‹ Main Site Forums Home My Account

How does 2QBs affect QB rankings


#1

Hi,

How would you say having a 2QB league would alter top 200 rankings? Would this generally make QBs more valuable, less valuable, or unchanged in terms of a top 200 compared to the current top 200 list?

Thanks,
Erik


#2

it changes it drastically. QBs become a rare, and effective commodity. without a doubt on average QBs score more than any other position. so having 2 of those in the top 12, is like having 2 top 12 RBs in a normal league lineup setting. picture being able to start bell and alvin kamara. zeke and fournette. gurley and gordon. its an instant advantage because there is a drop off, and a rarity to them. there are only 32 of them that will start in a given week. less than that on bye weeks. having startable QBs in that system is dire. but, you can still wait on them a little bit. think of it this way, a 12 man league means that every team has 2, so that means 24 QBs have to be gone. and that not everyone gets 3 because that would be 36 of the 32 possible starters. its a crazy balancing act with them, that makes it super important to have at least 3 QBs. so the top 200, hell top 50, becomes very QB heavy.


#3

It makes a difference, but I think it’s actually fairly overstated.

Let’s take a look at snapshot of each position from last year:

RB

  1. Gurley 383
  2. McCaffrey 228 (-155)
  3. Miller 193 (-190)
  4. Murray 171 (-212)

WR

  1. Brown 310
  2. Green 226 (-84)
  3. Cooks 221 (-89)
  4. Juju 197 (-113)

QB

  1. Wilson 347
  2. Ben 260 (-87)
  3. Taylor 222 (-125)
  4. McCown 205 (-142)

RB drops off much faster than QB. WR doesn’t drop off quite as fast, but you often start more, even in 2 QB and superflex. For this reason, I treat QBs roughly the same as in normal leagues. Everything just happens earlier.

Edit: the 4 players at each position are the the 1st, 10th, 15th and 20th finishers at each position. I tried to mark them that way, but it changes them to 1-4.


#4

that takes into account just the drop off. the main point is that you still need startable options, and as there are less of them to choose from than any other position, you need to have at least 3 to get you through bye weeks or you will be giving yourself a disadvantage 2 times a season. and that doesnt even take into account injuries. and a positional drop off of 150 points from 1st to 20th is still pretty big. its no 220, but at least with RBs you can find other guys to work with. you just cant with QBs in that kind of system.


#5

You don’t need more startable QBs than either WR or RB, but yes, you do need more bodies – though it’s worth noting, this makes more guys fsntasy relevant too, which somewhat offsets this. What I take exception with is that people think you need to take 2 QB1s early when the math just doesn’t support that at all. The relative value of positions changes a bit, but not nearly as much as most people seem to think, and the relative value of QBs within the position doesn’t change at all.


#6

still not the point. its not that you have more QBs to start than WR or RB, its that the pool to choose from is tiny. 32. the math says with everyone starting 2, thats 24 gone. so 12 people have 8 QBs to grab for depth. that means someone is getting screwed on bye weeks. well, 4 people are depending on how people draft. and that does still give you a positional advantage, because if you do get 2 top 12 QBs, you will score about 300 more points in the season than the guy that waited and got 2 20s ranked guys by your own math. thats not to say you have to take QBs early, but if want a stud to offset your weaker guy later, then you do have to go early. just like with RB. 150 points is still a big difference. thats 10 points less a game. 10 points a game will win you more than you think. so i wouldnt devalue it just because its really not important at all in a standard lineup. if you see a scarcity, it becomes more important just by nature.


#7

This is a great question @flad, one that I have wondered myself being new to a dynasty league that employs the same 2QB system. I inherited a team with tier 2-3 QB’s (Tannehill, Bradford, and Bridgewater) and going into the draft with the 1.01 and 1.07, I’ve wondered the best strategy.
Thanks to both @BusterD and @DFWB for great points/counterpoints as well.


#8

150 is a big difference. 212 is quite a bit more. My point was not that you should wait on both QBs until everyone has 2, rather that it’s more efficient use of draft capital to get say, QB 10 and 18 and still have the ability to get a top 10 RB and WR.


#9

which im on board with, but they way you are phrasing it, it sounds like you are way devaluing the QB spot in a 2QB system. because dont forget, in a 2QB league QB 10 will go around round 3 or 4. so either way you have to go QB early to even do what you are talking about. the 10th QB off the board right now ADP wise is going at 3.07. and then the 18th QB is going at spot 6.04. so technically you just agreed with me lol. i just dont think you should devalue it as much as you are. i will say, that you can still get values and sleepers on QBs so its still viable to go one early and then one mid to late. but you still need 3 to be effective the whole season. thats all im trying to say.


#10

Then I didn’t do a very good job explaining, haha. No, I was saying that it doesn’t affect my strategy all that much, except that you need a couple more bodies, and everything happens a few rounds earlier.

Although I will say, you very much can survive (or even thrive) with your first QB being around the 15th guy taken. Give me three guys from the Bortle, Dalton, Smith, Keenum level and a flier Rookie, and I’m golden, as long as the I was able to get stud RBs and WRs earlier. There is certainly risk, and less room for error if you wait this long, but it can definitely pay off in other parts of your roster.

Edit: I wouldn’t recommend this if you’re picking around the turn (either side). It can be very hard to judge when those 2nd and third run a will start, and if you gamble on the long end if the turn, you could very well regret it.


#11

I’ve played in a 2 QB league for years now and it makes a HUGE difference. Depending on factors like # of people in the league, how many QBs can be rostered all make the difference. I’m in a 12 team league with 3 QB’s max on rosters…if you do the math that means that some people are being stuck with no Bye week options as well as MAJOR injury concerns if someone goes down. I personally try to take 1 QB by the end of the 3rd (based on how fast they go), 1 in the 5th-8th, and then I sit and try to find the right time to start the last wave of QB runs.


#12

ahhh haha so we were agreeing-disagreeing? lol it happens. i was gonna say thats a bold move. so yeah we agree then in principle. timing and execution is probably a bit off still, but thats to be expected from person to person. also i completely agree about the turn. it makes it kinda nutty in a 2 QB system


#13

Pretty much


#14

Alright @DFWB and @BusterD taking all of this into consideration, let’s do a case study example. In this particular “random” 2QB league (32 roster spots, 6 QB limit), your team has only Bradford, Bridgewater, Tannehill, FitzP, and Hoyer (you’re not a dumb FF player you just inherited a lousy team).

Your RB’s are as followed: Mixon, Booker, D. Foreman, Langford, and Yeldon.

This upcoming draft you have the 1.01, 1.09, 2.01, 2.05, 3.01, and 3.04…

Is there any argument for not taking Barkley at 1 overall? For comparison, last season Mahomes, Kizer, and Watson were all taken round 1 (Trubisky was only QB to make it into round 2).


#15

oh thats an interesting question. i have never done a dynasty 2QB league before. hmm lets think… barkley at 1 overall is just a must. he is a next generational talent and you need RB bad. with the 1.09 and 2.01, you will probably get snuffed out of the good QBs. but on the flip side, your QBs are all made of glass. i would take the 1.09 and 2.01 and try to trade up to secure both. but that, is a tough tough question. because logically you have decent RBs depending on what you believe, and a QB room that is just waiting to fall apart. so what do you do? do you take a QB early who may not even start this year (its possible none of them do) or do you take a guy locked in to be the giants starter for years to come? its the same question you face in a redraft 2QB. you have pick 3. aaron rodgers is there. but so is gurley, or bell, or zeke. do you take the RB? or the QB? as much as the value changes in a 2QB, im still taking the RB that early. besides, with a team like that, chances are you are not competing this year. so yeah its barkley, but with a twinge of ahh man i wish i could take a QB and feel good about it. excellent question though.

Edit: my comment about taking a RB that early is really only for the first few picks. it just comes down to if those three are there. which is the same as the delima between barkley and one of the rookie QBs. if it was pick 1.02 i would take a QB.


#16

I’d consider trading back, but would need a serious haul. In my superflex dynasty, the the top 4 QBs went in the first. Allen was a late 2nd rounder.


#17

Kind of agree with you. Was actually going to try and package my 1.09 and 2.05 (hopefully) to move down two spots to potentially nab a Josh Allen (spoiler I am a UW-alum and thus blind to the criticism).

If there was an obvious no brainer QB, I could actually consider passing on SB but I just don’t see it there. Completely on board with packaging and moving up in R1 though but agreed if no one bites, I am not competing this yr anyways.


#18

Good point, I have considered moving down but haven’t gotten any reasonable offers. Interesting piece on Allen. I don’t see him leaving round 1 in my league unfortunately.


#19

another option is to stand pat where you are. and not even take one. if you dont think you can compete, start to build. because the beatiful thing about this is, other players will fall. you might be able to turn that 1.09 into another fantastic RB, same for the 2.01, and 2.05. you could get christian kirk at 2.05, maaaaybe a guice at 1.09, if not it would be a michel, ROJO, freeman, type guy. and then barkley. thats a pretty good start to rebuilding from the ground up. plus trading pieces are nice too. you might be able to pick up a michel at 1.09 and trade him to someone who really wants him for a QB straight up. with that many picks, you got options.


#20

One of the QBs will likely be there at 1.09.