Who would you take at 12 and 13 in a re-draft

[Ice717]

Ignore what everyone says and stick to drafting based on ADP

 

Does this comment have any relevance to what I've been saying? Bonedaddies do what you wish but like I said before I would get at least one RB if not two there are two there that you like. I think there is a lot of value at QB in the later rounds this year.

 

Laylow I draft on VBD not ADP if you need me to explain to you what that is I would be more than happy to.

[Purple Hippos]

I wouldn't call drafting 2 average rb's, over 2 stud wr value based drafting. Sounds like you need someone to explain it to you.

[LayLow]

Does this comment have any relevance to what I've been saying? Bonedaddies do what you wish but like I said before I would get at least one RB if not two there are two there that you like. I think there is a lot of value at QB in the later rounds this year.

 

Laylow I draft on VBD not ADP if you need me to explain to you what that is I would be more than happy to.

 

Nope, nothing to do with you. Just giving him another option.

 

I drafted with RHINO and not ADP. I also check all my drafts from last year, other then me taking brady in the 2nd/3rd, he went in the 4th round in every other draft I was in. Good point though

 

 

Players to Avoid in 2008

 

 

Larry Johnson.

Edited July 23, 2008 by LayLow

[Big John]

Nope, nothing to do with you. Just giving him another option.

Against policy to copy and paste articles from the members-only areas.

[LayLow]

Against policy to copy and paste articles from the members-only areas.

Sorry, i will edit

[Big Country]

I wouldn't call drafting 2 average rb's, over 2 stud wr value based drafting. Sounds like you need someone to explain it to you.

 

VBD is all about making a guesstimate as to the drop off you expect to see from one pick to the next at the particular positions you are deciding between and drafting accordingly. Having drafted out of the 12 hole twice so far, and having the 12 pick at WCOFF this year, I'll be studying this a lot, but thus far I have ended up going RB/RB twice as WR is relatively deep this year. Unless Moss is there, I am much happier with ending up with two RBs that I have in my top 10 plus still getting two WRs in my top 10 than ending up with two WRs in my top 5 and getting two RBs that are maybe in my top 20 but likely have much larger question marks than what I could get.

 

Depending on starting lineup requirements, my ideal situation from the 12 is to get one of my top 10 RBs and land Moss (maybe Wayne in a start 2RB/3WR/TE/Flex PPR league) then look to go RB/WR or RB/TE in the 3/4 spots.

 

Just because the WRs are likely to score more points than the RBs (again, depending on scoring system) in your scenario, they are not neccesarily more valuable because the drop off at RB is that much steeper between the RBs likely available at the 12/13 spot compared to those available at the 36/37 spot compared to the much smaller drop off at the WR position (again, based on my projections as of this time). Unless you really think relying on Julius Jones and say Michael turner as your primary RBs in order to have Wayne and owens at WR gives you a better shot than having say Gore and Grant at RB with Holmes and Holt at WR. IMO, I prefer having the more stable RBs with good upside and WRs that are very capable of putting up strong numbers every week vs. having WRs more likely of the strong steady production and very shaky RBs where I am hoping to strike gold.

[LayLow]

VBD is all about making a guesstimate as to the drop off you expect to see from one pick to the next at the particular positions you are deciding between and drafting accordingly. Having drafted out of the 12 hole twice so far, and having the 12 pick at WCOFF this year, I'll be studying this a lot, but thus far I have ended up going RB/RB twice as WR is relatively deep this year. Unless Moss is there, I am much happier with ending up with two RBs that I have in my top 10 plus still getting two WRs in my top 10 than ending up with two WRs in my top 5 and getting two RBs that are maybe in my top 20 but likely have much larger question marks than what I could get.

 

Depending on starting lineup requirements, my ideal situation from the 12 is to get one of my top 10 RBs and land Moss (maybe Wayne in a start 2RB/3WR/TE/Flex PPR league) then look to go RB/WR or RB/TE in the 3/4 spots.

 

Just because the WRs are likely to score more points than the RBs (again, depending on scoring system) in your scenario, they are not neccesarily more valuable because the drop off at RB is that much steeper between the RBs likely available at the 12/13 spot compared to those available at the 36/37 spot compared to the much smaller drop off at the WR position (again, based on my projections as of this time). Unless you really think relying on Julius Jones and say Michael turner as your primary RBs in order to have Wayne and owens at WR gives you a better shot than having say Gore and Grant at RB with Holmes and Holt at WR. IMO, I prefer having the more stable RBs with good upside and WRs that are very capable of putting up strong numbers every week vs. having WRs more likely of the strong steady production and very shaky RBs where I am hoping to strike gold.

I agree in a way. I will lay out my conundrum in a different post.

[Purple Hippos]

I disagree on the drop off. I think the drop off at wr at the 3/4 turn is worse that of rb. If you pick Jones and Turner at the turn then your in trouble, but there is much better talent on the board still than them. T. Jones, K. Smith, M. Forte are much better value than Homes, Jennings, Burress.

 

Just my opinion, always seems to work for me though.

[Square]

VBD is all about making a guesstimate as to the drop off you expect to see from one pick to the next at the particular positions you are deciding between and drafting accordingly. Having drafted out of the 12 hole twice so far, and having the 12 pick at WCOFF this year, I'll be studying this a lot, but thus far I have ended up going RB/RB twice as WR is relatively deep this year. Unless Moss is there, I am much happier with ending up with two RBs that I have in my top 10 plus still getting two WRs in my top 10 than ending up with two WRs in my top 5 and getting two RBs that are maybe in my top 20 but likely have much larger question marks than what I could get.

 

Depending on starting lineup requirements, my ideal situation from the 12 is to get one of my top 10 RBs and land Moss (maybe Wayne in a start 2RB/3WR/TE/Flex PPR league) then look to go RB/WR or RB/TE in the 3/4 spots.

 

Just because the WRs are likely to score more points than the RBs (again, depending on scoring system) in your scenario, they are not neccesarily more valuable because the drop off at RB is that much steeper between the RBs likely available at the 12/13 spot compared to those available at the 36/37 spot compared to the much smaller drop off at the WR position (again, based on my projections as of this time). Unless you really think relying on Julius Jones and say Michael turner as your primary RBs in order to have Wayne and owens at WR gives you a better shot than having say Gore and Grant at RB with Holmes and Holt at WR. IMO, I prefer having the more stable RBs with good upside and WRs that are very capable of putting up strong numbers every week vs. having WRs more likely of the strong steady production and very shaky RBs where I am hoping to strike gold.

I agree with BC for what its worth.

(Its hard to find someone on this board that kicks more ass than BC)

[Big Country]

I agree with BC for what its worth.

(Its hard to find someone on this board that kicks more ass than BC)

 

Thank you for the compliment. I appreciate it.

 

And, having the 12 pick in something with as much money on the line as WCOFF, I am extremely interested in as much discussion as possible regarding potential draft strategies from the 12 spot. (My group also has a team with the 4 pick, so that is a completely different strategy, but as I am drafting with Darin3 our team with the 12 pick, I feel I have even a greater vested interest in studying the options and scenarios even more closely)

[Ice717]

Thank you for the compliment. I appreciate it.

 

And, having the 12 pick in something with as much money on the line as WCOFF, I am extremely interested in as much discussion as possible regarding potential draft strategies from the 12 spot. (My group also has a team with the 4 pick, so that is a completely different strategy, but as I am drafting with Darin3 our team with the 12 pick, I feel I have even a greater vested interest in studying the options and scenarios even more closely)

 

I was beginning to wonder why you were spending so much time with our littled heated discussion, but it all makes so much since now. I personally wouldnt mind having a later pick this year, but my main money league does things a little different with the drafting order so I can't really think about drafting back to back every two rounds like a normal snake draft. I'm simply thinking I would like to have a later first round and earlier second. At this point it may be to early to tell but Country what player are you hoping falls to you at 12?

[Big Country]

I was beginning to wonder why you were spending so much time with our littled heated discussion, but it all makes so much since now. I personally wouldnt mind having a later pick this year, but my main money league does things a little different with the drafting order so I can't really think about drafting back to back every two rounds like a normal snake draft. I'm simply thinking I would like to have a later first round and earlier second. At this point it may be to early to tell but Country what player are you hoping falls to you at 12?

 

In the WCOFF structure (PPR performance system, start 2 RB, 3 WR, flex) I am hoping that somehow Moss does fall (very unlikely), and short of that i am looking at probably grabbing 2 of Gore, Lynch, Grant, barber, MJD and possibly bush depending on what I see out of New orleans in the preseason.

 

Our group had the 7 pick last year and took Bush in this structure, and while he did not blow anyone away with his rushing numbers, the combination of what he did put up along with his heavy involvement in the passing game made him a solid play every week. Owens is someone else i would consider at the 12/13 if we decide we are comfortable heading in to the season with a Thomas jones/Julius Jones type back as our #2 and none of the RBs that we have in the top 10 are left. One thing I very likely will not do is go WR/WR. I've seen this tried many times, even in this structure, and the failure rate is extremely high.

 

last year we won our league and went RB (Bush) / WR (Smith) / then I believe it was Portis, Holmes and I am blanking on our 5th round pick. What helped us a lot was being wise with out free agent spending and snagging Ryan Grant for the late season push.

 

ETA: And one other reason I am spending a lot of time in this thread is that it is very close to a true strategy discussion that has not disentigrated into flaming, and this is the type of discussion that gets my juices flowing plus opens my eyes up to other potential strategies that I may have overlooked, dismissed or not given much credit to that may be worthwhile.

Edited July 24, 2008 by Big Country

[Purple Hippos]

I have many people tell me the WR/WR theory dont work, yet in the 2 years prior to this year. I have been using it in my 12 and 16 team drafts I have had great teams, won 2 Super bowls(12 team redraft) back to back, and lost one Super bowl (My first year was last year here) in the 16 team league.

 

Now in a 10 team league I dont think that will work, and hasn't as I tried it last year and didnt even make the playoffs (I think injuries to my wr helped), but I swear by it in 12 or more teams. I am in the middle of the 16 team draft now (see sig for team), and after 4 rds my team looks pretty good going WR/WR. I have 5.14, and 5.15 coming up with 6.2 at the turn. I have to say its looking bright so far for this season.

 

As for flaming, im glad people are being civil. I never could understand getting mad over someone else talking up their draft opinions.

[Ice717]

I have many people tell me the WR/WR theory dont work, yet in the 2 years prior to this year. I have been using it in my 12 and 16 team drafts I have had great teams, won 2 Super bowls(12 team redraft) back to back, and lost one Super bowl (My first year was last year here) in the 16 team league.

 

Now in a 10 team league I dont think that will work, and hasn't as I tried it last year and didnt even make the playoffs (I think injuries to my wr helped), but I swear by it in 12 or more teams. I am in the middle of the 16 team draft now (see sig for team), and after 4 rds my team looks pretty good going WR/WR. I have 5.14, and 5.15 coming up with 6.2 at the turn. I have to say its looking bright so far for this season.

 

As for flaming, im glad people are being civil. I never could understand getting mad over someone else talking up their draft opinions.

 

Does your league allow for trading? Cause even though I've never been in WCOFF I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to trade so the WR/WR theory I think has less power in that kind of format. I don't belong to the RB/RB stud theory but I do think at least one is a must.

[Big Country]

I have many people tell me the WR/WR theory dont work, yet in the 2 years prior to this year. I have been using it in my 12 and 16 team drafts I have had great teams, won 2 Super bowls(12 team redraft) back to back, and lost one Super bowl (My first year was last year here) in the 16 team league.

 

Now in a 10 team league I dont think that will work, and hasn't as I tried it last year and didnt even make the playoffs (I think injuries to my wr helped), but I swear by it in 12 or more teams. I am in the middle of the 16 team draft now (see sig for team), and after 4 rds my team looks pretty good going WR/WR. I have 5.14, and 5.15 coming up with 6.2 at the turn. I have to say its looking bright so far for this season.

 

As for flaming, im glad people are being civil. I never could understand getting mad over someone else talking up their draft opinions.

 

My key question though would be what RBs did you draft, and when/ Not trying to take anything away from the draft skill involved, but if it involves finding the players that majorly outperform their draft position (ie Portis at RB last year, Ahman Green two years ago, Colston two years ago, etc.) then it is less about the actual strategy and more about the ability to find value later on. IMO, QB and WR value are easier to come by in the latter rounds, especially WRs in a PPR league, than are RBs. In WCOFF, it was not uncommon two years ago to see drafts where 20-22 of the first 24 picks were RBs. Last year I think it was closer to 18-20 RBs average in the first two rounds. The thing that I have come to realize in drafting at WCOFF vs. my more casual local leagues is that if someone is plunking down $1800 for a team, they know what they are doing so those RBs with potential value do not fall like they may in that local, so, while it is hard to find good sleeper value later on, in these leagues it is virtually impossible as you generally are up against 11 other owners that do very thorough research.

 

Does your league allow for trading? Cause even though I've never been in WCOFF I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to trade so the WR/WR theory I think has less power in that kind of format. I don't belong to the RB/RB stud theory but I do think at least one is a must.

 

in WCOFF, there is no trading, and that is certainly a major consideration. In my experience, you are much more likely to find WR value on the waiver wire than you are RB value. It is amazing just how deep into the RB depths owners go in WCOFF just because of this, so it is very difficult to find that RB value. Grant was an anomaly last year, in the prior year's I don't recall an RB near that impactful be available on the WW. I suppose this is part of the reason of leaning towards at minimum 1 RB in the first two rounds.