value RB vs WR

[eagle279]

With more and more teams going to the running back by committiee approach, would it not be a better strategy to draft WR, WR in the first two rounds of any FFdraft, especially if you pick in the second half of the 1st round. You can pick up two of the top five WR's and still have a decent chance of picking up a quality RB in round 3. My feeling is that the RB position is being devalued (at least from a scoring prespective) in Fantasy football. Why pass on the sure scoring potential of a tried and true top WR to pick a RB who could have his "thunder" snatched by another back who is inserted for 10-15 carries a game?

 

I have a feeling that a lot of Fantasy Football drafts this next year are going to reflect this. Insight anyone?

[Savage Beatings]

The value still comes depending upon the available field at any given position, and the drop offthat comes (or doesn't) after your pick. So, if only 5 RB's are going to be featured backs in an offense this year, then you might want to try to grab one considering the drop off that comes after they are gone. With WR's there are a lot of players in that position who can score very similar points for you throughout the season, so the drop off isn't usually as great from the Tier 2 guys to the Tier 3 guys, etc.

 

But Championships have certainly been won using the reverse strategy as well.

[The Irish Doggy]

Nah. I feel certain that stud RB theory is alive and well.

[Bronco Billy]

You do realize that as more teams appear to be willing to reduce their primary RB's role in the O that the value of featured RBs increase even more dramatically? That doesn't even begin to speak to the wild variability of repeatability in scoring of top WRs from year to year and the influence of the emphasis on the passing game in rules enforcement that have caused a wider spread of WR scoring, lowering their value?

 

Based upon your proposal, it would appear to be even more imperative to grab a RB who could be featured in the first round - that is if you are truly serious about competing for a championship.

Edited May 8, 2008 by Bronco Billy

[T_bone65]

You do realize that as more teams appear to be willing to reduce their primary RB's role in the O that the value of featured RBs increase even more dramatically? That doesn't even begin to speak to the wild variability of repeatability in scoring of top WRs from year to year and the influence of the emphasis on the passing game in rules enforcement that have caused a wider spread of WR scoring, lowering their value?

 

Based upon your proposal, it would appear to be even more imperative to grab a RB who could be featured in the first round - that is if you are truly serious about competing for a championship.

 

 

But what if your league is setup so that you don't need a RB

Edited May 8, 2008 by T_bone65

[Bronco Billy]

But what if your league is setup so that you don't need a RB

 

Then you should consider yourself and your leaguemates nothing short of brilliant for anticipating this situation and adjusting your rules for it, since the league won't be enslaved to a requirement of featured RBs being forced far to the top of the player values.

Edited May 8, 2008 by Bronco Billy

[eagle279]

Yes there are maybe five feature RB's in the NFL at present, so if you have a top 5 pick in the draft, you can celebrate....but for everyone else it seems to make more sense to draft WR, WR in the first two rounds, or even go QB, WR; or WR, QB as you want the most potential point value for your selections. I think the RBBC "IS" a serious blow to the stud RB theory of drafting.

[Bronco Billy]

Yes there are maybe five feature RB's in the NFL at present,

 

 

I think you're off by a bit there....

[peepinmofo]

What 5 RBs might we be speaking of?

[alchico]

What's a paradigm

[Savage Beatings]

What's a paradigm

 

20 cents... idiot.

[Bronco Billy]

20 cents... idiot.

 

:rimshot:

[policyvote]

With more and more teams going to the running back by committiee approach, would it not be a better strategy to draft WR, WR in the first two rounds of any FFdraft, especially if you pick in the second half of the 1st round. You can pick up two of the top five WR's and still have a decent chance of picking up a quality RB in round 3. My feeling is that the RB position is being devalued (at least from a scoring prespective) in Fantasy football. Why pass on the sure scoring potential of a tried and true top WR to pick a RB who could have his "thunder" snatched by another back who is inserted for 10-15 carries a game?

 

I have a feeling that a lot of Fantasy Football drafts this next year are going to reflect this. Insight anyone?

 

Welcome to my line of thinking, circa 2002.

 

Peace

policy

[policyvote]

Then you should consider yourself and your leaguemates nothing short of brilliant for anticipating this situation and adjusting your rules for it, since the league won't be enslaved to a requirement of featured RBs being forced far to the top of the player values.

 

My local's been a auction keeper league, striving to balance QB/RB/WR production, for like fifteen years. The original founders were rotisserie baseball geeks who basically took those rules and applied them to football. The result has been a fair, balanced league wherein almost any draft strategy is viable if you have the acumen. In the past eight years I've made the playoffs the last six in a row, winning it all four years ago and last year. I typically use a balanced, WR-heavy approach. I've been pounding the table on this site for years; IMO playing "fantasy running backs" in a serpentine draft format is niether competitive, nor fair, nor fun.

 

Peace

policy

Edited May 8, 2008 by policyvote

[Savage Beatings]

What 5 RBs might we be speaking of?

 

I just pulled that number out of my heiny in my response to the question. I think people just ran with it.

[eagle279]

I was afraid it would come to this.....

 

Ok, lets take an example of a points per reception league (yes, in a non ppr league stud RB makes more sense at least in first round), out of the top 32 points producers you only have 7 RB's (Westbrook, LT, Addai, Peterson, Portis, Barber, and J. Lewis). Out of the same 32 there is 1- TE (Witten); 13 OB's (Brady, Romo, P Manning, TRoethlisberger, Brees, Anderson, Hasselbeck,Favre, Palmer, Kitna, Cutler, Warner, and McNabb): and 11 WR's (Moss, Owens, Wayne, Edwards, Houshmandzadeh, Fitz, Johnson, W. Walker, Colston, slipping in the parking lot Marshall, and T. Im old Holt).

 

Of the top 15 you only have two RB's--Westbrook with 358.5 pts, and LT with 326.85 pts. In the same top 15 you have 8 QB's and 5 WR's (Moss 357.30, Owens 307.00, Wayne 294.70, Edwards 289.20, and TJ Joushmandzadeh 282.20.

 

If I draft with say pick 12 of a 12 team draft I could get 2 of the top 5 WR's and then still be able to get a starting RB in a team that has a RBBC approach and then handcuff his partner with a later pick. For example, you can do this with two teams (say the Jets whom seem to be working hard on improving the offensive line, and CIN where both RB will be avaidable after the first two rounds). So pick three is a RB. Pick 4 you take a top 5 QB and from there you fill out your roster depending on number of players per position.

 

Granted injuries, and acending, and declining values of players will change who the top 15 of 2008 are (put guessing tihem is what makes fantasy football so fun) but I would be willing to make a wag (wild assed guess) that the list will once again be full of WR's and QB's not RB's.

Edited May 8, 2008 by eagle279

[yo mama]

I went RB-WR-WR-WR from the 1.3 spot in my local last year (12 team league) and made it to the superbowl. The issue isn't which position you're picking, so much as the points that pick generates for you. There were a lot of RB disappointments last year who were drafted in the first three rounds, due to both under-performance and injury. The three WRs I got all ended up in the top 14 WRs or so from a point per game perspective and vastly out performed most of the RBs I passed on. However, the RB2 I grabbed in the 5th round was Jamal Lewis, and he had a banner year. And that's the vulnerability of grabbing lots of WRs early: even if they pay off you're gambling that you can good RBs either later in the draft, or during the year.

Edited May 8, 2008 by yo mama

[Big Country]

I was afraid it would come to this.....

 

Ok, lets take an example of a points per reception league (yes, in a non ppr league stud RB makes more sense at least in first round), out of the top 32 points producers you only have 7 RB's (Westbrook, LT, Addai, Peterson, Portis, Barber, and J. Lewis). Out of the same 32 there is 1- TE (Witten); 13 OB's (Brady, Romo, P Manning, TRoethlisberger, Brees, Anderson, Hasselbeck,Favre, Palmer, Kitna, Cutler, Warner, and McNabb): and 11 WR's (Moss, Owens, Wayne, Edwards, Houshmandzadeh, Fitz, Johnson, W. Walker, Colston, slipping in the parking lot Marshall, and T. Im old Holt).

 

Of the top 15 you only have two RB's--Westbrook with 358.5 pts, and LT with 326.85 pts. In the same top 15 you have 8 QB's and 5 WR's (Moss 357.30, Owens 307.00, Wayne 294.70, Edwards 289.20, and TJ Joushmandzadeh 282.20.

 

If I draft with say pick 12 of a 12 team draft I could get 2 of the top 5 WR's and then still be able to get a starting RB in a team that has a RBBC approach and then handcuff his partner with a later pick. For example, you can do this with two teams (say the Jets whom seem to be working hard on improving the offensive line, and CIN where both RB will be avaidable after the first two rounds). So pick three is a RB. Pick 4 you take a top 5 QB and from there you fill out your roster depending on number of players per position.

 

Granted injuries, and acending, and declining values of players will change who the top 15 of 2008 are (put guessing tihem is what makes fantasy football so fun) but I would be willing to make a wag (wild assed guess) that the list will once again be full of WR's and QB's not RB's.

 

Value is based on point differential, not points scored. I would elaborate more, but I have to run to a meeting. If no one else chimes in to add detail, I will get back to it.

[cmutts]

In my draft this summer, I am picking 1.7 and then 2.6. Based on possible keepers/non keepers, at 1.7 I am hoping to grab Portis. If not then Lynch. At 2.6, I will consider either RB or WR. This is a 1 ppr league and I may very well take a top WR here. If there is a 20 carrier RB when you pick, I think you really need to grab him. Come the 2nd round, review the Tiers for RB and WR and take the highest rank player.

Edited May 8, 2008 by cmutts

[The Irish Doggy]

I've been pounding the table on this site for years; IMO playing "fantasy running backs" in a serpentine draft format is niether competitive, nor fair, nor fun.

 

Peace

policy

 

 

Pound harder. With a shoe.

[Seahawks21]

I have drafted WR/WR in the first two rounds twice in my fantasy football life. The first was about four years ago, when I drafted T.O. & Moss with the last pick in the 1st round and first pick in the 2nd. I finished dead last that season and was not competetive. Two years ago I drafted Chad Johnson and Torry Holt in the first two rounds. I got second to last and would have been much worse had I not gotten a little lucky by drafting Lamont Jordan a few rounds later. What I have found is that WR's aren't nearly as consistent as RB's. If you have a WR based draft, there will be weeks were you put up ridiculously low point totals. Most good WR's only score about 8 TD's per season, and lots of the good ones score them in bunches, leaving plenty of weeks where they don't score. Your fantasy team will lose these weeks. The point totals may look similar on paper, but the WR route leaves you terribly inconsistent.

 

Put it this way...I would much rather have Dwayne Bowe as my #2 receiver than have Chester Taylor as my #2 RB.

[Bier Meister]

strategy will also depend upon scoring system (ppr vs. non-ppr) and how many of a position you can start ( ie: up to 3 rb's, 4 wr's, etc)

[Bronco Billy]

Value is based on point differential, not points scored. I would elaborate more, but I have to run to a meeting. If no one else chimes in to add detail, I will get back to it.

 

Is it that time of the year again?

[Big Country]

Is it that time of the year again?

 

Starting a little early this year. I may just have to write an article on it and see if I can't get DMD or WW to sticky it to the top of the advice forum.

[Bronco Billy]

Starting a little early this year. I may just have to write an article on it and see if I can't get DMD or WW to sticky it to the top of the advice forum.

 

Agreed. You're the right person to do it, too, IMNSHO.