Best-ball strategies for Quarterbacks

The reality in both traditional and best ball leagues is that you mix in running backs and wide receivers early and often throughout your draft. Those positions typically call for at least two and maybe up to four different starters each week. But quarterbacks require just one starter (super flex aside) and that already makes them a unique position because they are the top scorers in almost all fantasy league scoring.

In the “best ball” format, there are no starting decisions. The league software automatically awards you with the highest-scoring quarterback on your roster for that week.

In traditional league play, owning the highest-scoring quarterback is an advantage, balanced by what you gave up to draft him. In best ball, is it better to draft a top quarterback, or can you make up that difference by owning two of the Top-10 scorers? Where is the bang for your buck? Let’s find out.

Average draft position for best ball quarterbacks

First off, this is when the Top-24 quarterbacks are drafted in the average best ball draft this summer. It’s not any different than traditional leagues. By around Round 8, the first 11 quarterbacks are taken on average.

In a traditional league with point-per-reception scoring, this is roughly what to expect. Last year, the quarterbacks were considered more valuable coming off a season where the Top-3 turned in monster performances. By Round 5, eight quarterbacks were selected with two taken in each of Round 2 to Round 5.

Quarterbacks have been devalued from last year when Patrick Mahomes and Joe Burrow dropped in production and the position had enough newcomers to lower the perceived reliability. For this season, expect to spend a Round 3 or Round 4 pick to reach a Top-4 quarterback. Last year, it cost you a second or a third-rounder.

Just like last year, the Top-15 drafted quarterbacks are gone by Week 9 when everyone has their starter and a few get a high-end QB2 for their teams. Quarterbacks are slightly cheaper this year, so that the Top-8 are gone by Round 6 whereas they were all taken by Round 5 in 2023.

Mixing and matching quarterbacks

One truism in fantasy football trumps all else – “you have to pick players that match or exceed the expectation of their draft spot.” At the core, no matter what your strategy is, if you do not pick players that at least repay the value you drafted them for, nothing else matters. And yes, some of your players will be injured and ruin everything you tried to accomplish. Welcome to fantasy football.

In best ball leagues, there is a sense that volume overcomes individual talent, meaning that if you wait on a quarterback like so many do, then you just grab a couple of “good” ones, expecting they’ll combine for optimal weekly scores that equate to a “great” quarterback.

Since every week matters, I gave each quarterback their average fantasy game score for any missing games.

Here are the 2023 Top-24 if they had not missed games.

As usual, there is a major advantage to owning a Top-3 quarterback. The slope gets smoother after the first five quarterbacks are taken, meaning that the difference between the No. 8 and the No. 15 quarterbacks is negligible at around one or two points per game.

Combining two or three later round quarterbacks = Top-10 equivalent

No.

It doesn’t. Don’t kid yourself.

Having done the statistical studies in the past, whenever you grab that QB2 in the hopes that he’ll magically line up good and bad weeks with your first drafted quarterback and boost your points significantly is just wrong. Yes, best ball means that you get the optimal score from your position. No, that in no way compensates for a weak QB1. You could collect four or five of the bottom-end quarterbacks and all combined they won’t equal a top quarterback.

The reason a top quarterback is elite is because in most weeks, and maybe nearly all, he’ll generate more fantasy points than a lesser quarterback. There will be a mild bump in total points from the optimal scoring, but it rarely equates to more than 40 or 50 more fantasy points over a season. You’ll see the same bump from combining nearly any two quarterbacks from the Top-20.

The higher scoring your first quarterback proves, the less your second quarterback matters. Almost every week will rely on that top quarterback, and your backup provides little more than a bye week cover.

There are great reasons to have a highly drafted QB2 – bye weeks, injury coverage, plus the chance he has a surprise big season. But he’s not going to add much to what your QB1 is already going to do.

Laying back and drafting two quarterbacks outside of the Top-5 is a disadvantage at the highest-scoring position. Don’t expect on “optimal scoring” to carry your team of average players. Build an average team, get an average score. Best ball or standard play doesn’t really matter.

There are reasons to own three quarterbacks, but it’s more about covering your bases should one be lost for the season to injury. It doesn’t add many points to your total because you just get one quarterback score, and the deeper you go in the draft, the less likely that quarterback will top the other two.

It makes sense to have a strong set of quarterbacks. But your QB1 is going to do all your heavy lifting… or not.

Bottom Line

The numbers show that your first quarterback will supply the bulk of your weekly best-ball points for the position, and the difference-makers at the top need little more than a bye-week cover. There just isn’t the bang for the buck in adding an early second quarterback when you snagged yours by the fifth round.

Fantasy football has been previously gripped by the “zero-QB theory.” Sure, you can win with a fantasy team that doesn’t have a top quarterback. But the rest of your team has to deliver more.

Play a few best ball contests and in each, try a different strategy at quarterback with at least one team getting a Top-3. Check your results at the end of the year. While deeper quarterbacks do not distinguish themselves much, those prized top scorers provide an advantage that no other position can provide.