WaterMan Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 A 10 league team has enough players left over in FA to start 8 WRs on each team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gablemancer Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) A 10 league team has enough players left over in FA to start 8 WRs on each team. I dunno I could only really start like 6 or 7 if I was allowed. I wish the league I played in had 12 teams though, it'd make things that much more interesting. The truth is there's still only 32 running backs who can start one week as opposed to 64+ wide receivers each week. You decide which is slightly more valuable. I'm still trying to figure this out as RBBC are hell. We can thank Shanny for this can't we? EDIT - Lord Opie: The smacktalk that comes out of the league is worth being in it. There's really only 3/4 owners in the league who really suck. And for some reason my mom is not one of them. Half of those owners are outside the family. And I just realized I didn't draft Marshall but traded Brandon Jacobs for him like an idiot. My running back corps was just sick last year as I was the own who drafted Slaton, Forte, and Chris Johnson. I enjoy this league for purposes of beating up on my family. Edited May 21, 2009 by gablemancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The truth is there's still only 32 running backs who can start one week as opposed to 64+ wide receivers each week. Last year, you could start 2 TEN RBs (White & Johnson), 2 MIA RBS (Brown and Williams), 2 CAR RBS (Stewart & Williams), 2 NE RBS, 2 SD RBs (LT2 & Sproules), 2 NYJ RBs (Jones & Washington), 2 NO RBs (Bush & Thomas), 2 TB RBs (Dunn & Pittman)......likely more I am missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 NYG. Barber/Jones Barber/Choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 That may be true, but he ought to be able to obtain Brown to handcuff to Addai and Scott to handcuff to Benson at very low cost, making his RBs very solid and deep. It might be true that those guys should be available in later rounds to handcuff, but it's been my experience that in many leagues (redrafts anyway) you have a very limited number of roster spots avialable, and using one on a handcuff (let alone two handcuffs) is sometimes a luxury that you can't afford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gablemancer Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Last year, you could start 2 TEN RBs (White & Johnson), 2 MIA RBS (Brown and Williams), 2 CAR RBS (Stewart & Williams), 2 NE RBS, 2 SD RBs (LT2 & Sproules), 2 NYJ RBs (Jones & Washington), 2 NO RBs (Bush & Thomas), 2 TB RBs (Dunn & Pittman)......likely more I am missing. I meant literally start in the NFL. Not trying to imply that the aforementioned running backs have little or no value considering how heavily I relied upon the Carolina and New York Giants backfield last year. I'm just saying that there's fewer viable fantasy options at running back than at receiver. Does this mean that taking running back/running back is the best option in a fantasy draft? Absolutely not. I guess I'm just a big fan of taking running backs early and hoping that a young/hurt/suspended/old receiver is there that will produce well. Could this be the year of everything? Probably just the year of Wide Receivers with Fitzgerald and Boldin helping to lead the NFL on a new trend of throwing the ball a lot, maybe as opposed to RBBC or Wildcat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I meant literally start in the NFL. What difference does it make who starts in the NFL when RB1 only sees half of the carries, and WR3 gets 6 looks a game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Last year, you could start 2 TEN RBs (White & Johnson), 2 MIA RBS (Brown and Williams), 2 CAR RBS (Stewart & Williams), 2 NE RBS, 2 SD RBs (LT2 & Sproules), 2 NYJ RBs (Jones & Washington), 2 NO RBs (Bush & Thomas), 2 TB RBs (Dunn & Pittman)......likely more I am missing. I made it to the championship game in a 16-team (BOTH) league with Peterson/Taylor (MIN) as my starting backfield. Having two "starting" RB's is no longer a necessity, even in leagues where you have to start two backs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I made it to the championship game in a 16-team (BOTH) league with Peterson/Taylor (MIN) as my starting backfield. Having two "starting" RB's is no longer a necessity, even in leagues where you have to start two backs. Not a necessity, but the rest of your team better be stacked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I'm not a very big fan of drafting Wide Receivers or Quarterbacks in the first two rounds (as the trend was last year). I patiently waited my turn after taking Steven Jackson and Ryan Grant, who ended up being total busts compared to the running backs I took in later rounds. But here's the stable of receivers I wound up with after the draft was through: Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson, Brandon Marshall, Larry Fitzgerald, and Roddy White. While I was playing in a 10 team league with my family (Who really aren't that great except for 2 of them), I still can't believe the depth I got after taking my two starting running backs. This year while others will be drafting the big name receivers early, I will be patient and hope that I find sleepers or injury replacements, it's more fun that way and helps to show off your fantasy football skills. And you consider this an indicator for a valid strategy for a league that doesn't include your cat, dog, hamster, and fish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I made it to the championship game in a 16-team (BOTH) league with Peterson/Taylor (MIN) as my starting backfield. Having two "starting" RB's is no longer a necessity, even in leagues where you have to start two backs. This I will agree with, and is becoming a very viable strategy in bigger leagues. I was running Turner & Norwood in tandem in ATAP about one third of the time and it worked out pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Come to think of it, the guy that won my main money laegue started Johnson/White down the stretch and into the playoffs, after frustrating himself earlier in the year trying to pick which one to start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.