|
Post by BV on Sept 4, 2011 20:26:24 GMT -5
I still don't see Houston winning it. Their switch to a 3-4 hasn't gone smooth, and their secondary is still awful.
Titans are a possibility if Hasselbeck isn't awful.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Tebow™ on Sept 4, 2011 20:31:21 GMT -5
That's like the AFC's version of the NFC West. Also who is gonna put that Bears bet in their sig?
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Sept 4, 2011 21:07:55 GMT -5
Really? Your team looks pretty good to me. Thanks. I don't think it is terrible or anything. I just don't really love any of the guys I took.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Sept 4, 2011 21:30:33 GMT -5
ralpho you got charles at #9? what was the first round like? QB heavy league, Rodgers was ranked #1 but the first went like this: Peterson, Adrian RB MIN 0/0 2 Johnson, Chris RB TEN 29 sec 0/0 3 Brees, Drew QB NO 8 sec 0/0 4 Vick, Michael QB PHI 23 sec 0/0 5 Rice, Ray RB BAL 26 sec 0/0 6 Brady, Tom QB NE 2 min 23 sec 0/0 7 Rivers, Philip QB SD 7 sec 0/0 8 Rodgers, Aaron QB GB 13 sec 0/0 9 Charles, Jamaal RB KC 7 sec 0/0 10 Foster, Arian RB HOU 2 min 0 sec 0/0 11 Johnson, Andre WR HOU 24 sec 0/0 12 Schaub, Matt QB HOU 18 sec
|
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Sept 4, 2011 23:41:59 GMT -5
Since everybody's doing predictions..
AFC: 1. Patriots 2. Steelers 3. Chargers 4. Texans 5. Jets 6. Ravens
NFC: 1. Packers 2. Saints 3. Eagles 4. Cardinals 5. Falcons 6. Giants
Superbowl: Saints vs Patriots
|
|
|
Post by BV on Sept 5, 2011 0:45:39 GMT -5
It's nice that everyone is picking the Saints, but I just don't see it. Their defense has looked really awful in the pre-season. They still can't ![](http://www.wrestlingfigs.com/images/wfcensored.gif) ing tackle. Secondary is a giant question mark too. All I'm hoping for is Brees to bounce back from his awful season and Ingram to emerge into a stud.
|
|
Jamal
Main Eventer
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Joined on: Nov 24, 2005 14:53:44 GMT -5
Posts: 4,877
|
Post by Jamal on Sept 5, 2011 0:52:40 GMT -5
I don't really expect a top 5 defense from the Saints, but I still like the unit. Plus its not like that offense needs an elite defense. Unless Brees picks off where he left off in terms of INT's.
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Sept 5, 2011 14:59:48 GMT -5
I guess I'll make my picks now.
AFC: 1. New England Patriots 2. Pittsburgh Steelers 3. Indianapolis Colts 4. San Diego Chargers 5. Baltimore Ravens 6. Kansas City Chiefs
NFC: 1. Atlanta Falcons 2. Green Bay Packers 3. Philadelphia Eagles 4. St. Louis Rams 5. New Orleans Saints 6. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
AFC Playoffs:
Kansas City def. Indianapolis (biggest shocker of the season) San Diego def. Baltimore New England def. Kansas City Pittsburgh def. San Diego New England def. Pittsburgh
NFC Playoffs:
Tampa def. Philly New Orleans def. St. Louis Tampa def. Atlanta (Ryan chokes, sorry TRW.) New Orleans def. Green Bay New Orleans def. Tampa
Super Bowl: New England def. New Orleans, in what I predict'll be one of the, if not the highest scoring Super Bowl in history.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Sept 5, 2011 15:09:58 GMT -5
I want to point out real quickly that the term "QB-Heavy" league is kind of a weird one.
Theoretically, unless you're talking about touchdowns or yardage specifically being worth more points than the other, all of the QB's should remain at about the same overall value. Even if it is yardage-heavy or touchdown-heavy, the only thing that should happen is shifting within the position itself, not really the overall rankings.
Mathematically, all of the quarterbacks' values rise together.
In fantasy football, you want to get players who are better than the other players at their position. It doesn't matter to me that Matt Schaub might outscore Arian Foster in total points. If Schaub is the 8th-highest scoring QB and Foster is the 3rd highest scoring RB, Arian Foster is the more valuable player overall.
The only times that QB's values should really inflate is if you are in a league with 14+ teams, or if you start more than one of them each week.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Sept 5, 2011 15:12:58 GMT -5
I want to point out real quickly that the term "QB-Heavy" league is kind of a weird one. Theoretically, unless you're talking about touchdowns or yardage specifically being worth more points than the other, all of the QB's should remain at about the same overall value. Even if it is yardage-heavy or touchdown-heavy, the only thing that should happen is shifting within the position itself, not really the overall rankings. Mathematically, all of the quarterbacks' values rise together. In fantasy football, you want to get players who are better than the other players at their position. It doesn't matter to me that Matt Schaub might outscore Arian Foster in total points. If Schaub is the 8th-highest scoring QB and Foster is the 3rd highest scoring RB, Arian Foster is the more valuable player overall. The only times that QB's values should really inflate is if you are in a league with 14+ teams, or if you start more than one of them each week. Yes and no, the league I am in is 1 pt for every 15 yards passing, it is usually 25 yards right? I have done enough drafts to know when AP and CJ are usually 1-2 in all rankings, and CJ is 6th in this league and Rodgers is #1 to realize the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Sept 5, 2011 15:26:18 GMT -5
I'm going to steer you to an article I wrote last year that broke down the mathematical misunderstandings of the QB position within fantasy football. bleacherreport.com/articles/431861-dont-overvalue-quarterbacks-in-your-draftCheck that out. It's not EXACTLY the same situation, but it still breaks down why you want to get the players who score more points than their position. Overall point scoring matters, but only to a certain extent.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Sept 5, 2011 15:30:23 GMT -5
I'm going to steer you to an article I wrote last year that broke down the mathematical misunderstandings of the QB position within fantasy football. bleacherreport.com/articles/431861-dont-overvalue-quarterbacks-in-your-draftCheck that out. It's not EXACTLY the same situation, but it still breaks down why you want to get the players who score more points than their position. Overall point scoring matters, but only to a certain extent. I dont get any of this, but if the QB stats are usually 25 = 1 point, but my league is 15 = 1 point, and Rodgers is the #1 ranked player in the draft.....doesnt that confirm that it is a QB-centric league? Would anyone here take Brees or Rogers over AP or Johnson? I know I wouldnt regardless of the league, but they score more than the RB's
|
|
|
Post by BV on Sept 5, 2011 17:17:11 GMT -5
QB are the point grabbers. End of. Whether you hate grabbing them early on not, having a good fantasy QB will put you in a good position to win, period.
|
|
|
Post by BV on Sept 5, 2011 17:18:18 GMT -5
I'm going to steer you to an article I wrote last year that broke down the mathematical misunderstandings of the QB position within fantasy football. bleacherreport.com/articles/431861-dont-overvalue-quarterbacks-in-your-draftCheck that out. It's not EXACTLY the same situation, but it still breaks down why you want to get the players who score more points than their position. Overall point scoring matters, but only to a certain extent. I dont get any of this, but if the QB stats are usually 25 = 1 point, but my league is 15 = 1 point, and Rodgers is the #1 ranked player in the draft.....doesnt that confirm that it is a QB-centric league? Would anyone here take Brees or Rogers over AP or Johnson? I know I wouldnt regardless of the league, but they score more than the RB's I'd take AP or Johnson considering you can get a QB in later rounds who will put up similar stats like Schaub and Romo.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Sept 5, 2011 17:43:05 GMT -5
This is the key to the article I wrote... It doesn't matter what scoring system it happens in because it is simply points-based.This is an obviously exaggerated example, but it should show the difference between drafting for high scoring and drafting for high value. In this example, we will assume that quarterbacks score an incredible amount more points than running backs do for the year.
First scoring QB – 1,000 points 10th scoring QB – 900 points First scoring RB – 300 points 10th scoring RB – 100 points
At first glance, it seems obvious that the first pick of these four players should be the top-scoring quarterback. He outscored the 10th ranked quarterback by 100, the top-scoring running back by 700, and the 10th ranked running back by 900 points on the year.
But again, we need to look more at value and not just at scoring. In this example, the top value player is actually the No. 1 RB. The reason for this is because he significantly outscored the other players at his position.
If we assume that these four players were in a fantasy draft all by themselves, this point is magnified. If you were to just draft for points, assuming that you’re in a league where you can only start one quarterback from week to week, the draft might look like this:
First pick: You select quarterback No. 1 (1,000 points) Second pick: I select running back No. 1 (300 points) Third pick: You select running back No. 10 (100 points) Fourth pick: I select quarterback No. 10 (900 points)
At the end of the year, your scoring total would be 1,100 while I walk away with the championship at 1,200 points. You had the highest scoring player, but it didn’t matter, because you made the wrong choice on running backs, where there was a bigger discrepancy in point totals.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Sept 5, 2011 18:10:44 GMT -5
I am still confused at what you are getting at, 2010 here are the ranks:
Peyton Manning was the highest scoring player at 474 points. The highest scoring RB in my league was 313 and he was 18th in total points out of all positions.
So obviously this is a QB-centric league when the highest rated QB puts up 161 more points than a RB who went bananas.
|
|
Mr. Bo Ziffer
Main Eventer
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Joined on: Oct 2, 2007 1:18:10 GMT -5
Posts: 1,139
|
Post by Mr. Bo Ziffer on Sept 5, 2011 18:27:50 GMT -5
Anyone think the Rams could upset the Eagles in week 1? I hear rumors The Rams are going to be using 2 TE 2 RB sets and plan on attacking the Eagles weak LB Corp. What im basicly asking is it worth taking a chance and betting some money on it?
|
|
|
Post by roddypiper on Sept 5, 2011 18:29:11 GMT -5
Anyone think the Rams could upset the Eagles in week 1? I hear rumors The Rams are going to be using 2 TE 2 RB sets and plan on attacking the Eagles weak LB Corp. What im basicly asking is it worth taking a chance and betting some money on it? No, because if you do THIS will be the one week where they show up lol.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Sept 5, 2011 20:20:51 GMT -5
I am still confused at what you are getting at, 2010 here are the ranks: Peyton Manning was the highest scoring player at 474 points. The highest scoring RB in my league was 313 and he was 18th in total points out of all positions. So obviously this is a QB-centric league when the highest rated QB puts up 161 more points than a RB who went bananas. How many points did Eli Manning score?
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Sept 5, 2011 20:25:29 GMT -5
I know where Kliquid is coming from.
In almost all leagues, your top 10 QBs will outscore almost every other player. However, once you get past the top 3 QBs, the difference in point total is pretty small. However, with running backs, once you get past the top 5, the point differential is massive. Which is why, even in a league driven by high QB totals, you still want to shore up your RB position first.
I am in two pay leagues, and one league has 6 point tds for QBs, and the other has 4 points for passing TDs. Despite the difference, I don't change my QB drafting strategy.
The only reason to change your strategy would be if you had to start 2 QBs, or if there were some other odd QB stats added. But your standard scoring with yardage, and touchdown, it really doesn't change the drafting strategy.
|
|