KingGhidra wrote:I'd have no problem grabbing Vick at 1.12 and coming back with Faulk or Taylor at 2.01.
Provided that there were 11 Rbs taken prior, I'd have to agree.
This is my new first round cheat sheet, or a reasonable facsimile
1.01 Priest Holmes
1.02 Ahman Green
1.03 Clinton Portis
1.04 LaDainian Tomlinson
1.05 Shaun Alexander
1.06 Ricky Williams
1.07 Deuce McAllister
1.08 Edgerrin James
1.09 Jamal Lewis
1.10 Randy Moss
1.11 Marshall Faulk
1.12 ???
Ooooh, whatcha gonna do? You're on the clock, better think fast!
I think any combo of Vick-Holt-Taylor is reasonable here. Being the conservative guy I am, I may go for Taylor-WR but not only is Vick-Taylor reasonable, it could be downright scary. I can't see Tampa Bay having the Vick killing dominance it did in 2002. Vick already proved he can torch the Panthers and Saints, so that's 7-8 games of fantasy Vick dominance in my opinion. Vick would have to fall to a pre-season ranking of mid 4th rounder for me to definitely not draft him at 1.12/2.01.
M_Zimm wrote:I agree, the best RB that you could have at 1.12 would be Taylor or Faulk and I would be surprised if they were there, in my mind the top 9 picks would consist of: (in no particular order) Priest Portis LT Ahman Shawn Alexander Deuce J-Lew (assuming he gets out of trouble) Edge Ricky
So the RB pool looks something like this:
Corey Dillon Rudi Johnson D. Davis S. Davis Marshall Faulk Fred Taylor Travis Henry Kevin Barlow
I think you could still land a good pair of RBs to play all season with that available selection. Its better than waiting until the end of the 3rd round and having to play Shipp or A. Thomas all year. Also, there's always the chance Moss, Harrison, Culpepper, or Manning goes in the first round, which only makes that RB pool more talented when it gets to you.
M_Zimm wrote:To me it isn't worth taking a risk on a back like Barlow or Rudi when you can have a proven, top 3 guy at his position that will put up points every week. So you could still take Vick at 1.12 and then follow up with whoever is left in Taylor or Faulk.
Vick is a proven top 3? When did this happen? The only way his fantasy stats vault him to the top three is using standard scoring (10 yds rushing, 25 passing, etc) and lowering passing TDs to 4 points, which is designed to award QBs for running more. Under that scoring he was the #2 QB 2 years ago. However McNabb's stats show he was averaging almost 4 more points per game, just only played 10. Vick's point per game average last year didnt even come close to top 3.
As for risk, Vick has yet to complete an entire season of football. His running styles may impressive to watch, but it may have something to do with his injury risk. Vick is an injury risk, inconsistent, has virtually no weapons to rely on, and has had one good season, which as yet to be proven not to be a fluke.
Anonymous wrote: Vick is a proven top 3? When did this happen?
That would be the 2002 season in case you weren't watching. He finished 2nd or 3rd in 15 games of play.
The only way his fantasy stats vault him to the top three is using standard scoring (10 yds rushing, 25 passing, etc) and lowering passing TDs to 4 points, which is designed to award QBs for running more.
Which is standard from what I understand. I don't think it was originally designed to reward QBs for running more, but to lower overall point totals from QB TD passes. It just so happens guys like Vick, Culpepper and Plummer benefitted from it.
As for risk, Vick has yet to complete an entire season of football. His running styles may impressive to watch, but it may have something to do with his injury risk. Vick is an injury risk, inconsistent, has virtually no weapons to rely on, and has had one good season, which as yet to be proven not to be a fluke.
Playing the QB position is a risk. Whether you have the ability to scramble and run downfield or not, you still have 300 lb, 4.5 40 yard dash lineman barreling down on you, quite often from the blindside.
Culpepper has missed 7 games the last 2 seasons and McNabb missed 6 in the same time, I don't see anyone calling them injury risks. Regardless of your feelings of their actual NFL QB abilities, they are all fantasy studs. Vick is a fantasy stud. He rushed for 289 yards in 5 games last year (only 4 of which were starts). That projects to over 900 rushing yards. Everyone seems to forget that he passed for 3000 yards in addition to rushing for almost 800 in 2002. He obviously knows how to pass the ball. Playing a 5-11 schedule for the 2004 will hopefully be beneficial too.
culpepper and mcnabb have finished whole seasons at the collegiate and NFL level. Vick has not. Both are also larger than vick.
Every QB is an injury risk in reality. But with vick's size and track record you can't honestly say that the injury risks for those three players are the same. mcnabb frinsihed the most recent season btw, vick did not.
Funny, I looked into this. He is actually the same size as Clinton Portis. He's about the same size as Elway and bigger than Flutie and both of them had pretty long NFL careers and a similar play style. If there's any real knock against Vick, it's his height at 6', but it's not like he couldn't add another 10 pounds and be a respectable 225 and not lose any speed.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Plindsey88 » Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:45 pm 
