CardinalEmpire.com Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Spin-off from my other thread... let's say your league decides tomorrow to change things up and go 2 WR, 1 RB, and 1 WR/RB flex. Knowing you only HAD to start 1 RB, would you still pick a RB with anything other than the #1 overall? I'm thinking there is so much uncertainty with picks 2-6 this year and a lot of good potential in rounds 3 & 4. Why go RB early when you can potentially have a duo of Fitz/Johnson/Moss? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider321 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Because RB's win fantasy championships. I wish people would stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qball86 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Seems like a rule made by someone who doesn't typically draft well, esp the RB position. Even with the #2 rb becoming a flex wr/rb I would bet most people will still start 2 RBs as they typically produce more points per game than WRs. In that league I certainly would still start 2 of each rb/wr until one of my RBs got hurt and had to sit for a few weeks. Reason being you won't get to draft 3 WRs that are worth starting over a 2nd RB. Even at the end of the snake you can only get 2 wrs and then you wait around 18 or more picks for the next WR? Just because you don't have to start two players from the most productive position doesn't mean you shouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I have 4 WRs worthy of a 1st round pick: Moss, Fitz, Johnson & Johnson. (Not Chad) Depending on the scoring system and number of teams, I also consider Brees and Brady to be worth 1st round picks. At RB, I think Peterson and MJD are the top two, but after that, I'd go WR. Then I'd mix in LT and the QBs. That's 9 players If you've got 12 teams, that leaves 3 more RBs for the first round. Westbrook, Slaton, Turner, Forte, DeAngelo - depends on who you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I have 4 WRs worthy of a 1st round pick: Moss, Fitz, Johnson & Johnson. (Not Chad) Depending on the scoring system and number of teams, I also consider Brees and Brady to be worth 1st round picks. At RB, I think Peterson and MJD are the top two, but after that, I'd go WR. Then I'd mix in LT and the QBs. That's 9 players If you've got 12 teams, that leaves 3 more RBs for the first round. Westbrook, Slaton, Turner, Forte, DeAngelo - depends on who you like. QBs just are not worth 1st round picks, imo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Because RB's win fantasy championships. I wish people would stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Not anymore. I wish people would stop living in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Not anymore. I wish people would stop living in the past. there has always been the biggest dropoff at RB when drafting....and that is where the difference lies... QB's have a couple that are great, but there are a bunch that can get you by....and as for WR, they are far too inconsistent except for a few.... a starting RB touches the ball a minimum of 15 times a game.....that's where the strength lies....but I like this new train of thought that people have....there's no wrong way to draft, just more effective ways.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 there has always been the biggest dropoff at RB when drafting....and that is where the difference lies... QB's have a couple that are great, but there are a bunch that can get you by....and as for WR, they are far too inconsistent except for a few.... a starting RB touches the ball a minimum of 15 times a game.....that's where the strength lies....but I like this new train of thought that people have....there's no wrong way to draft, just more effective ways.. Agreed. Again, it depends on your leagues scoring but with the RBBC being more prominent than ever before the "need" to build your team through the RB position has all but dissapeared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xPattonx Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) Not anymore. I wish people would stop living in the past. Exactly... fact is if I can get Larry Fitz or Randy Moss late in round 1 that's the direction I'm going and I'll be just fine with Brandon Jacobs on the turn. I do admit though it's important to have that one consistent high scoring rb but you don't have to get that guy in round 1. And as far as rb 2's with so many committee backfields quality rb's can be had later in drafts. Wr talent dries up a lot earlier and doesn't plateau like rb talent it just keeps dropping off. I made sure to get 2 stud wr's in every draft (2 wr's within the first 3 rounds) being that I start 3 wr's I feel that is a solid strategy especially with so many quality rb's (McFadden, D.Ward, T.Jones, Lynch, etc.) available in middle rounds. I wouldn't want to leave round 2 without a rb though unless I left round 2 with a combo like Fitz/Moss and that's a different story altogether. It's simple the way I see it.. there are 4 wr's in the NFL that are impossible to cover and have a legit shot at 300+ fantasy points (Fitz,Moss,Andre,Calvin) and I want one of them if at all possible in every single draft and I'll take one in round 1 every time as long the top 5 rb's are off the board and I feel like I have a legit shot at a stud rb on the turn. Edited August 19, 2009 by xPattonx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I think that starting a mandatory RB with the option of starting another (instead of starting 2) slightly devalues a RB, but not by much. As far as whether I draft a RB, WR or whatever in a round, it depends on who is available and who I think is going to be available at my next pick. Getting locked into this whole "I'm going to go RB/WR/WR" or similar thing is silly. If Ladanian Tomlinson is there at 2.5 when I took Steve Slaton at 1.8 because of a run on WRs, I'm going to pick him instead of Anquan Boldin. I can live with Wes Welker as my #1 WR with two top RBs. So the answer to questions of this ilk is "it depends." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Here is a comment I made regarding from the POV of the #7 pick, as that is what we have in WCOFF, and have been debating at great length RB vs. WR. Right now, from the 7 hold, I am on the side of going RB. If someone can tell me which one of the WRs we would consider in the 1st (Fitz, Moss, AJ) is likely to significantly outscore the WRs we would be looking at in the 2nd round (Jennings, Colston, Wayne, Smith, CJ), I would soften my stance. If someone could tell me which RB we are looking at in the 2nd/3rd and beyond (Grant/DMcF/Westbrook/Bush) is likely to contribute similarly to the guys we are looking at in the 1st (SJax, Slaton, LT), I would soften my stance. At this point, I can not with any confidence produce an answer to either question. Essentially, I am more confident that a Jennings/Colston/Wayne type WR is more likely to put up numbers in the Moss/AJ/Fitz range than I am that an RB like Bush/Westbrook/Grant/McFadden is likely to put up numbers like a SJax/Slaton/LT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Spin-off from my other thread... let's say your league decides tomorrow to change things up and go 2 WR, 1 RB, and 1 WR/RB flex. Strictly hypothetical, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Not anymore. I wish people would stop living in the past. Exactly. How did Jackson and Larry Johnson work for people last year? You can draft 1 good RB and have a better team than everyone else in other departments while they race for RBs. The FA is always good for RBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Exactly. How did Jackson and Larry Johnson work for people last year? You can draft 1 good RB and have a better team than everyone else in other departments while they race for RBs. The FA is always good for RBs. poor examples here....I didn't even have LJ in my top 20 and Jackson came off a holdout which has a history of it's own among NFL players... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) Because RB's win fantasy championships. I wish people would stop trying to reinvent the wheel. The NFL is reinventing your wheel with scrambling QBs, more NFL rules that protect/allow WRs to get open, and RBBC. Who knows how the wildcat will further break the wheel? Edited August 19, 2009 by WaterMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider321 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) The NFL is reinventing your wheel with scrambling QBs, more NFL rules that protect/allow WRs to get open, and RBBC. Who knows how the wildcat will further break the wheel? LOL. Thank you for supporting my point for me, Water. How many of those scrambling qb's have won the Super Bowl? hint: the answer is "ZERO". (Elway and Young were no longer "scramblers" when they won it all) The more people try to change the game(fantasy and reality), the more it stays the same. Pocket passers still win Super Bowls. Stud rb's still win fantasy leagues. Edited August 19, 2009 by spider321 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medal of Honor Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Essentially, I am more confident that a Jennings/Colston/Wayne type WR is more likely to put up numbers in the Moss/AJ/Fitz range than I am that an RB like Bush/Westbrook/Grant/McFadden is likely to put up numbers like a SJax/Slaton/LT. This is my exact train of thought. It's not that you don't need two studs at each position (let's say an ESPN standard scoring league). It's that I think those studs can be found more easily out of the group of Tier 2 WRs than they can out of the group of Tier 2 RBs. I say go WR, RB or RB, WR. I would steer clear of WR, WR - especially in a 12-team league. With your third pick you should NEVER go in sure that you are going to pick a specific position. You should react based on what the other 9 or 11 teams are doing. Are RBs going off the board fast? If so do you want to fill that position with a warm body while there are still some left? Or go for a 3rd great WR for trade bait? Things like that. Don't plan your first 3 moves, or you might end up crying on draft day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Exactly... fact is if I can get Larry Fitz or Randy Moss late in round 1 that's the direction I'm going and I'll be just fine with Brandon Jacobs on the turn. I do admit though it's important to have that one consistent high scoring rb but you don't have to get that guy in round 1. And as far as rb 2's with so many committee backfields quality rb's can be had later in drafts. Wr talent dries up a lot earlier and doesn't plateau like rb talent it just keeps dropping off. I made sure to get 2 stud wr's in every draft (2 wr's within the first 3 rounds) being that I start 3 wr's I feel that is a solid strategy especially with so many quality rb's (McFadden, D.Ward, T.Jones, Lynch, etc.) available in middle rounds. I wouldn't want to leave round 2 without a rb though unless I left round 2 with a combo like Fitz/Moss and that's a different story altogether. It's simple the way I see it.. there are 4 wr's in the NFL that are impossible to cover and have a legit shot at 300+ fantasy points (Fitz,Moss,Andre,Calvin) and I want one of them if at all possible in every single draft and I'll take one in round 1 every time as long the top 5 rb's are off the board and I feel like I have a legit shot at a stud rb on the turn. That's pretty much my strategy as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 LOL. Thank you for supporting my point for me, Water. How many of those scrambling qb's have won the Super Bowl? I didn't realize we were talking about scrambling QBs' Super Bowl wins. The more people try to change the game(fantasy and reality), the more it stays the same. Who are these people? Guys on their keyboards? RBBC seems to be here to stay. Whatever happened to the staple of RB/FB? Oh yeah, it changed. Pocket passers still win Super Bowls. Ok, but we're talking about not going RB/RB in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medal of Honor Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I think I've had the best luck with RB, WR, WR. with the 7th pick in a 12-team league, I generally have Chris Johnson, Greg Jennings, and Colston. I feel better about that than Fitz, Jennings, and some clown like Westbrook or DMC leading my RB charge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider321 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) Water, I was responding to YOUR analogy. Way to take my statements out of context. You should be a politician. Edited August 19, 2009 by spider321 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Muto Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Because RB's win fantasy championships. I wish people would stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Spin-off from my other thread... let's say your league decides tomorrow to change things up and go 2 WR, 1 RB, and 1 WR/RB flex. Knowing you only HAD to start 1 RB, would you still pick a RB with anything other than the #1 overall? I'm thinking there is so much uncertainty with picks 2-6 this year and a lot of good potential in rounds 3 & 4. Why go RB early when you can potentially have a duo of Fitz/Johnson/Moss? I think it really depends on your scoring. if it's PPR, yeah maybe I think about a WR as early as the 4th or 5th pick (couldn't elevate any WR over AD, MJD and forte in a standard PPR). if it's not PPR, the top RBs are simply going to score more, you're probably better off going that direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I'd like to see a H2H, Huddle Fantasy Forum Battle between... spider321 -and- Henry Muto How can we make this happen? Bring back the Huddle Fights 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.