RB early is the new upside down?

[Zooty]

I posted something to similar to this in the advice forum but since it wasn't directly answering anyone's WDID question it was generally ignored.

 

But it seems people are just hell-bent on drafting 3 WRs and are letting good RBs drop. Doing a bunch of MFL 10s I have seen people pass on Doug Martin for Allen Hurns and draft Doug Baldwin over J. Charles.

 

Sorry but it seems the herd has all shifted to ignore the RB and grab any and every WR. I have noticed especially on the turns that at 2/3 there is better RB options than WR.

 

Just remember kids, when everyone starts doing it, it isn't cool any more.

In a 12 team MFL10. PPR.

pick 3.02 just went and here are your options

 

QB- any of them
TE- any but Gronk
RB-
Doug Martin
Carlos Hyde
LeSean McCoy
Eddie Lacy
Mark Ingram
Latavius Murray
Thomas Rawls
Matt Forte
WR-
Sammy Watkins
Doug Baldwin
Allen Hurns
Jarvis Landry
Golden Tate
Michael Floyd
Jeremy Maclin
Jordan Matthews
Eric Decker
Kelvin Benjamin
Randall Cobb

 

So who are you taking?

Watkins, Landry, Hurns? Are any of them really a better option than Martin, McCoy or Ingram?

I'm not sure locking into a plan is a great idea. granted our locals are probably good for 2-4 going early but the top end WRs aren't as deep as people seem to think IMO.

 

http://www61.myfantasyleague.com/2016/options?L=30335&O=17

[drafter]

my thoughts exactly......

 

The new Contrarian is RB RB.

 

I have draft position #9 in my 10 team PPR league this weekend. if the lemmings follow the expert "guidance" i'll be quite happy to go RB with my first 2 picks.

[Shaft]

It still all depends on your league format. Many of my leagues have changed from requiring 2 RBs to just 1. Years ago, 2RB was the standard, but with the shift in RB value (i.e. RB committees, more passing in the NFL, ppr) the starting requirement just further devalues the RBs. I still keep a constant eye out for RBs just due to the lack of depth in the position. To put it simply, the numbers don't lie and WRs will go off the board quickly based on the previously mentioned trends.

 

ETA: I would take Martin or Ingram.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Shaft

[HowboutthemCowboys]

I posted something to similar to this in the advice forum but since it wasn't directly answering anyone's WDID question it was generally ignored.

 

But it seems people are just hell-bent on drafting 3 WRs and are letting good RBs drop. Doing a bunch of MFL 10s I have seen people pass on Doug Martin for Allen Hurns and draft Doug Baldwin over J. Charles.

 

Sorry but it seems the herd has all shifted to ignore the RB and grab any and every WR. I have noticed especially on the turns that at 2/3 there is better RB options than WR.

 

Just remember kids, when everyone starts doing it, it isn't cool any more.

In a 12 team MFL10. PPR.

pick 3.02 just went and here are your options

 

QB- any of them

TE- any but Gronk

RB-

Doug Martin

Carlos Hyde

LeSean McCoy

Eddie Lacy

Mark Ingram

Latavius Murray

Thomas Rawls

Matt Forte

WR-

Sammy Watkins

Doug Baldwin

Allen Hurns

Jarvis Landry

Golden Tate

Michael Floyd

Jeremy Maclin

Jordan Matthews

Eric Decker

Kelvin Benjamin

Randall Cobb

 

So who are you taking?

Watkins, Landry, Hurns? Are any of them really a better option than Martin, McCoy or Ingram?

I'm not sure locking into a plan is a great idea. granted our locals are probably good for 2-4 going early but the top end WRs aren't as deep as people seem to think IMO.

 

http://www61.myfantasyleague.com/2016/options?L=30335&O=17

Probably Martin but it depends on who I took in 1 and 2

[michaelredd9]

I'd probably take a running back with those options. I'd also consider Cobb. But if a running back is slightly better than a receiver in the first three rounds, I'll still take the receiver. Running backs options are good in rounds 4 and 5. Wide receivers available are not good in rounds 4 and 5.

[heehawks]

Probably Martin but it depends on who I took in 1 and 2

This.

[Zooty]

It still all depends on your league format. Many of my leagues have changed from requiring 2 RBs to just 1. Years ago, 2RB was the standard, but with the shift in RB value (i.e. RB committees, more passing in the NFL, ppr) the starting requirement just further devalues the RBs. I still keep a constant eye out for RBs just due to the lack of depth in the position. To put it simply, the numbers don't lie and WRs will go off the board quickly based on the previously mentioned trends.

 

ETA: I would take Martin or Ingram.

 

 

but most leagues still require 2. the ones that don't are generally for the more dedicated owners, not the general bunch. I am more amused at the number of people I see who are just going to force the WR/WR/WR idea. What Aaron Rogers still in the board in the 5th? Nah, I'm passing because I need a 5th WR dammit!

[Zooty]

I'd probably take a running back with those options. I'd also consider Cobb. But if a running back is slightly better than a receiver in the first three rounds, I'll still take the receiver. Running backs options are good in rounds 4 and 5. Wide receivers available are not good in rounds 4 and 5.

 

maybe but my general feel is those RBs in the 4th and 5th (click the link) are much more high risk than the RBs I could have had at 2 and 3 and even early in the 4th. Much more high risk with the 4/5 RBs than the WRs still on the board in through at least the 7th. You're really dropping off ionto the timeshare and injury risk guys but meanwhile you are passing on good solid PPR receivers because you already drafted 4 in the 1st four rounds.

 

I think people are passing on value because they have committed to a "system" rather and getting the best values.

 

Of course all of this may be slightly tilted as well since it is Best-Ball and you don't need to guess which of you 4 crappy pass-catching backs will be in a game where they are down 17 and they catch 8 passes in the 4th quarter.

[heehawks]

 

Of course all of this may be slightly tilted as well since it is Best-Ball and you don't need to guess which of you 4 crappy pass-catching backs will be in a game where they are down 17 and they catch 8 passes in the 4th quarter.

Best ball changes everything when it comes to draft strategy. They tend to have larger rosters, so one can throw many darts in one position, while loading up hugh in another.

[Shaft]

This is one the few years when I like having a top-3 pick so I can pick a stud WR and then in the 2 round and 3rd turn around I can get two starting RBs (e.g. Martin, Ingram, McCoy, etc.).

[darin3]

No time to skim the other responses but could this just be an outlier? Meaning... Martin's ADP could be dropping, especially in PPR formats, with Sims slated to take more work, especially on passing downs. Couple that with just one particular league being chock full of "WR is so important" lemmings....

 

Bottom line is yes, you find value when certain positions are overvalued. Doesn't mean you need to completely buck the trend but if a player - regardless of position - has fallen past his ADP to a point where the value is simply undeniable, you take him.

 

I rarely go into a draft with a set plan.... other than draft best available player and be mindful of "runs" and fallen value.

 

That said, going RB-RB would be scary to me. I would not like my WR1 situation at all...

[kdko]

Yeah, I feel like last year was the final year of going RB/RB. Too many injuries to quality starting RB's over the last few years that have miffed enough people to warrant not drafting one early. I went with RB/RB last year, but got Tate in the 3rd, Marshall in the 5th, and Watkins in the 6th. That's not going to happen again. The ADP is freefalling on some RB's but who can you really trust to complete a full season?

[anismith]

Yeah, I generally go WR, WR, WR, but I am always getting talent at those spots so far in my early money drafts. The lowest WR I got with my third pick was Maclin, but the alternative RB's at that time were not very good, no Mccoy, Charles, or even CJ. The few times I deviated from the WR route have been to grab Mccoy or Charles in the third.

In a standard format PPR where you can start 3 WR's max (one as Flex), I don't really understand grabbing a 4th WR at that point. I want at least 2 good RBs. If I wait till the 5th to start looking, they are sometimes gone.

 

My drafts generally go like this and I'm pretty happy with it.

 

1. WR (Brown, Jones, OBJ, Hopkins, AJ, Dez)

2. WR (Alshon, Jordy, Evans)
3. WR (Evans or Cooks)

4. RB (Murray, Langford, Jones, Foster, Matthews)
5. RB (Murray, Langford, Jones, Foster, Matthews)

6. RB (J-stew, Charles Sims, D. Williams)

7. WR/RB (Marin Jones, Steve Smith, D. Williams, or high upside handcuff)

[Zooty]

No time to skim the other responses but could this just be an outlier? Meaning... Martin's ADP could be dropping, especially in PPR formats, with Sims slated to take more work, especially on passing downs. Couple that with just one particular league being chock full of "WR is so important" lemmings....

 

Bottom line is yes, you find value when certain positions are overvalued. Doesn't mean you need to completely buck the trend but if a player - regardless of position - has fallen past his ADP to a point where the value is simply undeniable, you take him.

 

I rarely go into a draft with a set plan.... other than draft best available player and be mindful of "runs" and fallen value.

 

That said, going RB-RB would be scary to me. I would not like my WR1 situation at all...

 

 

yeah most the 10s I have done have pretty much gone this way. I think in about everyone there was a RB who fell in the 1st (AP) 2nd (AP, Bell) or 3rd (Charles, McCoy, Martin) that I couldn't pass on. But it may the best ball format...

I think I only finished 3 WRs to start in 1 of 10 drafts so far, other wise too much value.

 

 

 

Martin in specific is an interesting case. I've see some websites where he is ranked in the top 2 and others where is closer to 12 so he has gone anywhere from mid 2nd to early 4th in my drafts. I won't comment on what I think of Sims since we already did that dance but yeah maybe some people think he'' be an even bigger factor this year.

 

this one I did go with 2 RBs to start and yeah, WRs are weak

 

Abdullah, Ameer DET RB (P) 110.9 10 7.04

Gurley, Todd RAM RB 208.4 8 1.04

Howard, Jordan CHI RB ® - 9 14.09

Martin, Doug TBB RB 214.5 6 2.09

Rawls, Thomas SEA RB (P) 127.6 5 4.09

Benjamin, Travis SDC WR 183.5 11 8.09

Cooks, Brandin NOS WR 246.4 5 3.04

Fitzgerald, Larry ARI WR 263.0 9 5.04

Garcon, Pierre WAS WR 171.8 9 10.09

Gordon, Josh CLE WR (S) - 13 6.09

Strong, Jaelen HOU WR 36.5 9 18.09

Wright, Kendall TEN WR (P) 96.5 13 15.04

Ertz, Zach PHI TE 146.1 4 9.04

Miller, Zach CHI TE (P) 107.9 9 12.09

Edited August 19, 2016 by Zooty

[HowboutthemCowboys]

Yeah, I generally go WR, WR, WR, but I am always getting talent at those spots so far in my early money drafts. The lowest WR I got with my third pick was Maclin, but the alternative RB's at that time were not very good, no Mccoy, Charles, or even CJ. The few times I deviated from the WR route have been to grab Mccoy or Charles in the third.

In a standard format PPR where you can start 3 WR's max (one as Flex), I don't really understand grabbing a 4th WR at that point. I want at least 2 good RBs. If I wait till the 5th to start looking, they are sometimes gone.

 

My drafts generally go like this and I'm pretty happy with it.

 

1. WR (Brown, Jones, OBJ, Hopkins, AJ, Dez)

2. WR (Alshon, Jordy, Evans)

3. WR (Evans or Cooks)

4. RB (Murray, Langford, Jones, Foster, Matthews)

5. RB (Murray, Langford, Jones, Foster, Matthews)

6. RB (J-stew, Charles Sims, D. Williams)

7. WR/RB (Marin Jones, Steve Smith, D. Williams, or high upside handcuff)

12 team drafts?

[anismith]

12 team drafts?

Yep, 12 team PPR drafts for money.

[stethant]

Here's the thing: in standard leagues (not even considering PPR) last year for the first time the top WRs had greater value than the top RBs. While this was the first year this has happened, it wasn't a fluke. WR value exceeded RB value through WR18/RB18. After RB18, the RBs had more points than the WR.

 

WRs in the first two rounds were much more likely to hold their value than RBs drafted in the first two rounds.

 

I have historically been a fan of RB-RB but last year I was pushed off that strategy by draft circumstances and my teams did just fine. I just don't think the numbers support 2RBs in the first 3 rounds like they used to.

[Zooty]

Here's the thing: in standard leagues (not even considering PPR) last year for the first time the top WRs had greater value than the top RBs. While this was the first year this has happened, it wasn't a fluke. WR value exceeded RB value through WR18/RB18. After RB18, the RBs had more points than the WR.

 

WRs in the first two rounds were much more likely to hold their value than RBs drafted in the first two rounds.

 

I have historically been a fan of RB-RB but last year I was pushed off that strategy by draft circumstances and my teams did just fine. I just don't think the numbers support 2RBs in the first 3 rounds like they used to.

 

 

But if WR18 is gone by the end of Rd 2 as I have been seeing, you almost have to take a guy like Ingram, Martin or Charles. Its too much value.

 

I'm not advocating taking RB/RB but getting 2 RBs by the end of 4th or 5th may be better value than taking whatever WRs are left

 

As far as the part in bold, I haven't seen the numbers to validate that comment but it may speak more to injuries. I would be interested to see that

[darin3]

 

 

yeah most the 10s I have done have pretty much gone this way. I think in about everyone there was a RB who fell in the 1st (AP) 2nd (AP, Bell) or 3rd (Charles, McCoy, Martin) that I couldn't pass on. But it may the best ball format...

I think I only finished 3 WRs to start in 1 of 10 drafts so far, other wise too much value.

 

 

 

Martin in specific is an interesting case. I've see some websites where he is ranked in the top 2 and others where is closer to 12 so he has gone anywhere from mid 2nd to early 4th in my drafts. I won't comment on what I think of Sims since we already did that dance but yeah maybe some people think he'' be an even bigger factor this year.

 

this one I did go with 2 RBs to start and yeah, WRs are weak

 

Abdullah, Ameer DET RB (P) 110.9 10 7.04

Gurley, Todd RAM RB 208.4 8 1.04

Howard, Jordan CHI RB ® - 9 14.09

Martin, Doug TBB RB 214.5 6 2.09

Rawls, Thomas SEA RB (P) 127.6 5 4.09

Benjamin, Travis SDC WR 183.5 11 8.09

Cooks, Brandin NOS WR 246.4 5 3.04

Fitzgerald, Larry ARI WR 263.0 9 5.04

Garcon, Pierre WAS WR 171.8 9 10.09

Gordon, Josh CLE WR (S) - 13 6.09

Strong, Jaelen HOU WR 36.5 9 18.09

Wright, Kendall TEN WR (P) 96.5 13 15.04

Ertz, Zach PHI TE 146.1 4 9.04

Miller, Zach CHI TE (P) 107.9 9 12.09

 

Actually that's not terrible. Cooks is a low-level WR1, I still think Fitz is a solid WR2 and Garcon is a good WR3 in PPR. Benjamin is a wildcard that could be anything from a backup to a low-level WR2. Add in Gordon and that could be a doable WR unit. Especially since you have Gurley/Martin who should carry your team. Not a fan of Rawls though

[Dolphin_Akie]

Im picking #2 in my 12 team standard. Going three WR with my first 3 picks (generally Beckham, Marshall then DT or Alshon) has been happening in mocks or I've been taking McCoy. After McCoy there's a drop off to CJ, Hyde etc.

 

Never understand a draft format where you've decided beforehand what position you want in each round. Thats why I'd never fully commit to zero RB because who knows what might happen.

[Shaft]

Some players take this commitment thing to a whole new level. This ain't marriage, this is teenage love. One week we're in love, the next week we're dumping them because of a new "love." It's more like seasonal love lust. Like in high school, sometimes we have to settle for what's best on the market.

[stethant]

But if WR18 is gone by the end of Rd 2 as I have been seeing, you almost have to take a guy like Ingram, Martin or Charles. Its too much value.

Totally agree that at some point taking an RB will/may make more sense in a draft. I would definitely do this, especially with Martin (but that's my bias).

 

 

WRs in the first two rounds were much more likely to hold their value than RBs drafted in the first two rounds.

 

As far as the part in bold, I haven't seen the numbers to validate that comment but it may speak more to injuries. I would be interested to see that

OK so I heard about this on Paul Charchian's podcast, Fantasy Football Weekly. I have no affiliation with them or any conflicts of interests with them - just really enjoy the podcast. He was explaining this on his August 6th podcast and I'll quote him here:

 

"Based on last year’s ADP, 19 RBs were taken in the first 4 rounds. Of the 19, the number that performed within a round of their ADP or a higher round were 2: AP and Miller. 12 of the 19 finished 5 rounds lower than their ADP or worse.

 

17 WRs taken in the 1^st 4 rounds. 8 of 17 finished at their ADP round or higher. Only 4 of the 17 WR taken in the first 4 rounds were catastrophic failures (5 rounds lower than ADP or worse)."

 

He also pointed out that similar stats were seen in 2013. Not sure about 2014. I think DMD has done this analysis in years past and came to a similar conclusion about the dependability of RBs and WRs. Of course if you pick the right RBs then this isn't a problem

Edited August 19, 2016 by stethant

[loaf]

I've done a few mocks with going 3 WRs in a row. Didn't like it in 12 teams but in 10 it seemed to leave some decent guys for me.

[Dolphin_Akie]

Some players take this commitment thing to a whole new level. This ain't marriage, this is teenage love. One week we're in love, the next week we're dumping them because of a new "love." It's more like seasonal love lust. Like in high school, sometimes we have to settle for what's best on the market.

 

People worry far too much about the draft in comparison to in-season waivers and trading.

[Shaft]

 

People worry far too much about the draft in comparison to in-season waivers and trading.

Exactly because something better usually comes up.