This article fails to point out the most important aspect of Michael Vick's fantasy numbers: his inconsistancy. He's one of the most inconsistant scorers af all QBs (though not quite as bad as Grossman). If you have a solid fantasy squad, having Vick on your team can be team suicide.
Here's a HYPOTHETICAL example to show my point:
You have the best team in the league, not counting your QB. Your non-QB positions average 150 points per game, while all other teams average around 140 points per game (non-QB).
But your 10 point advantage doesnt mean much if Ron Mexico is your QB and has a few huge games despite the stinkers he puts up more often than not. Its feast or famine for him, and he scores the following points over the first 6 weeks:
11
45
10
44
15
9
(total points: 134)
as opposed to the QB on the team you face each week:
22
20
21
19
26
21
(total points: 129)
The writer of this article would say "WOW, Vick had more points! He must be awesome in Fantasy Football!"
But what he fails to see is that the inconsistancy would kill some teams. Even with a 10 point edge before QBs are taken into consideration, the team with the 'worse' QB (5 total points less) will win 4 of these 6 games. In this example, Vick's team either won in a blowout or lost where a consistant QB would have won.
Now I realize that this is an extreme example, and even Vick isnt that inconsistant, but I'm just trying to say that if you have a solid team, an inconsistant QB can do much more help than good. If the rest of your team is good enough to take you into the playoffs, you dont want Vick's 'occasional' horrible game to tank your otherwise solid weeks. Total #s dont show the whole picture.
...please note that this exmple assumes that the rest of your team is very solid. If you have a sub-par team, then having a QB like Vick can be just what you need. If the rest of your team is going to be outscored 2/3 of the time, your only chance to make it to the playoffs may be the occasional huge game by an inconsistant player.
"Cincinatti leads the league in 'Johnsons'" - John Madden
Crippler wrote:This article fails to point out the most important aspect of Michael Vick's fantasy numbers: his inconsistancy. He's one of the most inconsistant scorers af all QBs (though not quite as bad as Grossman). If you have a solid fantasy squad, having Vick on your team can be team suicide.
Here's a HYPOTHETICAL example to show my point:
You have the best team in the league, not counting your QB. Your non-QB positions average 150 points per game, while all other teams average around 140 points per game (non-QB).
But your 10 point advantage doesnt mean much if Ron Mexico is your QB and has a few huge games despite the stinkers he puts up more often than not. Its feast or famine for him, and he scores the following points over the first 6 weeks:
11 45 10 44 15 9 (total points: 134)
as opposed to the QB on the team you face each week:
22 20 21 19 26 21 (total points: 129)
The writer of this article would say "WOW, Vick had more points! He must be awesome in Fantasy Football!"
But what he fails to see is that the inconsistancy would kill some teams. Even with a 10 point edge before QBs are taken into consideration, the team with the 'worse' QB (5 total points less) will win 4 of these 6 games. In this example, Vick's team either won in a blowout or lost where a consistant QB would have won.
Now I realize that this is an extreme example, and even Vick isnt that inconsistant, but I'm just trying to say that if you have a solid team, an inconsistant QB can do much more help than good. If the rest of your team is good enough to take you into the playoffs, you dont want Vick's 'occasional' horrible game to tank your otherwise solid weeks. Total #s dont show the whole picture.
...please note that this exmple assumes that the rest of your team is very solid. If you have a sub-par team, then having a QB like Vick can be just what you need. If the rest of your team is going to be outscored 2/3 of the time, your only chance to make it to the playoffs may be the occasional huge game by an inconsistant player.
Why use a hypothetical situation when you can use the real thing? I'm in a pretty vanilla scoring league. Here's Vick's production on my fantasy team this year alongside Peyton Mannings productions:
Obviously, it depends on your scoring system, but I think in most leagues, Vick has been extremely consistent THIS YEAR. Certainly, in years past that hasn't been the case but it is impossible to argue against his numbers this year. People are just hating on him because they are bias against him being an NFL QB. Plain and simple.
Your argument is correct, but Vick does not fit the hypothetical situation you're giving.
Why use a hypothetical situation when you can use the real thing? I'm in a pretty vanilla scoring league. Here's Vick's production on my fantasy team this year alongside Peyton Mannings productions:
Obviously, it depends on your scoring system, but I think in most leagues, Vick has been extremely consistent THIS YEAR. Certainly, in years past that hasn't been the case but it is impossible to argue against his numbers this year. People are just hating on him because they are bias against him being an NFL QB. Plain and simple.
Your argument is correct, but Vick does not fit the hypothetical situation you're giving.
Thanks for the counterpoint. Here are the stats in my league, where the settings are as follows:
Completions (0.2)
Incomplete Passes (-0.2)
Passing Yards (30 yards per point; 3 points at 325 yards)
Passing Touchdowns (6)
Interceptions (-2)
Rushing Yards (15 yards per point; 3 points at 150 yards)
Rushing Touchdowns (6)
Vick's stats are a lot more variable under these conditions.
As you can see, his numbers jump back and forth from 10-15 to 30-35, especially after week 2.
But you do bring up a good point, that Vick is a little more consistant this year than in years past. Perhaps using Grossman is a better example.
However, regarding your statement, "People are just hating on him because they are bias against him being an NFL QB. Plain and simple.", I think it has a lot more to do with his performance in years past. Points systems also have a lot to do with it, as you stated.
"Cincinatti leads the league in 'Johnsons'" - John Madden
Definately any league that gives points for completions, as well as 6 points for passing TDs is going to put Vick at a disadvantage. So I can see where you're coming from.
As far as people being bias based on year's past, I suppose that is part of it. But at the same time people with NO past such as Romo and even Cutler, who has yet to play a snap, people are falling in love with. I just think if Vick has done well in your league, after 12 weeks of pretty consistent play, you got to bite the bullet and admit that this isn't last year or the year before - it's this year and this year he's doing his fantasy owners damn proud.
To think I was kicking myself - I mean, really mad at myself - for drafting Vick when I could have gotten Bledsoe 4 rounds later...I guess that worked out.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Crippler » Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:22 am 
