. Love the contrast. It's the difference between science and art. Some guys draft a team like an artist painting a picture...other guys like a calculated scientist weighing the logic of everything. Most somewhere in the middle.

 

It's that contrast that makes it fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go back and change the pick if it will allow us all to hug it out. :wub:

 

Never. THIS is why we do this draft (at least why I do) to match strategies and compare notes with the best on the board. Fumble and I go way back, there's absolutely no animosity on either of our parts. Just good solid ff draft talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you kidding? This is what I love about this draft. Some of the debates over the years have been legendary. I'm very stubborn about all things FF as is Remote and a few others. JScott is generally more sensible, level-headed, and flexible in his approach to things- more pragmatic if you will. Love the contrast. It's the difference between science and art. Some guys draft a team like an artist painting a picture...other guys like a calculated scientist weighing the logic of everything. Most somewhere in the middle.

 

It's that contrast that makes it fun.

 

 

Never. THIS is why we do this draft (at least why I do) to match strategies and compare notes with the best on the board. Fumble and I go way back, there's absolutely no animosity on either of our parts. Just good solid ff draft talk.

 

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a hypothetical...Rivers vs. Newton

 

Rivers: 22, 16, 29, 20, 18, 35, 31, 15, 23, Bye, 21, 24, 17, 34, 28, 19, 20 = 372 points

 

Newton: 19, 30, 27, 16, 38, 31, 22, 17, 29, 27, Bye, 42, 18, 16, 26, 21, 33 = 412 points

 

I didn't even look to compare weeks...created those two possibilites totally independent of each other. In a best ball format, this would give you 475 points. That is a great best ball total. What might you get with Newton and say...Alex Smith. Probably about 430.

 

these types of debates are why i continue to take part in the june mock. love them.

 

again i do not disagree with what you just laid out, on the surface. but i like this better for someone who drafts a QB in round 5 or 6 and then backs that guy up in round 8 or 9.

 

not for someone who takes a QB early in round 1 2 or 3. Basically you are investing 2 out of your first 7 picks into 1 position when you have 7 starting positions to worry about (not including kicker and defense obviously). On top of that, drafting a QB in the top 3 rounds declares that you think the guy is a stud and you should be counting on him week in and week out.

 

you have slightly changed my view on this strategy as it pertains to the no hassle format but i'm still not seeing enough value in it to justify potentially weakening other starting positions. Could have just waited and drafted Ryan and Rivers back to back and used that 3rd rounder on a stud WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about trading Rivers then a few weeks into the season? Or Newton for that matter. Doesn't drafting a guy you had projected as the #48 player on the board at #74 for example give you some options potentially in a few weeks?

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
Sign in to follow this  

×