1.01 pick in redraft PPRs (1 Viewer)

[pantherclub]

I seriously doubt that those 3 guys will be there at the 2/3 turn. I will be more than happy to eat crow but there is just no way I would gamble on that.

 

[zamboni]

IF you start 1 QB and 1 RB ... and IF you knew with certainty that Manning would throw 5,500 yards and 55 TDs... then sure he's a solid pick at #1. But that should not be your starting point.... it should instead be closer to 5,000 yards and 40 TDs. In this projection, how would Manning's VBD score compare with Charles/McCoy/Peterson?

Essentially, where's the break-even point for Manning's stats if we assume that at least one of Charles/McCoy/Peterson is going to have a season somewhat like McCoy or Charles in 2013 or (nearly) Peterson in 2012?

My attempt at some math (.5 PPR for RBs):

Charles in 2013 = 345 points

McCoy in 2013 = 305

Peterson in 2012 = 329

(average of 326)

12th best RB averages about 200 points --> compared to the average of the 3 stud RBs above, that's about a 38% drop off.

24th best RB averages about 136 points --> compared to the above, that's about a 58% drop off

Manning's greatest season ever for a QB produced 480 in this scoring vs. 295 for QB12 --> drop off of about 38%.

This right there causes me to believe that even IF Manning had another record-breaking season, he's approximately equal to the RB 1... when you only start 1 RB, and not as valuable as the RB1 when you start 2 RBs.

Assuming that RB24 would produce 136 points and RB1 would produce 326, and assuming that QB12 will produce 295 points, Manning would need 700(!) points to give you the same VBD figure. Surely that cannot be correct?

but you fail to factor in that over 60% of the top 15 preseason RB totally bust out. Its rarer for WR and QB

In short, its better to be safe and less risk in the first 2-3 rounds

You still seem to be missing the supply/demand dynamic of top notch RBs vis-a-vis WRs and QBs.

I am not missing anything, what does supply and demand have to do with the turnover for the top 15 running backs?

For reasons stated earlier: there are very few top notch RBs relative to a much deeper pool of WRs and QBs. Sure you can miss if your RB picked at #1 fails to live up to expecations, but you can still take that RB #1 and get quality WRs/QB, etc. later. Hard to do if you pass up RB at #1.

But people have different draft strategies, and that's cool.

 

[Sabertooth]

Calvin would be my first overall pick.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I seriously doubt that those 3 guys will be there at the 2/3 turn. I will be more than happy to eat crow but there is just no way I would gamble on that.

MFL currently has Rodgers at 2.10, Manning at 3.01, and Brees at 3.05 on a sample size of 322 real PPR drafts -- not mocks. It's not going to change all that much.

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01 -- and any regression will pull him further from the elite RBs.

 

[cloppbeast]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

I'm sure you can come up with a baseline to justify your position.

Using worst starter in any way he wasn't. Using 100 most valuable players he wasn't. Using average starter (QB6 v RB12) he wasn't. Using VORP he wasn't.

 

[monk]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

I'm sure you can come up with a baseline to justify your position.

Using worst starter in any way he wasn't. Using 100 most valuable players he wasn't. Using average starter (QB6 v RB12) he wasn't. Using VORP he wasn't.

Using common sense usually works better than a bunch of stats designed to support one side of an argument

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

I'm sure you can come up with a baseline to justify your position.Using worst starter in any way he wasn't. Using 100 most valuable players he wasn't. Using average starter (QB6 v RB12) he wasn't. Using VORP he wasn't.

Using common sense usually works better than a bunch of stats designed to support one side of an argument

FF is based 100% on statistics. Ignoring them is not really the best approach. Interesting that you feel the entire statistical system that this website is built upon was "designed to support one side of an argument" that didn't even exist when Joe first started talking about VBD 20 years ago.

 

[fightingillini]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

I'm sure you can come up with a baseline to justify your position.

Using worst starter in any way he wasn't. Using 100 most valuable players he wasn't. Using average starter (QB6 v RB12) he wasn't. Using VORP he wasn't.

Using common sense usually works better than a bunch of stats designed to support one side of an argument

Common sense dictates that RB is more valuable than a QB in leagues where you have to start 2 RBs and only 1 QB. It's called supply and demand.

In one of my 12 team leagues, Charles had a VBD of 205 using worst starter, and Peyton had a VBD of 161. This is a PPR league. QBs get 4 pts per TD pass in this league and a pt per 25 yds passing. Typical league setup.

So in most leagues, Manning had a season like no other QB in history, and still wouldn't be worth the 1.01 pick in hindsight.

You would have to have very QB friendly scoring or have a superflex league to have Manning equal or exceed the value of Charles.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

The ADP stuff is also a side issue. The major point is that even last year, Manning wasn't worth 1.01.

Except that he was.

I'm sure you can come up with a baseline to justify your position.

Using worst starter in any way he wasn't. Using 100 most valuable players he wasn't. Using average starter (QB6 v RB12) he wasn't. Using VORP he wasn't.

Using common sense usually works better than a bunch of stats designed to support one side of an argument

Common sense dictates that RB is more valuable than a QB in leagues where you have to start 2 RBs and only 1 QB. It's called supply and demand.

In one of my 12 team leagues, Charles had a VBD of 205 using worst starter, and Peyton had a VBD of 161. This is a PPR league. QBs get 4 pts per TD pass in this league and a pt per 25 yds passing. Typical league setup.

So in most leagues, Manning had a season like no other QB in history, and still wouldn't be worth the 1.01 pick in hindsight.

You would have to have very QB friendly scoring or have a superflex league to have Manning equal or exceed the value of Charles.

This argument essentially assumes the RB you take at 1.1 will finish RB1. It also assumes the QB you take at 1.1 will finish QB1. It doesn't really take into account the odds of them doing so. I'm not sure I'd take Manning 1.1, but if I leave the first round with Manning, I'll feel MUCH more confident he won't bust than any RB, by far.

 

[karmarooster]

Ok, assuming that there is more certainty that Peyton will finish as QB1 rather than Charles/McCoy/Peterson will finish as RB1...

There is also greater certainty that the QB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Matt Ryan) will finish as a QB5-12 than there is certainty the RB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Ray-Tate-Miller-Jones-Drew) will finish up as RB13-30.

So you aren't just comparing the likelihood that Peyton is a stud QB vs. the likelihood that Charles is a stud RB. You're comparing that differential in certainty vs the differential in certainty that a "value" QB is still a QB1 vs. the "value" RB is still a (borderline) RB2.

Thus, it's not QB in round 1 vs. RB in round 1...... it's "QB in Round 1 vs. RB in Round 1" vs. "QB in Round 8 vs. RB in Round 8."

 

[fightingillini]

Ok, assuming that there is more certainty that Peyton will finish as QB1 rather than Charles/McCoy/Peterson will finish as RB1...

There is also greater certainty that the QB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Matt Ryan) will finish as a QB5-12 than there is certainty the RB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Ray-Tate-Miller-Jones-Drew) will finish up as RB13-30.

So you aren't just comparing the likelihood that Peyton is a stud QB vs. the likelihood that Charles is a stud RB. You're comparing that differential in certainty vs the differential in certainty that a "value" QB is still a QB1 vs. the "value" RB is still a (borderline) RB2.

Thus, it's not QB in round 1 vs. RB in round 1...... it's "QB in Round 1 vs. RB in Round 1" vs. "QB in Round 8 vs. RB in Round 8."

I was just posting static VBD values earlier. What really matters is the dynamic VBD. If you take Manning with the 1.01, you're going to be behind the 8-ball at least 4 RB and WR positions...to the owner who takes a QB in Round 5-6. That's a lot of value that you're giving up in rounds 2-5, so Manning needs to have a monsterous year to make up for that difference.

You can pass on Manning at 1.01 and likely take Aaron Rodgers with the 2.12 pick. Or pass on Charles at 1.01, take Manning, and then get a RB12-RB14 with the 24th pick. We all know that the difference between Charles and RB13 is much greater than Manning and Rodgers. And you keep adding on to that advantage when I wait until Round 6 to take a Nick Foles or Matt Ryan.

So by taking Charles, you can miss on him not being the RB1 and still be in decent shape. Missing on Manning would be complete suicide unless you got really lucky with your RBs in the middle rounds, despite the fact that Manning is more likely to finish QB1 than Charles is to finish RB1.

 

[monk]

Ok, assuming that there is more certainty that Peyton will finish as QB1 rather than Charles/McCoy/Peterson will finish as RB1...

There is also greater certainty that the QB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Matt Ryan) will finish as a QB5-12 than there is certainty the RB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Ray-Tate-Miller-Jones-Drew) will finish up as RB13-30.

So you aren't just comparing the likelihood that Peyton is a stud QB vs. the likelihood that Charles is a stud RB. You're comparing that differential in certainty vs the differential in certainty that a "value" QB is still a QB1 vs. the "value" RB is still a (borderline) RB2.

Thus, it's not QB in round 1 vs. RB in round 1...... it's "QB in Round 1 vs. RB in Round 1" vs. "QB in Round 8 vs. RB in Round 8."

I was just posting static VBD values earlier. What really matters is the dynamic VBD. If you take Manning with the 1.01, you're going to be behind the 8-ball at least 4 RB and WR positions...to the owner who takes a QB in Round 5-6. That's a lot of value that you're giving up in rounds 2-5, so Manning needs to have a monsterous year to make up for that difference.

You can pass on Manning at 1.01 and likely take Aaron Rodgers with the 2.12 pick. Or pass on Charles at 1.01, take Manning, and then get a RB12-RB14 with the 24th pick. We all know that the difference between Charles and RB13 is much greater than Manning and Rodgers. And you keep adding on to that advantage when I wait until Round 6 to take a Nick Foles or Matt Ryan.

So by taking Charles, you can miss on him not being the RB1 and still be in decent shape. Missing on Manning would be complete suicide unless you got really lucky with your RBs in the middle rounds, despite the fact that Manning is more likely to finish QB1 than Charles is to finish RB1.

In the 12 team league i am in (6 pts per TD, -3 per turnover) Start 1QB, 1RB, 1 WR , 1 TE and 3 Flex (RB, WR or TE) ... Peyton, Rogers and Brees will be gone by the 16 pick.

 

[karmarooster]

Well that is a pretty high scoring system for QB, and you only have to start one RB, 16 team draft.... so, everything would be somewhat adjusted.

 

[rjv]

Ok, assuming that there is more certainty that Peyton will finish as QB1 rather than Charles/McCoy/Peterson will finish as RB1...

There is also greater certainty that the QB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Matt Ryan) will finish as a QB5-12 than there is certainty the RB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Ray-Tate-Miller-Jones-Drew) will finish up as RB13-30.

So you aren't just comparing the likelihood that Peyton is a stud QB vs. the likelihood that Charles is a stud RB. You're comparing that differential in certainty vs the differential in certainty that a "value" QB is still a QB1 vs. the "value" RB is still a (borderline) RB2.

Thus, it's not QB in round 1 vs. RB in round 1...... it's "QB in Round 1 vs. RB in Round 1" vs. "QB in Round 8 vs. RB in Round 8."

I was just posting static VBD values earlier. What really matters is the dynamic VBD. If you take Manning with the 1.01, you're going to be behind the 8-ball at least 4 RB and WR positions...to the owner who takes a QB in Round 5-6. That's a lot of value that you're giving up in rounds 2-5, so Manning needs to have a monsterous year to make up for that difference.

You can pass on Manning at 1.01 and likely take Aaron Rodgers with the 2.12 pick. Or pass on Charles at 1.01, take Manning, and then get a RB12-RB14 with the 24th pick. We all know that the difference between Charles and RB13 is much greater than Manning and Rodgers. And you keep adding on to that advantage when I wait until Round 6 to take a Nick Foles or Matt Ryan.

So by taking Charles, you can miss on him not being the RB1 and still be in decent shape. Missing on Manning would be complete suicide unless you got really lucky with your RBs in the middle rounds, despite the fact that Manning is more likely to finish QB1 than Charles is to finish RB1.

Stated this in several posts back. Simply put, drafting a QB in round one your playing catchup the entire draft.

 

[Ojaays]

Ok, assuming that there is more certainty that Peyton will finish as QB1 rather than Charles/McCoy/Peterson will finish as RB1...

There is also greater certainty that the QB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Matt Ryan) will finish as a QB5-12 than there is certainty the RB you take in rounds 6-12 (let's call him Ray-Tate-Miller-Jones-Drew) will finish up as RB13-30.

So you aren't just comparing the likelihood that Peyton is a stud QB vs. the likelihood that Charles is a stud RB. You're comparing that differential in certainty vs the differential in certainty that a "value" QB is still a QB1 vs. the "value" RB is still a (borderline) RB2.

Thus, it's not QB in round 1 vs. RB in round 1...... it's "QB in Round 1 vs. RB in Round 1" vs. "QB in Round 8 vs. RB in Round 8."

I was just posting static VBD values earlier. What really matters is the dynamic VBD. If you take Manning with the 1.01, you're going to be behind the 8-ball at least 4 RB and WR positions...to the owner who takes a QB in Round 5-6. That's a lot of value that you're giving up in rounds 2-5, so Manning needs to have a monsterous year to make up for that difference.

You can pass on Manning at 1.01 and likely take Aaron Rodgers with the 2.12 pick. Or pass on Charles at 1.01, take Manning, and then get a RB12-RB14 with the 24th pick. We all know that the difference between Charles and RB13 is much greater than Manning and Rodgers. And you keep adding on to that advantage when I wait until Round 6 to take a Nick Foles or Matt Ryan.

So by taking Charles, you can miss on him not being the RB1 and still be in decent shape. Missing on Manning would be complete suicide unless you got really lucky with your RBs in the middle rounds, despite the fact that Manning is more likely to finish QB1 than Charles is to finish RB1.

In the 12 team league i am in (6 pts per TD, -3 per turnover) Start 1QB, 1RB, 1 WR , 1 TE and 3 Flex (RB, WR or TE) ... Peyton, Rogers and Brees will be gone by the 16 pick.

Likewise, in my 12 team league, QBs get 6 pt per TD, no deductions for int's.

I expect Manning, Rogers and Bree's off the board by 13.

 

[Level 3 Offenders]

And? Peyton Manning was still far less valuable than the top few RBs in most scoring systems,

I disagree. How did you come to this conclusion?

I used math.Speaking to "typical" league settings -- one QB / 2+ RBs / 3+ WRs / PPR / no point-per-completion, etc. In leagues where you can start more than one QB, obviously things are different, and no one should take issue with QBs being drafted early in those formats.

How would your "math" show its better to pick ADP than Peyton?Unless I am totally misreading that

I'm not going to take the time to fully regurgitate information that's pretty easily found in the archives here for you. Compare a reasonable projection for Manning's value over QB12 with a reasonable projection for Peterson / Charles / McCoy / Forte over RB28 or so (number of flex spots will effect where you set this baseline). Then look at your projection for Manning + a 9th round RB vs Charles + Romo / Rivers / etc. Finally, check out Manning's current ADP of 3.01.

All of this makes it pretty HUGELY obvious why Manning is a terrible pick 1st overall.

for starters how can you accurately gauge his adp at this point in the year? No way in your head do you honestly think he is lasting until the 3 round. That is just crazy talk

Secondly I would rather have a solid consistent qb then to roll the dice on a top rb. Thats just me. If I had the #1 pick and if Graham has looked good in the preseason then thats my pick. If not I would gauge between Rodgers, Brees or Manning depending on what happens in the preseason. Drafting this far out is ludicrous, insanity and quite frankly for amateurs.

Panther Club maybe you should listen to people who clearly are more knowledgeable and back their case up with real data. I'm not trying to be a jerk but you're just being stubborn. It's not crazy talk. In competitive leagues I will routinely see Peyton last until the early 3rd(more often taken late 2nd). For the TFC on rtsports his adp is 2.9 http://www.fantasychampionship.com/adp and perhaps you should consider a bit more carefully your claims that amateurs are drafting now. I would make the case that their will be many more and a higher percentage of "amateurs" drafting come August. I will grant you 1 point. In your typical home town fantasy league Peyton will go much earlier than the Adp at all sites suggests. Do you understand why?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

when are they gonna put a search function in the upper right corner like every other board?

 

[chihawk]

In a ppr-league, I think the first pick is really close between Charles, McCoy, and AP (or even Forte). Slighth differences in league rules may sway it one way or another. My league has bonus scoring for long TDs, so I will be taking Charles. I think he has a greater chance of breaking big TDs (rushing or receiving) compared to the others.

The much tougher decisions come after that. Let's look at the 2/3 turn.

Barring injury during preseason, the following 21 players are very likely gone. If any of them drop, I'm all over them at the turn.

McCoy, LeSean PHI RB
Charles, Jamaal KCC RB
Peterson, Adrian MIN RB
Forte, Matt CHI RB
Lacy, Eddie GBP RB
Murray, DeMarco DAL RB
Ball, Montee DEN RB
Bernard, Giovani CIN RB
Bell, Le'Veon PIT RB
Lynch, Marshawn SEA RB

Johnson, Calvin DET WR
Thomas, Demaryius DEN WR
Graham, Jimmy NOS TE
Bryant, Dez DAL WR
Green, A.J. CIN WR
Jones, Julio ATL WR
Marshall, Brandon CHI WR
Brown, Antonio PIT WR
Jeffery, Alshon CHI WR
Nelson, Jordy GBP WR

Manning, Peyton DEN QB


That leaves the following group and two of them will be picked 22 and 23 before my two picks at the turn.

Foster, Arian HOU RB
Martin, Doug TBB RB
Ellington, Andre ARI RB
Stacy, Zac STL RB

Cobb, Randall GBP WR
Gronkowski, Rob NEP TE
Thomas, Julius DEN TE
Allen, Keenan SDC WR

Rodgers, Aaron GBP QB
Brees, Drew NOS QB

If Foster seems to be in good health going into the season, he could be a good value choice hear...and may actually go into the category of very likely being gone already.

I'm intrigued by Ellington since my league has bonus scoring for long TDs. Like Charles, he's got a chance to break away for TD on any play.

We start 3 WRs so I would like to get a top WR at the 2/3 turn as well, but I'm just not thrilled with Cobb and Allen at this point in the draft, but I would very likely end up drafting one of them.

 

[chihawk]

Based on the MFL ADP, you could also skip RB at 2/3 turn and pick up Rashad Jennings, Ryan Mathews, Gerhart, Joique Bell, or even Ray Rice at the 4/5 turn as your RB2. Vereen could also be there. Performance during week 2 and 3 of preseason could change this. I wouldn't be surpised if Rashad Jennings start creeping up the draft boards.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

I have the 1.02 so I'll be taking whichever of McCoy or Charles isn't taken at 1.01.

 

[Phenomena]

I've been liking my mocks at 1.01 lately

McCoy

Brown

Gronk

Andre Johnson

Stafford

Steven Jackson

Colston

Gordon

Hunter

McFadden

I'll take that through 9 rounds all day. If I actually get those guys to drop in a real draft, anyway.

 

[pantherclub]

I've been liking my mocks at 1.01 lately

McCoy

Brown

Gronk

Andre Johnson

Stafford

Steven Jackson

Colston

Gordon

Hunter

McFadden

I'll take that through 9 rounds all day. If I actually get those guys to drop in a real draft, anyway.

I dont want this to turn into a rate my draft thread but thats pretty putrid dude. No way I would take that "all day".

 

[LittlePhatty]

LeSean "turf toe" McCoy scares me now, so I'm going Charles. I wouldn't fault anyone if they took Forte at 1.01 either.

 

[irishnips]

Is there any love for AP with the first pick. Sounds like Turner wants to get him 50-60 catches. In a half ppr that definitely helps not to mention getting him out in space more. They never utilized him like that in the past.

 

[Warpig]

Is there any love for AP with the first pick. Sounds like Turner wants to get him 50-60 catches. In a half ppr that definitely helps not to mention getting him out in space more. They never utilized him like that in the past.

AP at 1.01 isn't bad either. Nobody would blink at that. The only knock on him might be age and lack of a supporting cast. Even with stacked boxes, AP gets his.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Is there any love for AP with the first pick. Sounds like Turner wants to get him 50-60 catches. In a half ppr that definitely helps not to mention getting him out in space more. They never utilized him like that in the past.

AP at 1.01 isn't bad either. Nobody would blink at that. The only knock on him might be age and lack of a supporting cast. Even with stacked boxes, AP gets his.

I have 1.02 and am strongly considering AP. And I think a lot of people in my league will blink at that. The supporting cast is underrated with a TE that's emerging, a stud WR also emerging, and Norv's pass friendy RB system. I can't think of any real knocks to owning AP. Don't think the boxes are stacked, and he's a superfreak humanoid, so age isn't a worry yet at all. I could talk myself into taking him over Shady or Jamaal in PPR.

 

[Warpig]

Is there any love for AP with the first pick. Sounds like Turner wants to get him 50-60 catches. In a half ppr that definitely helps not to mention getting him out in space more. They never utilized him like that in the past.

AP at 1.01 isn't bad either. Nobody would blink at that. The only knock on him might be age and lack of a supporting cast. Even with stacked boxes, AP gets his.

I have 1.02 and am strongly considering AP. And I think a lot of people in my league will blink at that. The supporting cast is underrated with a TE that's emerging, a stud WR also emerging, and Norv's pass friendy RB system. I can't think of any real knocks to owning AP. Don't think the boxes are stacked, and he's a superfreak humanoid, so age isn't a worry yet at all. I could talk myself into taking him over Shady or Jamaal in PPR.

AP, I think, is a valid 1.01 pick. Not to say Jamaal and Shady aren't...but if we were to nitpick, Jamaal and Shady have other things I would flag before AP.

Jamaal is on a team that doesn't have any other threats either and Alex Smith is a check down king. But neither Jamaal or Shady have the build that AP does. So I like AP to be a work horse back over the other 2 and he's able to take more of a beating when the boxes get stacked.

Shady is on a high powered offense, but will Chip Kelly rotate his stable of backs more? Especially with Sproles. And if Foles regresses this year, will defenses start taking away Shady to make Foles beat them?

Of course we could be over analyzing, but I see AP as the more dependable since he's produced regardless of the crud they've had at QB/WR/TE and against stacked boxes.

 

[JDL]

@Warpig, I agree with everything you stated above which is why I would take Forte with the first pick. Great offense w/ no competition at the position. Very tough call between AP and Forte.