Draft Champions Leagues In 2014: 35 Rounds?

[Don Draper]

Moyer,
I don't agree with you. You say people get lucky with the later round picks. I say that's hogwash. Anyone with half a brain could have made some very good late round picks last year.

[Sandman62]

Looks like plenty of value to me! Especially in a DC when you might need a Jerrel Jerrigan type for a week or two. Those are players that can help you get in the money.

Good point. In a DC in which I drafted Cutler, I drafted McCown in round 35.
Also got sporadic decent DC production from Fitzpatrick, Royal, Clay, DBrown, Cassel and Crabtree.

This isn't to pick on either of you two, but just to use McGown and Jerrigan as examples.

Don't you think that McCown and Jerrigan hurt you more often then they helped you? Meaning that they were probably owned by other teams in other drafts that you were in more often then they were owned by you.

Say someone missed the QB run in your draft and then decided, "That is OK. I'll just draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs and I'll roll with Cutler as my #1 and some other #20-something QB as his backup."

Shouldn't they be penalized for missing the QB run? Shouldn't they also be penalized for deciding they could get by with just Cutler, who has now missed games in 4 consecutive seasons, and some weak #20-something backup?

Shouldn't they have to make the tough decision of spending their more valuable 26th Round pick to get McCown or not, rather than their less valuable 30th or 32nd or 35th Round pick?

Getting McCown in the 30th Round or later is like getting him for free and is no decision at all.

Additionally, they were actually rewarded for missing the QB run because they got to draft RBs, WRs, and TEs, while others were "wasting" their picks on QBs because they made the correct decision to draft QBs during the QB run and the correct decision not to rely on Cutler, who has now missed games in 4 consecutve seasons, and a weak #20-something backup.

If they decided to roll with the Cutler/McCown combo and a weak #20-something backup they should have to use their more valuable 26th Round pick on McCown to make up for the fact that they got to draft from a better selection of RBs, WRs, and TEs during the QB run that they missed.

...

I'm willing to bet that he helped more of your opponent's teams then he helped your teams.

I think you may have a flawed vision of how teams ended up with McCown on them (at least in some cases)?

I was in 9 DCs and McCown was drafted in just 2 of them. I drafted him in one, and finished in 2nd place - which probably wouldn't have happened without McCown. My QBs in that league were Cam, Cutler, Cassel and McCown and here is the season production I got from them: Cam: 37%, Cutler: 30%, McCown: 26%, Cassel: 7.6%

In another of my DCs, BillyWaz drafted McCown, for a QB corps of: Cam, Cutler, Locker, Fitzpatrick, McCown.

So your assumption that only people who missed the QB run lucked their way into McCown isn't accurate in these cases (and I suspect many others). Billy and I apparently both felt that the risk of having an inconsistent-scoring, running QB1 like Cam necessitated a higher-end backup like Cutler, which probably meant that we were spending an earlier pick on our QB2 than many others did (while they got to "draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs" ). Though you may have avoided Cutler due to injury history, others liked his outlook with Trestman and those receivers. And for those who drafted Cutler - whether as QB1 or QB2 - wasn't spending a very late pick on his NFL backup a prudent insurance policy in a DC, especially given his injury history and the potential upgrade to their passing offense with Trestman???

[boutrous11]

why is a good pick someone makes in rounds 30-35 lucky? Is a good pick in round 25 lucky? round 20? where is the cutoff?....

If I am in round 34 and I see a running back that a. is third string on a team w' an injury prone # 1, b. flashed real potential in limited work the year before, and c. is on a high scoring NFL team.... and I pick that guy and he turns out to be a gem, then I got lucky??

[kjduke]

I may not be recalling this correctly, but I think the only reason we polled pre-draft about the number of rounds was because it was published in the rules incorrectly as 30 Rounds instead of the correct number of 26 Rounds as it was in 2012. If it had not been published in the rules incorrectly, then we would not have polled pre-draft. We were stuck with 30 Rounds only because it was incorrectly published that way in the rules.

I think we should do the original, and correct, number of 26 Rounds.

Mark
Follow Me

Mark, you are right on why we changed the number of rounds, but we are not "stuck" with them. Likewise, "original" is not necessarily "correct", for the number of rounds - it's the number I decided to go with the first year I put this together. Based on the feedback of those participating, and my own assessment, I think 30 is the "correct" number going forward because it plays wells and it seems to be the mid-point preference of those playing. As such, I don't foresee going backwards in rounds, hopefully that doesn't kill your interest.

Likewise, I understand your thesis on team construction, but I disagree on that as well in terms of eliminating luck --- I think being able to backup more potential injuries, or simply making better picks than the next guy in those late rounds, pushes the contest outcome toward less luck, not more.

[RedRyder]

...

I'm willing to bet that he helped more of your opponent's teams then he helped your teams.

I think you may have a flawed vision of how teams ended up with McCown on them (at least in some cases)?

I was in 9 DCs and McCown was drafted in just 2 of them. I drafted him in one, and finished in 2nd place - which probably wouldn't have happened without McCown. My QBs in that league were Cam, Cutler, Cassel and McCown and here is the season production I got from them: Cam: 37%, Cutler: 30%, McCown: 26%, Cassel: 7.6%

In another of my DCs, BillyWaz drafted McCown, for a QB corps of: Cam, Cutler, Locker, Fitzpatrick, McCown.

So your assumption that only people who missed the QB run lucked their way into McCown isn't accurate in these cases (and I suspect many others). Billy and I apparently both felt that the risk of having an inconsistent-scoring, running QB1 like Cam necessitated a higher-end backup like Cutler, which probably meant that we were spending an earlier pick on our QB2 than many others did (while they got to "draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs" ). Though you may have avoided Cutler due to injury history, others liked his outlook with Trestman and those receivers. And for those who drafted Cutler - whether as QB1 or QB2 - wasn't spending a very late pick on his NFL backup a prudent insurance policy in a DC, especially given his injury history and the potential upgrade to their passing offense with Trestman???[/quote]

What Sandman said! I didn't really see Jerrigan drafted all that much except by me...so I guess I was pretty lucky. And because it was a DC, he played when I needed him and he made a difference.

Give me more rosters spots and it gives me an advantage. That is why I like DCs: larger roster spots. I can absolutely see why some folks would not want larger rosters if I am going to be in their league.

I'm worried about my team when I'm drafting...don't get me wrong, I track if someone needs a QB, K or DEF are they are quickly drying up, everyone knows I like a good cockblock now and then, but I'm really not worried about an opponent getting lucky or rewarded. I just don't look at it that way, I think at the level we play at and with usually the same names year in and year out, if someone drafts just one starting QB and then 4 back-ups, it's a strategy. And if QB1 goes down and there a back-up hits, then I call it a good strategy.

[moyer1313]

Moyer,
I don't agree with you. You say people get lucky with the later round picks. I say that's hogwash. Anyone with half a brain could have made some very good late round picks last year.

Without picking a fight, if anyone with half a brain can do it, then why bother?

Let’s keep the decisions important and about more than not only who to draft, but also about when to draft them.

Let’s not make it into just picking who is the best player left or who will score points if someone gets hurt.

Mark
Follow Me

[moyer1313]

...

I'm willing to bet that he helped more of your opponent's teams then he helped your teams.

I think you may have a flawed vision of how teams ended up with McCown on them (at least in some cases)?

I was in 9 DCs and McCown was drafted in just 2 of them. I drafted him in one, and finished in 2nd place - which probably wouldn't have happened without McCown. My QBs in that league were Cam, Cutler, Cassel and McCown and here is the season production I got from them: Cam: 37%, Cutler: 30%, McCown: 26%, Cassel: 7.6%

In another of my DCs, BillyWaz drafted McCown, for a QB corps of: Cam, Cutler, Locker, Fitzpatrick, McCown.

So your assumption that only people who missed the QB run lucked their way into McCown isn't accurate in these cases (and I suspect many others). Billy and I apparently both felt that the risk of having an inconsistent-scoring, running QB1 like Cam necessitated a higher-end backup like Cutler, which probably meant that we were spending an earlier pick on our QB2 than many others did (while they got to "draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs" ). Though you may have avoided Cutler due to injury history, others liked his outlook with Trestman and those receivers. And for those who drafted Cutler - whether as QB1 or QB2 - wasn't spending a very late pick on his NFL backup a prudent insurance policy in a DC, especially given his injury history and the potential upgrade to their passing offense with Trestman???

What Sandman said! I didn't really see Jerrigan drafted all that much except by me...so I guess I was pretty lucky. And because it was a DC, he played when I needed him and he made a difference.

Give me more rosters spots and it gives me an advantage. That is why I like DCs: larger roster spots. I can absolutely see why some folks would not want larger rosters if I am going to be in their league.

I'm worried about my team when I'm drafting...don't get me wrong, I track if someone needs a QB, K or DEF are they are quickly drying up, everyone knows I like a good cockblock now and then, but I'm really not worried about an opponent getting lucky or rewarded. I just don't look at it that way, I think at the level we play at and with usually the same names year in and year out, if someone drafts just one starting QB and then 4 back-ups, it's a strategy. And if QB1 goes down and there a back-up hits, then I call it a good strategy.[/quote]

Jules,

“What Sandman said! I didn't really see Jerrigan drafted all that much except by me...so I guess I was pretty lucky. And because it was a DC, he played when I needed him and he made a difference.”


I stand by original statement:

moyer1313 wrote:I'm willing to bet that he helped more of your opponent's teams then he helped your teams.

Jernigan scored the following in the NFFC:

WK1 – 0
WK2 – 0
WK 3 – 1.5
WK 4 – 0
WK5 – 3.3
WK6 – 0
WK7 – 0
WK8 – 5.9
WK9 – 0
WK10 – -1.0
WK11 – 4.1
WK12 – 4.4
WK13 – 0
WK14 – 0
WK15 – 13.7
WK16 – 20.0

Knowing that you draft strong teams, I doubt that through Week 14, Jernigan contributed to your teams in any week other than possibly Week 8 when there were a lot of teams on BYE.

That is probably 0 times in 14 weeks.

Your opponents, who probably drafted weaker teams than you did, are more likely to have gotten a contribution during not only during Week 8, but also in Weeks 11 and 12 when their teams were probably weaker than yours due to injuries and poorer roster construction.

He most likely contributed to all teams during Weeks 15 & 16.

So, I still think that he helped more of your opponent’s teams than he did yours because your teams are usually better than theirs.

Mark
Follow Me

[moyer1313]

why is a good pick someone makes in rounds 30-35 lucky? Is a good pick in round 25 lucky? round 20? where is the cutoff?....

If I am in round 34 and I see a running back that a. is third string on a team w' an injury prone # 1, b. flashed real potential in limited work the year before, and c. is on a high scoring NFL team.... and I pick that guy and he turns out to be a gem, then I got lucky??

"....and I pick that guy and he turns out to be a gem, then I got lucky??"

Yes, you did get lucky.

You got lucky that the starter got hurt, even if it is someone like an injury prone Darren McFadden. Just like whoever drafted the starter got unlucky that the starter got hurt, even if it is someone like an injury prone Darren McFadden.
But, you especially got lucky that whoever drafted the starter failed to get all of his backups before the 34th Round.

The person that failed to get all of the backups to his starter by the 34th Round deserves to be punished.

Why should anyone be rewarded because someone made a mistake and did not get all of their starter's backups by the 34th Round?

If you had the foresight to take that same RB in the 26th Round, ahead of 80 or 90 other players that were taken by the 34th Round, then you are more deserving of the reward because you spent a more valuable pick on the player and the drafter of the starter probably wasn’t expected to also draft the 3rd stringer in a 26 Round draft like he would be in a 35 Round draft.

The kind of “luck” you described is more tolerable than stuff like the guy who drafts a Kicker who had been cut 2 weeks earlier by his NFL team, someone laughs at him in the Chat Room, he now knows he made a mistake (as did the person who laughed at him in the Chat Room), then takes 3 Ks who currently are not on NFL teams in the 30-something Rounds, and one of them ends up on an NFL roster because of an injury to an established Kicker.

That person needed to be punished for his mistake by either rolling with his mispicked Kicker or having to waste a valuable roster spot or spots on other Kickers. Spending 30-something Round picks on extra Kickers is not punishment enough.
Adding extra Rounds allows players to cover up their mistakes and doesn’t punish them enough for their mistakes.

Mark
Follow Me

[moyer1313]

["Sandman62"]

Looks like plenty of value to me! Especially in a DC when you might need a Jerrel Jerrigan type for a week or two. Those are players that can help you get in the money.

Good point. In a DC in which I drafted Cutler, I drafted McCo]wn in round 35.
Also got sporadic decent DC production from Fitzpatrick, Royal, Clay, DBrown, Cassel and Crabtree.
===================================

This isn't to pick on either of you two, but just to use McGown and Jerrigan as examples.

Don't you think that McCown and Jerrigan hurt you more often then they helped you? Meaning that they were probably owned by other teams in other drafts that you were in more often then they were owned by you.

Say someone missed the QB run in your draft and then decided, "That is OK. I'll just draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs and I'll roll with Cutler as my #1 and some other #20-something QB as his backup."

Shouldn't they be penalized for missing the QB run? Shouldn't they also be penalized for deciding they could get by with just Cutler, who has now missed games in 4 consecutive seasons, and some weak #20-something backup?

Shouldn't they have to make the tough decision of spending their more valuable 26th Round pick to get McCown or not, rather than their less valuable 30th or 32nd or 35th Round pick?

Getting McCown in the 30th Round or later is like getting him for free and is no decision at all.

Additionally, they were actually rewarded for missing the QB run because they got to draft RBs, WRs, and TEs, while others were "wasting" their picks on QBs because they made the correct decision to draft QBs during the QB run and the correct decision not to rely on Cutler, who has now missed games in 4 consecutve seasons, and a weak #20-something backup.

If they decided to roll with the Cutler/McCown combo and a weak #20-something backup they should have to use their more valuable 26th Round pick on McCown to make up for the fact that they got to draft from a better selection of RBs, WRs, and TEs during the QB run that they missed.

...

I'm willing to bet that he helped more of your opponent's teams then he helped your teams.

I think you may have a flawed vision of how teams ended up with McCown on them (at least in some cases)?

I was in 9 DCs and McCown was drafted in just 2 of them. I drafted him in one, and finished in 2nd place - which probably wouldn't have happened without McCown. My QBs in that league were Cam, Cutler, Cassel and McCown and here is the season production I got from them: Cam: 37%, Cutler: 30%, McCown: 26%, Cassel: 7.6%

In another of my DCs, BillyWaz drafted McCown, for a QB corps of: Cam, Cutler, Locker, Fitzpatrick, McCown.

So your assumption that only people who missed the QB run lucked their way into McCown isn't accurate in these cases (and I suspect many others). Billy and I apparently both felt that the risk of having an inconsistent-scoring, running QB1 like Cam necessitated a higher-end backup like Cutler, which probably meant that we were spending an earlier pick on our QB2 than many others did (while they got to "draft a couple more good players while others are drafting QBs" ). Though you may have avoided Cutler due to injury history, others liked his outlook with Trestman and those receivers. And for those who drafted Cutler - whether as QB1 or QB2 - wasn't spending a very late pick on his NFL backup a prudent insurance policy in a DC, especially given his injury history and the potential upgrade to their passing offense with Trestman???

I made no assumption as to why anyone drafted McCown nor did I speculate as to why you or Billy drafted him. I just created an example.

In my opinion, the only legitimate reason to draft McCown was if you drafted Cutler.

It is also my opinion that relying on Cutler to be a QB #1 or QB #2 requires drafting either a reliable QB #3 or McCown because as good as I think Cutler would do, I also know he hasn't played a full season since 2009.

If someone that did not draft Cutler is throwing a dart at McCown in the late Rounds, and banking on Cutler's yearly injury, then I want them to pay a higher price than a 35th Round pick when they get lucky and Cutler does get injured.

If anyone drafted only 2 starting QBs and one of them was Cutler, then they should draft McCown in a 30 or 32 or 35 Round draft. Just like both you and Billy did.

In a 26 Round draft, that decision isn't as easy to make.

If someone decides to wait on a QB and then drafts Cutler late, in the meanwhile drafting out of a better RB, WR, TE pool then those that took a QB earlier, then I want them to have to either draft a 3rd QB, draft McCown in the 26th Round, or take a 0 when Cutler gets injured.

I want them to pay a price for waiting on Cutler and then counting on him to stay healthy.

If they take a 3rd QB, then I get some value back when I get to draft a RB, WR, or TE when they draft a QB.

If they decide to take McCown in the 26th Round, then I get some value back when I get to draft another player that might contribute to my team.

If they do not take McCown in the 26th Round, then I get some value back when they take a 0 when Cutler gets injured.

If they do not have to take McCown until the 35th Round, then I get no value back because the player I get in the 35th Round is just a dart and will most likely contribute nothing to my team, other than maybe to back up one of my other players.

Taking McCown in the 30th or 32nd or 35th Round is easy, if you own Cutler.

Taking McCown in the 26th Round is a much more difficult decision.

I want to make the decisions hard to make.

In the two drafts you described, you both took McCown to backup Cutler. Assuming you both took McCown late, that was a very good strategy.

You got to wait for a QB while picking from a better pool of RBs, WRs, and TEs, you only had to draft 2 QBs (Cam and Cutler), and you paid nothing for McCown.

Going with that same strategy, drafting only Cam and Cutler, in a 26 Round draft would have been a tougher decision to make and one I think both of you would have avoided, as would I have.

Mark
Follow Me

[moyer1313]

I’ve lost this battle, again, so I will stop and end with a summation:

I believe that my players will get injured, but I also believe that my opponent’s players will get injured, too.
I believe that the bad luck of injuries will even out.
I believe that the good luck of a lucky pick will even out.
I believe that protecting my roster against the bad luck of injuries by the way that I build my roster is something that I can control.
I believe that the good luck of a lucky pick by my opponent is not something that I can control.
I believe 26 roster spots are more than sufficient to build a roster that can protect itself against injury.
I believe more roster spots allow my opponents more opportunities to make a lucky pick, which is something that I cannot control by any other means than by keeping the number of roster spots at 26.
I believe that roster spots should be valuable.
I believe every pick should be important.
I believe that less roster spots make each roster spot more valuable and each decision harder.
I believe mistakes and bad decisions should be punished.
I believe more roster spots reduces the value of each spot.
I believe more roster spots reduces the importance of each pick and the difficulty of each decision.
I believe more roster spots reduces the punishment for mistakes and bad decisions.
I believe more roster spots allow my opponents more opportunities to cover up their mistakes.
I believe building a solid roster that can withstand injury is more difficult and more challenging with smaller rosters than with bigger rosters.

Somewhere around 26 Roster spots (25 in the old WCOFF) has been the standard for over a decade and I believe it should continue to be the standard.

Mark
Follow Me