Is this guy a tool? Favre and Vick on the same team

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:01 am

Knowing full well the reaction I would get, I drafted Favre in round 5 after taking Vick in round 4.

I do not feel a need to defend myself because in a few weeks we can all point to the scoreboard. Yes, I was fully aware that they both have a week-9 bye and I will play Rex Grossman that week. When I made the pick I figured I’d bid a ton of FAAB on whatever reserve QB emerges after a few weeks of injuries, but Grossman falling to me late will likely allow me to avoid that option.

Here’s a quick look into the thought process that landed Vick and Favre on the same team:

With the #3 pick I knew exactly was I was getting going in: Duece McAllister. I projected TO or S. Davis as my 2nd player and T. Barber or C. Martin as my third. TO went 25th so I took Davis 26th. Then Barber went 30th so I took Martin at 31. I am fully aware of the 3rd RB / #1 RC debate, however in my book RC’s are just like SP’s in baseball, after the top tier (the big-4 this year) everyone else is a crapshoot. I also believe Martin is in the best shape of his life and I project the Jets as a playoff team. I think he will score TD’s and be a 16-18 point a game player.

Coming back in the 4th there were only 4-5 of the 2nd tier QB’s (the nine guys after the big-2.) Since both teams 1 and 2 needed a QB I figured I would take one then grab Shockey (the #2 TE on my board.) I had already decided not to take a RC, as in my opinion there were still 30-40 guys that would be between a 9 to 12 point a game player. I went Vick and was shocked that neither team 1 nor 2 took Favre.

I then figured there was a slim chance that Shockey could slip back to me and I grabbed Favre off the board. In the 6th round Shockey did indeed fall and I took him as planned.

Sure there was a slight “blocking” mentality to this pick (ask the teams with Plummer and Delhome as starting QB’s how that spot is treating them) but for the most part this move was made because of the additional befits it provides my team.

I then drafted RC’s in the next four rounds and ended up with Keyshawn, Roy Willliams, Hilliard, and Terrell (all players from my top 45 RC’s.) The end result was that I missed out on Peter Warrick. So the impact to my team is the difference in value between Terrell and Warrick when compared with the difference between Favre and someone like a Tommy Maddox as my backup.

I of course have also minimized the impact to my team of a major injury to either Vick or Favre. If one of these guys go down 15 teams from the other leagues will be done, I’ll simply lose my 2nd option. Plus I will be able to extract a few extra points by playing the match-ups correctly.

Others may not think Martin, Keyshawn and Shockey will score many TDs this year, I however believe otherwise. The success of my team rests on those three players and not a potential injury to my starting QB. With this move I have positioned my team differently from anyone else and come week 14 I’ll be rooting for one of these guys to go down for the rest of the year since I plan to be playing against 31 teams at that point, about 25-50% of whom will likely have one of these two guys.

[ September 06, 2004, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: nnoy ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:25 am

If you want me to be honest, drafting both Vick and Favre that early is WASTING a high round draft pick on a BACKUP. Probably be better served with someone else. I don't know who was available at that point, so I get get into specifics.

BTW, if Shockey was the #2 TE, on your board, you're in trouble. He wasn't even in my top 5.

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:32 am

What would a thread be without feedback from Gekko?

Let’s exchange boards Gordo now that it’s all said and done. We can do a correlation analysis at the end of the season between each of our projected values and the end results and see which of us made more accurate projections.

[ September 06, 2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: nnoy ]

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:42 am

I think Favre in the 5th round is too high. I don't understand your logic of having 2 QB's with the same bye week. I appreciate you defending it here in advance of someone else flogging it, but I can't imagine doing that. I was ticked off I had to match up bye weeks for ANY of my top 10 picks let alone top 5 and at the same position.

I would have rather heard you defend taking Delhomme and Harrington as your starting QB because you had analyzed the matchups and determined that 74% of the time they would have bottom 10 passing defenses to play against throughout the season and you would mix and match them appropriately to produce the #3 rated QB production, etc., etc.

OR it would have been great in my book if you said 'Hey, Favre slipped to round 7 and I had to take him' - but... ??

Fact is - I'm not sure why you would defend this approach? Seems like a mistake to me? Don't care if you admit it or agree, that's just my opinion and you did ask.

Good luck regardless

Dave

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:49 am

Thanks for the feedback Dave. Obviously this was a calculated decision, if both guys stay healthy, Keyshawn and Shockey suck and I miss the playoffs then it can be chalked up as a mistake in hindsight. If one of these guys goes down, or if I extract 20 to 30 extra points and make the final 32 then obviously it will not be seen as a mistake or “lucking” into it. I would make the same decision 100 times out of 100, no buyer’s remorse here.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:52 am

Fair enough - it's hard to put myself into the dynamic of the draft you were in. I walked away from both Auction and Saturday drafts doing the same kind of 'if this happens' I'll be in good shape feelings.

Want to take a shot at my squads? I'll post 'em if you want

Dave

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 6:55 am

Originally posted by nnoy:
Thanks for the feedback Dave. Where's my thanks, nnoy?

Originally posted by nnoy:
I would make the same decision 100 times out of 100, no buyer’s remorse here. I's not "buyer's remorse", it's learning from mistakes. Don't worry, many others made mistakes. I'd say more, but I got the Gekko Invitational tomorrow night.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:00 am

Nathan, as I pointed out to you in an another thread, it seems like we have very similar teams (McAllister, S.Davis, Martin, Vick for you and James, D.Davis, Martin, Vick for me). I also have Keyshawn as my #1 receiver. Obviously, I like your team.

It was interesting to see some of the decisions people made about QBs, both starting and backup. Some people seemed to punt the QB position, others took two very early. Our backup quarterback--Brunell--was decided by the bye week (Week 9) matchup. Washington is playing Detroit that week, so we look to be in good shape.

brad_brown · Post by **brad_brown** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:13 am

I was in your draft (at #8) watching this and was actually wondering myself if this was going to work out for you... it will be interesting.

I took a hit at TE but ended up with D. Jackson, C. Chambers, P. Warrick and A. Lelie as my first 4 receivers partly because a couple teams (yours included) weren't taking them in Rounds 3-6.

As with any draft it will just come down to who can play and stay healthy all year to see how it pans out.

lichtman · Post by **lichtman** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:32 am

NNOY -- You intentionally picked two Qbs early, with the same bye week? Maybe you spent a little two much time obsessing over the schedule and not enough time thinking strategically about how to draft a team.

In a league where WR receptions are +1, RBs are +.5 and you NEED to start 3 WRs each week, selecting 3rd RBs AND 2nd QBs before your first WR is obscene.

The difference between Favre and Maddox is irrelevant, because you would rarely play either. You are taking hypothetical bench points and sacrificing points in your starting lineup each and every week.

I hate to get harsh, but a 27 line post invites criticism -- you selected 2 aging RBs, 1 aging QB, 1 QB whose main asset (mobility) is compromised by an injury and a new passing scheme, a TE who has never shown the ability to play a full season (and only caught 4 TDS in 24 career games), all before picking your first WR in a league that REQUIRES three WRs. And the WR corp that you think will be OK is a rookie, two TD-challenged veterans and a guy who hasn't sniffed 50 catches in a single season (and averaged less than 9 yards per catch last year).

But at least you didn't pick Ahman Green from the #3 spot.

[ September 06, 2004, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Ico Jones ]