Are QB's Overvalued in SuperFlex Leagues

[polk_high_allstar]

Just finished my 1st year in a SuperFlex League (team in signature). In this league i find that a few owners value QB's like they are almost untouchable. Some have 3-4 NFL starters on their rosters and I believe that they try to drive up the value. In my drive to make a run at the championship I kind of bought into this as well with trading for Rivers (traded Carr and Harvin for Rivers and a 3rd). Would like to know anyone opinion on SuperFlex leagues like this. Are QB's just as valuable as they are in 2QB leagues or can teams win with a WR or RB at that position.

Cheers

[bigchiefbc]

Just finished my 1st year in a SuperFlex League (team in signature). In this league i find that a few owners value QB's like they are almost untouchable. Some have 3-4 NFL starters on their rosters and I believe that they try to drive up the value. In my drive to make a run at the championship I kind of bought into this as well with trading for Rivers (traded Carr and Harvin for Rivers and a 3rd). Would like to know anyone opinion on SuperFlex leagues like this. Are QB's just as valuable as they are in 2QB leagues or can teams win with a WR or RB at that position.

Cheers

It really depends on the scoring system in your league.

In my league's scoring system, an average week for a QB is equivalent to a good week for a WR/RB. It's not rare for a WR to outscore a QB, but I'd say in general that if you're going to play a WR/RB in your superflex spot in a non-injury, non-bye-week situation, he better be pretty good. Otherwise, an average QB is better to stick there. But if someone is hoarding all of the QBs in your league and he's trying to screw you, it's nice to be able to tell him to go stick it and just run with a WR there. You are at a slight disadvantage, but it's not huge.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

You don't have to play a QB in the superflex spot, but I think most of the time you'd be better off doing so (particularly in standard). On average, even poor QBs manage to score about 10 points per week. You'd be hard-pressed to find that kind of consistency for your superflex spot from a RB or WR. In PPR, a WR may do the trick, but generally a QB at superflex will be your best option.

[joeday]

I am in two superflex leagues, 1 I waited on QB in the start up draft (2010) and missed the playoffs for the first 4 years, finally made it in 2014...the reason I made the finals in 2014 was Big Ben and Rivers were my QBs after some trades. In the other one I took QB in the start-up with my first two picks (Luck and Brees in 2012)...havent missed the playoffs yet, and won the ship last year with a suspect group of RBs and WRs. That said, I think owners in superflex take QBs in rookie drafts way earlier than they should. Last year people were talking about Geno and Manuel as top 3 picks, this year it was JFF, Bortles and Teddy. Unless there is an Andrew Luck type of QB in a draft then I am not going to pass on the Bells, Lacys, Hopkins, Watkins, Evans, OBJs of the world to take a rookie QB high.

[sloth8u]

im in the league with you, and you may very well be talking about me since i own brees, romo, cam, and teddy. 1st of all. im not driving the value up. i took cam, then traded for brees in our draft. didnt worry about grabbing qb's until romo falls to the 10th and why not at that point. then teddy falls to the mid 1st in our draft (believe it was 7 or 8), so i trade up to get him. at which point im set at qb for the next 10 years and never have to worry about getting a qb presumably.

to answer your question though. the qb carries more value because in general, if you have a decent qb...your weekly floor is limited while the weekly ceiling is higher. essentially solid qb's will avg nearly the same as a wr1 or high end wr2, in our league in particular it takes one glance at the scoring to see that our #6 wr julio avg 16 a game. 20 qb's avg that or better. take into account that 3 wr's must be started, at which pt wr3's are avgeraging 10 pts a game. 2rb's must be started and rb2's are putting up 11 pts a game. so yes, in general you are at an advantage starting a qb in your superflex. do you want to start a guy who is averaging 16 and has the potential to go big like a qb can, or do you want to start a guy who is averaging 10 or 11, and very rarely has the potential for a huge week in that spot?

now thats not to say that it is necessary to have a qb as your superflex on a weekly basis, it just gives you a higher floor and ceiling imo. it can be deceiving when your putting a non qb in that spot and he's scoring big, but dont forget the games when he's scoring 10 while the qb24 in the league is scoring 25 pts that week. or when that guy is scoring 20 for you, and the qb is also scoring 20...all im getting at here is that qb's are a safer bet to score more in general.

now to the value end of things. there are only 32 starting qb's. 32, thats it. there are endless options at other positions. of course injuries happen, but for the most part...you know who the starting qb is going to be week1 aswell as week 16 for most teams. throw in to the equation that the qb's that everyone wants are franchise qb's who will be filling the position for multiple years, and you can see why there is the attached extra value.

you dont "need" to start 2 solid qb's to win, but it sure helps your cause. especially if you dont have a very high end option to flex.

[Cult of Dionysus]

While I am a huge proponent of Superflex, I think that the scoring settings have to be such that the floors of QBs are a lot lower than what is typical and more in-line with other positions. Meaning, if a QB has a poor stat line, he should generate 2-6 points, not 8-12, which is what happens in standard leagues.

The best way to achieve this is to penalize for INTs. I typically have a -3 setting & another -2 for Pick6s. That really equalizes the positions nicely. If you look at my Beer League or USFL Superflex, each of which uses such a set up, the positions are relatively balanced and you can get away without having a solid 2nd QB...

[sloth8u]

While I am a huge proponent of Superflex, I think that the scoring settings have to be such that the floors of QBs are a lot lower than what is typical and more in-line with other positions. Meaning, if a QB has a poor stat line, he should generate 2-6 points, not 8-12, which is what happens in standard leagues.

The best way to achieve this is to penalize for INTs. I typically have a -3 setting & another -2 for Pick6s. That really equalizes the positions nicely. If you look at my Beer League or USFL Superflex, each of which uses such a set up, the positions are relatively balanced and you can get away without having a solid 2nd QB...

there are some nice scoring settings out there that i play in that puts everyone on level ground. i dont commish any of them and dont know the exact settings but you certainly do not need 2 qb's in balanced leagues.

[Factory of Sadness]

I agree with Cult. Great rules- and with the second QB not needed, no reason he shouldn't sell me Romo on the cheap:)

[knotts4372]

im in the same league with slot and polk high and actually had a long and bit heated discussion on the boards about this exact topic. would love to see more opinions on this matter. from how it looks sloth is very very high value on qb while myself and polk high tend to value them only slightly higher than a normal 1 qb league. heres how i see it

yes its a good strategy to draft qb early but also can screw you cause in lots of cases you will have solid qb but the rest of your team is weak. i for one did take arod early and then built the rest of my team waiting on my 2nd qb and have a very studly team where i play guys like djax in my superflex spot and was top points for the year tho playoffs i faded due to arod shitting the bed week 15.

in summation id just like more opinions here cause i really dont understand why even 3rd tier qb get this big boost in value in some ppl minds and go several rds earlier than normal. perfect example i offered jordy nelson for cam and was rebuked severely for it. when imo its a very equal trade especially seeing how he needed wr and i could use a 2nd qb

[Cult of Dionysus]

I agree with Cult. Great rules- and with the second QB not needed, no reason he shouldn't sell me Romo on the cheap:)

Make me an offer I can't refuse, and he's yours.

[rewolf399]

I'd say that the answer depends on several factors. The biggest reasons I'd say you can get away with a WR in the super flex in your league is that it is PPR and it is IDP and deep enough IDP to make up the positional advantage someone may have by using a better than average qb in the super flex spot.

[sloth8u]

knotts..djax in your flex is averaging 12 a game. not bad, but not as much as the majority of qb. qb's also have the greater potential to put up more points any given week. you had a great year, but take a look at your team and in this idp league...you are well above average on the defensive side of things. all 4 teams who did well were all pretty solid on defense if you notice. i would say that the defense is the biggest difference in us 4 and the others. not who is flexing what position.

[JamesNoll]

That said, I think owners in superflex take QBs in rookie drafts way earlier than they should. Last year people were talking about Geno and Manuel as top 3 picks, this year it was JFF, Bortles and Teddy.

I feel as though qbs hold great value in superflex. Trying to rebuild in a superflex is a lot more difficult than trying to rebuild your traditional 12 team ppr league. Without the qbs, your a pretender
As for the quote, taking advantage of the qb love is 1 way to accelerate the rebuild imo. I've been rebuilding my superflex over the last 2 years, & came into the 14 rookie draft with Matt Ryan & Matt Stafford entrenched as my starters. When Bortles fell to me at pick 10 I didn't hesitate to draft him. Around week 11 he had a few good games, I immediately sent out 7-8 trade offers. I ended getting Hopkins & what turned into 2.4 this year. Weather you view them as currency or assets, they remain very important in this format

[joeday]

That said, I think owners in superflex take QBs in rookie drafts way earlier than they should. Last year people were talking about Geno and Manuel as top 3 picks, this year it was JFF, Bortles and Teddy.

I feel as though qbs hold great value in superflex. Trying to rebuild in a superflex is a lot more difficult than trying to rebuild your traditional 12 team ppr league. Without the qbs, your a pretender
As for the quote, taking advantage of the qb love is 1 way to accelerate the rebuild imo. I've been rebuilding my superflex over the last 2 years, & came into the 14 rookie draft with Matt Ryan & Matt Stafford entrenched as my starters. When Bortles fell to me at pick 10 I didn't hesitate to draft him. Around week 11 he had a few good games, I immediately sent out 7-8 trade offers. I ended getting Hopkins & what turned into 2.4 this year. Weather you view them as currency or assets, they remain very important in this format

Oh teddy fell to me in one of mine at 1.12, of course I took him, but I wasn't gonna pass on Evans or obj at 1.2 to take QBs that may or may not pan out.

[slaughterrt]

I am commish of this league and a team owner that made it to the finals. My strategy going into the start up draft last year was to draft QB back to back in the first two rounds. I grabbed Stafford and Cutler (got flack for Cutler over guys like Tanny and RG3) in round one and two. Going in to the season, I felt good about my QB situation but I figured I couldn't be too careful. I drafted Johnny Football in the rookie draft (mid first round) and acquired Mettenberger during the season. My experience in these type of leagues is to either draft/over pay for a good option, or take shots on rookies before they hit. I have had mixed results grabbing vets in the startups and acquiring rookie QBs.

I believe the reason that I think this way, is that an average QB will produce (or at least have a higher floor) than your 3rd RB or 4th WR. If you are stacked at other positions and can have a viable WR4, then you obviously don't need two top QBs. My thoughts about having two very good QBs is that my QBs can cover each others bye week. Also, QBs traditionally have a pretty good shelf life, which is conparative to WRs, but much more than RBs. Another reason, whether logical or not, is that in another SuperFlex league, I ended up with Cam and Jimmy Graham as my top two picks (pick trading involved), and find myself trying to dig my way out of mediocrity. Yes, I know you can't judge everything based on one league, but I wanted stability at my QB and SuperFlex, and I think starting QBs as both spots offers the most stability.

These are some of my views on the matter, based on my experience. I know some will agree and some won't. I do also look forward to other views and opinions on the topic.