Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

The rb-rb draft?


BrooklynCrew
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know The Huddle is a bit old-school in terms of advice and 'get yur rb's early' etc... I no longer subscribe to this theory entirely... depending on the season of course.

 

I find a lot less turnover in the top 6 qb's year to year (others have done this math, but it's true). The turnover in the top 20 rb's and wr's is far more extreme. That is to say, at the end of the year, you will find nearly half the top 20 rb's and wr's were not drafted as the top 20 rb's and wr's... while the top 10 qb's are pretty close to the actual rankings in most seasons... generally speaking with exceptions.

 

I see the winners of my leagues as the guys who get the big qb coupled with a big wr or rb... and then get lucky in the mid-late draft by striking gold (or mining the wire).

 

The duo RB anchor teams haven't won many championships in my leagues over the last 3-5 seasons...

 

Do people find they have strayed from 'rb-rb' more in recent years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try not to get locked into picking certain positions and certain draft positions. If I feel that rb-rb is best value, I'll take it.

But yeah, in a league I'm going through a draft with now, 12 teams, only 2 went rb-rb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since there are fewer bell cow type backs, I suspect more and more teams are likely to do something besides RB-RB. I have certain groups players who I classify as under-valued over the first few rounds. I'll target and potentially draft these players regardless of what position they play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a new article from DMD called "Planning your first two picks" that might go along with what you're saying...

 

I normally like to get out of the first two rounds with a great RB/WR combo, regardless of which I draft first, unless there is tremendous value at a particular postion or scoring/lineup requirements necessitate that I go in a particular direction.

Edited by delusions of granduer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it all depends on draft position and whats available. The early picks most likely will take a a RB with the 1st pick, while later picks I may take a WR. The 2nd and 3rd pick might be WR and QB respectively if they are still top tier.

 

Of my 3 redraft leagues, I drafted:

 

Drafted 14 in a 16 team league: WR/WR

Drafted 10 in a 10 team league: WR/WR

Drafted 1 in 10 team league: RB/WR

Edited by Outshined
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The magic of it all is evolving the "pick the players who score the most points" to putting just a bit more thought into it and identifiying those players at their position (be it RB1, WR3, K, whatever) who will significantly outscore the other players at that specific position -- and picking them. If your turn comes in the 1st and the "difference makers" at RB1 are gone and you're left picking amongst 9 RBs all projected to score within 8 points of each other -- but there's a WR1 sitting there projected to score 48 points more in the year than all but two other WRS, I'd wait on the RB1 and grab the WR1 ... even if I'd read that it was really good to to RB-RB this year.

 

Look for the difference makers, young jedi ... and if that's too complicated, go RB-RB-WR-QB-WR-TE-D-RB-WR-WR-RB-K, feel free to rearange the order of picks 1-4 based on who's available when your pik comes, and don't pick many Bengals or Seahawks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a new article from DMD called "Planning your first two picks" that might go along with what you're saying...

 

I normally like to get out of the first two rounds with a great RB/WR combo, regardless of which I draft first, unless there is tremendous value at a particular postion or scoring/lineup requirements necessitate that I go in a particular direction.

 

This is a yearly article from DMD... and the general slant is you need 2 rb's in your first 3 picks to succeed (in some fashion). I no longer agree as I think football (and hence fantasy football) is changing from 10 years ago... The rbbc and emphasis on the passing game means you can find more rb value later in your drafts than ever before. I would argue that the winners in recent years (in my leagues) avoid 2 rb's in the first 3 rounds and hope to strike rb gold later in tandem with their strong qb/wr slants... I want a top tier qb/wr combo this year more than ever. Just my thoughts though, I know 2 rb's early is a fairly prevalent mindset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would add that if you have a shot at the top 4-5 solo RB's who get 200+ touches, it's wise to take one, since there aren't many of them... but outside of those draft spots, I think it's ok to be a lot more flexible than in the past when you really needed to collect a lot of rb's early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a yearly article from DMD... and the general slant is you need 2 rb's in your first 3 picks to succeed (in some fashion). I no longer agree as I think football (and hence fantasy football) is changing from 10 years ago... The rbbc and emphasis on the passing game means you can find more rb value later in your drafts than ever before. I would argue that the winners in recent years (in my leagues) avoid 2 rb's in the first 3 rounds and hope to strike rb gold later in tandem with their strong qb/wr slants... I want a top tier qb/wr combo this year more than ever. Just my thoughts though, I know 2 rb's early is a fairly prevalent mindset.

Well, the thing to remember about waiting on a RB and "getting lucky" is you have to get lucky... You can just as easily end up with a putrid backfield... This isn't to say that strategy can't work, but you have to either be extremely savvy or lucky... If you're one of those people that can always correctly identify RB sleepers, then yes, but I don't trust my ability to do so, and so I tend to go with safe bets to be top producers there...

 

I would add that if you have a shot at the top 4-5 solo RB's who get 200+ touches, it's wise to take one, since there aren't many of them... but outside of those draft spots, I think it's ok to be a lot more flexible than in the past when you really needed to collect a lot of rb's early.

I can agree with this though.. Once you get outside of the top few, then the difference between the rest shrinks... Though when you can land a Gore/MJD/McFadden/Forte in the second, I'd still say that there is strength there beyond just the top 5.

Edited by delusions of granduer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't lock into position any more, my goal in the first two rounds is to take the top available RB or WR available when it is my turn to pick. A lot depends on where in the draft I fall as to the make up of my first two picks. This year in my local it was WR-WR from the 10 hole in a 12 team draft. So in my particular case I found more value in taking Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald versus taking Mendenhall, Forte or Gore with the 10th pick + a WR like Vincent Jackson.

 

As for "waiting on RBs" I did just that drafting my first RB in the 5th round - Shonn Greene. By waiting I was able to cobble together these RBs - Greene, DeAngelo Williams (6th), Mark Ingram (8th), Addai (10th), Daniel Thomas (11th), Starks (12th). Drafted 6 RBs so I have more opportunity to "get lucky".

Edited by Grits and Shins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't lock into position any more, my goal in the first two rounds is to take the top available RB or WR available when it is my turn to pick. A lot depends on where in the draft I fall as to the make up of my first two picks. This year in my local it was WR-WR from the 10 hole in a 12 team draft. So in my particular case I found more value in taking Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald versus taking Mendenhall, Forte or Gore with the 10th pick + a WR like Vincent Jackson.

 

As for "waiting on RBs" I did just that drafting my first RB in the 5th round - Shonn Greene. By waiting I was able to cobble together these RBs - Greene, DeAngelo Williams (6th), Mark Ingram (8th), Addai (10th), Daniel Thomas (11th), Starks (12th). Drafted 6 RBs so I have more opportunity to "get lucky".

 

I think this is a great strategy this year...

 

And I guess my point is that I don't think "Gore" is safe at all. In fact, I can put like 20 or so RB's in tier 2 and have no idea who scores the most points. On the other hand, I think Brees or Rivers is pretty safe early... comparably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the mistake people make is overstating the chance of 1st round RBs to underwhelm and overestimate the likelihood that an 8th round RB will be the next A Foster.

 

In fact, I've lost track of the number of threads extolling the virtues of laying off RBs "because you can find Arian Foster in the 8th", like that's a sure thing. Sure, someone found Arian Foster in the 8th-10th round last year, but a whole lot of others found useless stiffs that were waiver wire bait by week 3.

 

Despite our collective inability to see the future, as a whole, we tend to get the early picks right more often than the later ones. It's why they're early picks. Sure, they're not 100%, but the RBs that are generally considered 1st round caliber are there for a reason and will pan out more often than the guys you're going to find later. This should not be earth-shattering news, yet people seem to ignore it. So, the more early picks you use on a position, the better your chances of getting enough guys at that position to field a good team. And, in most leagues, it's still important to be strong at RB. Hence, the rationale for devoting a lot of early picks to the position. To increase your chances of getting two that stick.

 

"I can find Addai in the 6th" is all well and good, and I actually think he's a good value there. But he is there for a reason. It's not as if he as just as much chance of being a viable FF starter as, say Mendy, or we'd be drafting him earlier.

 

But, like Grits did. If you ignore the position early, then you'd better load up on it from rounds 5-10 and give yourself as many chances as you can of getting two right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just as an example for me, I skipped the RBs until later (but this is also a league where I can start just 1 and 3 WRs if I wanted) so I did stock up on WRs more-so.

 

 

But this is what I got for RBs (12 team league)

 

Felix Jones 3.8

Reggie Bush 6.5

Tolbert 7.8

 

I know this is thin RB but I only need to start 1 (and my top 3 WRs Roddy, Nicks and S.Johnson) will start most of the time I think.

 

 

the you can get some OK RBs later on but you don't have many to pick from.

Edited by rai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's the thing, if I'm waiting on RB's, I'm definitely getting a top 6 qb in the first 3 rounds this year.

 

I went top TE in the 3rd round ... by the time my 3rd round pick came up Vick, Rodgers, Brady and Brees were off the board ... I could have gone with Romo at that spot but took the best TE instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went top TE in the 3rd round ... by the time my 3rd round pick came up Vick, Rodgers, Brady and Brees were off the board ... I could have gone with Romo at that spot but took the best TE instead.

 

 

i was in the same position in both of my 14 team ppr drafts this year. went wr/wr early. i intented on getting a tier 2 qb but never saw good value. ended up settling for stafford in the 7th rd in one of my leagues and flacco in the 9th in another league. needless to say, my team is ridiculously stacked at rb's and especially wr's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't pass on RB's that I feel are very good. I just can't. They can just be absolute rocks in your lineup. I think I can find complimentary WR's later, and am not as sure I can do the same thing at RB. I wanted to make sure I got a top 6 QB as well, and did so in both my leagues. I took Charles at #4 in one of my leagues and Hillis was still there on the way back so I took him instead of Greg Jennings. I'd rather have Hillis and Jackson than Jennings and Grant or Hightower. In that league I actually took 3 RB's with my first three picks, then came back with Peyton, Witten, and got Harvin and Boldin/Amendola as my starting receivers. I think I have to be one of the favorites on paper in both leagues I'm in, and took RB's with my first three picks in one league and my first two in the other. I didn't get one of the Johnsons at WR, but I drafted enough quality WR's that I should be able to get by fairly easily if I don't completely screw-up the match-ups. Just think, all I've got to do is hit on one WR and my team is pretty dominant. I'd rather be in that situation than banking on hitting on a later round RB to make my team dominant. I see WR based teams as a lot less consistent. Huge weeks and poor weeks. With Peyton, Charles and Hillis, I shouldn't have many poor weeks at all.

Edited by Seahawks21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every year is different, but I agree that RB/RB is a thing of the past. When you look at the top QB's, as you pointed out, they finish close to their projected spots. Brees, Brady and Rodgers will probably finish in the top 6. Sure there are dark horses and injury can strike anytime, but when getting bang for buck you have to go with what's the most predictable; It's why I took Rodgers with the 5th pick in the ladder.

 

IMO, this is the year to tank WR's. Getting a top QB and TE fill the void of the hardest spots to get consistency. A great RB mixed with a QB/TE is the best (again IMO) foundation. What one needs to do is know how others are probably going to draft, and (based on scoring system) do something different. When you do something different, it shifts who falls and trigger-happy lemmings will pick according to ADP. This year isn't last year... remember that.

Edited by Thews40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every year is different, but I agree that RB/RB is a thing of the past. When you look at the top QB's, as you pointed out, they finish close to their projected spots. Brees, Brady and Rodgers will probably finish in the top 6. Sure there are dark horses and injury can strike anytime, but when getting bang for buck you have to go with what's the most predictable; It's why I took Rodgers with the 5th pick in the ladder.

 

IMO, this is the year to tank WR's. Getting a top QB and TE fill the void of the hardest spots to get consistency. A great RB mixed with a QB/TE is the best (again IMO) foundation. What one needs to do is know how others are probably going to draft, and (based on scoring system) do something different. When you do something different, it shifts who falls and trigger-happy lemmings will pick according to ADP. This year isn't last year... remember that.

 

 

The thing with QBs is that yes, we can have a level of confidence in the projections for them, but, as is seen year in and year out, the drop off between the #1 and #12 QB is minimal compared to the drop off at other positions. So, if we are both relatively confident in who the top 10 will be, and we are also relatively confident that the drop off is minimal, it is a position that I would be very comfortable waiting on.

 

With RBs, I believe I saw an analysis somewhere, maybe even cited earlier in this thread, that of the projected top 10 RBs, or at least top 10 ADP RBs, only 5-6 perform at that level. Well, given the much larger dropoff at RB, I would much rather load up my chambers with as many bullets from that group to try hit on a top 10 RB then try get one of the 4 RBs that are top 10 out of the other 40 or so that may get drafted, depending on league size.

 

With WRs, we have also seen year over year a much smaller drop in production, and with the proliferation of PPR scoring, we aren't exactly seeing that gap increase significantly, more so we are seeing a much larger base of viable weekly options as those possession WRs that regularly go for 5 catches and 50 yards are seeing a doubling in their fantasy points, while that big play WR that is more of a 3 catch and 70 yard guy is now putting up the same fantasy points (though seeing a smaller percentage increase in points) in a much more volatile manner.

 

Now, this is all highly volatile from league to league where different lineup settings and scoring rules affect player values, but, in general, unless it is only a 1 required RB league, I would prefer to have as many bullets (read, highly ranked RBs) in my chambers as possible as the analysis of the stats over the last few years clearly shows that their is only a minimal drop in QB production from #1-#10 or 12 and with more viable WR options in PPR making that position a lot deeper, productive WRs can be found much later.

 

So, does all this mean one should blindly go RB-RB in their drafts? Of course not, but to blindly throw that option out of your playbook is just a foolish as going in to a draft with a preset draft plan and blindly sticking to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, RB-RB is not a thing of the past; however, it is no longer mandatory.

 

It depends on the following list of criteria:

 

1.) League Scoring

2.) Position Requirements

3.) Bench Requirements

4.) Wavier Wire / Trade Allowances

5.) RBBC

6.) Number of teams in League

7.) Draft Position

8.) Fantasy Football Websites

9.) Other Managers

10.) Bye Week Replacements

 

Most of these should be obvious. Each of these affects the strategy you employ. The biggest effect is felt by the switch to RBBC, the second is the change from a TD heavy scoring system to a yardage scoring system, and the third biggest effect is the league position requirements. All three of these of greatly decreased the value of starting RB-RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just went RB/RB/RB :wacko: Not what I planned. I just went back 10 years in FF history--old school. This is a 10 team PPR.

 

I know it could end up a bad decision, but WR's were all going off the board, leaving me getting sucked in with McCoy, Gore, and Blount. I think the draft WR's, and an elite QB, and get RB's later in the draft hit home in this league, and everyone was doing it.

 

I then got Stevie Johnson, Danny Amendola, and Pierre Garcon plus Matt Ryan, and Jarad Cook. It could be very bad ,I mean very bad, we'll see.

 

I don't think I will do that again in my redraft tomorrow night, but it will be interesting to see what comes of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think of FF strategies as kind of like what Warren Buffet says about investing - When others are greedy, be fearful, and when others are fearful, be greedy.

 

 

5 years ago RB whoreing was the rage, so it paid to buck the trend, load up at WR and gamble on RB. Over the last 3 years, the RB whores caught on and started adjusting strategy. Now that the popular method is to wait on QB and load up on WRs, it is the time to go back to RB whoreing until it again becomes the mainstream thing to do, at which point it is time to go back to loading up at positions other than RB to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information