Value based drafting

[alchico]

I've always been a guy who subscribed to the RB theory and taking guys i liked or had a gut feeling about. I never drafted a TE early, never took a K or D until the end and always seemed to do well.

That is up until this year. I'm in more leagues than i've ever been in (2-3 in the past, 6 this year) and i found myself going pretty heavy on VBD.

In 1 draft at #7 i took Mcallister in the 1st and when my 2nd #18 rolled around, Portis was still there, so i took him. Then i did the unthinkable for me and drafted gonzo with my 3rd #31. All the tier 1 wr's and 3 of the tier 2 wr's were gone and gonzo just seemed like the best value.

In my local the other night, Edge fell to me at #11(WOW) and i followed that up with #14 K. Jones, #35 JJ ariington, #37 Bulger-there were 4 QB's off the board and 8 more went after i took him, before my next pick-our league scoring favors QB's. I also took a D (the Bills) in the 8th round, which for me was really tough to do. But our league scoring favors D's so i finally bit the bullet and took one early.

In a 1st year dynasty i had the #1 pick and took LT, but i shocked even myself with my next 2 picks. At #24/25 i took R. Moss and Harrison. I was still able to grab Cumar with my 4th pick. While i missed out on all of the highly ranked rookies, i thought i got pretty good value being the #1 pick.

Even with the best laid out plans and extensive research, you still have to be flexible during the draft and be able to adapt to the flow of that particular draft to be sucessful. Also a lot depends on the scoring system and starting requirements of your particular league. Only time will tell but this is my story and i'm sticking to it

[Bree22]

I am an avid Value Base Drafter. It works great in Fantasy baseball but not so well in football. Basball players tend to be more predictable then Football players. I still follow the VBD system but you still need a little luck in the injury department and the hunch department. I have finished in the top 3, 3 out of the last 6yrs. The problem with football is that you know going in that at least 2-3 player in the first 2 rounds will be a bust and that a couple of players from the middle rounds will perform like first and second rounders. I think you have done well with your picks by the sound of it. You just need your WRs in the later rounds to payoff.

[alchico]

Ya i agree, the wr's are the key. I'm just hoping it's like everybody says and quite a few of the lower tier/sleeper wr's come out strong. And if nothing else i should have some good trade bait if i need to upgrade.

[Grits and Shins]

You can't get stuck into the 'I have to draft 2 RBs in the first 2 (or maybe even 3) rounds'.

 

In the first 3 positions I fully believe you are much better off drafting a WR with your 2nd and/or 3rd picks assuming the typical RB run happens.

 

In Generation Lost we can start 3 RBs but after taking Alexander at 1.03 I felt compelled to take Holt and CJohnson with my next 2 picks because IMO they were the best values to be had (21 RBs and 2 QBs were off the board).

[Rovers]

I too, did some things differently in the last draft (I was subbing for Slayer). Drafting at 1.12 and 2.1, I went Portis and K Jones. Nothing new there. However, on the wrap around, the best value I saw was Bulger at 3.12. It's definitely not my MO to go with a QB so early. He was simply the best value on the board, and I went with it. At 4.1, I went with a TE, Crumpler, instead of a low tier two WR. This was for two reasons, the first being that TE's get double yardage points over WR's, the other being that the flex allows for a 2 TE line up. I was able to get LJ Smith in the 8th round, thus getting two of the top ten TE's (at least as far as the Huddle rankings).

 

After the first two rounds, with a solid backfield, this really was a VBD based strategy. In the past, I would have gone with a WR instead of Bulger. Drafting in the 12 hole pretty much makes any other strategy an also ran, at least in my opinion.

[Jimmy Neutron]

I really like the VBD technique, especially in later rounds when it isn't clear where the value is. It doesn't do much for me in early rounds.

[Grits and Shins]

I too, did some things differently in the last draft (I was subbing for Slayer). Drafting at 1.12 and 2.1, I went Portis and K Jones. Nothing new there. However, on the wrap around, the best value I saw was Bulger at 3.12. It's definitely not my MO to go with a QB so early. He was simply the best value on the board, and I went with it. At 4.1, I went with a TE, Crumpler, instead of a low tier two WR.  This was for two reasons, the first being that TE's get double yardage points over WR's, the other being that the flex allows for a 2 TE line up. I was able to get LJ Smith in the 8th round, thus getting two of the top ten TE's (at least as far as the Huddle rankings).

 

After the first two rounds, with a solid backfield, this really was a VBD based strategy. In the past, I would have gone with a WR instead of Bulger. Drafting in the 12 hole pretty much makes any other strategy an also ran, at least in my opinion.

 

967331[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

In my local I drafted at 1.09.

 

First 2 picks were DD and KJ.

Second 2 picks were Walker and SSmith.

 

That is fairly standard for me ... but taking Bulger in the 5th has not been standard for me ... I typically like to wait until late to get my QB. In addition I took several more RBs before taking my last starting WR ... something I tended to avoid in the past (taking backups or depth before starters).