BS Miscreant Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 From a previous thread: RB's - Just nothing short of an all out feeding frenzy. Like the first 2 rounds are ending up literally 20 to 22 RBs. The odd thing is that after LT, Alexander, James and Holmes - the order just goes almost completely unpredictable. They all go, but in recent memory I have not seen such a wide variety of how they are valued ever. And yet - everyone HAS TO HAVE ONE, MORE MORE MORE. If you select a QB or WR in your first 2 picks, you can just about write off having two legitimate starting RBs. 820131[/snapback] DMD, although those trends do surprise me a bit because I figured everybody to be QB crazy this year, I tend to agree with them. Instead of everyone taking their time with RBs due to the depth, it appears everyone is going bonkers over them because RBs are all we've been hearing about. Speculation of course but thats the way it seems. 820223[/snapback] I'd like to add to this that I expected more variety in the first two rounds this year but having done several mocks I decide to check out what MFLs and Antsports mocks are looking like and they seem to follow the same trend. According to last year's mocks and drafts, 12-13 RBs were typically going in the first two rounds. This year 17-18 typically and up to 20 RBs are going in the first two. You can actually land a top 5 rated WR in the third. In fact, in a serious mock I'm in right now, CJ, Holt and Harrison all went in the 3rd. This was a ridiculous prospect last year in the drafts I was in. The theory: Although Manning is going much higher this year, most people seem to be feeling that they can actually have two quality starters at RB with their first two picks regardless of draft position. Instead of the apparent RB depth carrying more "quality" backs deeper into the draft it has created an early run more often than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted July 14, 2005 Share Posted July 14, 2005 From a previous thread:I'd like to add to this that I expected more variety in the first two rounds this year but having done several mocks I decide to check out what MFLs and Antsports mocks are looking like and they seem to follow the same trend. According to last year's mocks and drafts, 12-13 RBs were typically going in the first two rounds. This year 17-18 typically and up to 20 RBs are going in the first two. You can actually land a top 5 rated WR in the third. In fact, in a serious mock I'm in right now, CJ, Holt and Harrison all went in the 3rd. This was a ridiculous prospect last year in the drafts I was in. The theory: Although Manning is going much higher this year, most people seem to be feeling that they can actually have two quality starters at RB with their first two picks regardless of draft position. Instead of the apparent RB depth carrying more "quality" backs deeper into the draft it has created an early run more often than not. 879305[/snapback] Excellent point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 15, 2005 Author Share Posted July 15, 2005 Thanks Fatman. What, too obvious for everyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EZDoesit Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I think you're right on with that.....in fact, in both of my leagues last year, I could see this pattern starting to develop. Several teams going for 3 rb's in the first five rounds, etc.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispirons Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 i'm thinking of drafting rb's in all of the first three rounds. might take gates or gonzo in the 4th round. playing some hunches at wr of people i think are going to step up later in the draft. curious to see what this approach nets me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 From a previous thread:I'd like to add to this that I expected more variety in the first two rounds this year but having done several mocks I decide to check out what MFLs and Antsports mocks are looking like and they seem to follow the same trend. According to last year's mocks and drafts, 12-13 RBs were typically going in the first two rounds. This year 17-18 typically and up to 20 RBs are going in the first two. You can actually land a top 5 rated WR in the third. In fact, in a serious mock I'm in right now, CJ, Holt and Harrison all went in the 3rd. This was a ridiculous prospect last year in the drafts I was in. The theory: Although Manning is going much higher this year, most people seem to be feeling that they can actually have two quality starters at RB with their first two picks regardless of draft position. Instead of the apparent RB depth carrying more "quality" backs deeper into the draft it has created an early run more often than not. 879305[/snapback] Very interesting... I wonder if it will also affect the player values in auction style drafting this season? I'm just guessing that without the urgency that a serpentine draft can create, you'll still see the top QB's and WR's going for a very high percentage of an auction salary cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I totally agree. My brief take and admission that maybe I'm too much into VBD. You've got 3, maybe 4 (Bulger) QBs and then everyone else right now. I don't see any of the big 3 even matching last year's production. Culpepper lost Moss, the honeymoon is over in Philly and Manning's 2004 season come along once every 20 years. So I don't see an unsurmountable (sp?) difference from the QB position in any standard scoring system. I'll wait trusting my hunch that there are 7 to 9 QBs that didn't make the top 10 in 2004 that could in 2005. WRs are WRs. IMHO the toughest position to draft so I'm in no rush there. While there are a lot more "legit" RBs this year, after the first 3-5 there are enough questions about the rest to make it tough to draft and it gets even tougher once 24 picks have been made. Even if Manning, Culpepper, Moss and TO go in the first two rounds you are likely looking at 20 RBs being taken. Using the huddle's ranking system and assuming that 19 RBs will be gone by the time the 2.12 rolls around, if you take Manning #1 overall you are looking at C. Brown, C. Benson and T. Bell at the turn and you have no RBs. Heck even if McNabb and TO go in the first 23 picks, you only get to add Steven Jackson and LaMont Jordan into the mix. All 5 have "ifs" associated with any 2005 projections. Of course it sounds like I'm preaching to the choir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 Using the huddle's ranking system and assuming that 19 RBs will be gone by the time the 2.12 rolls around, if you take Manning #1 overall you are looking at C. Brown, C. Benson and T. Bell at the turn and you have no RBs. Heck even if McNabb and TO go in the first 23 picks, you only get to add Steven Jackson and LaMont Jordan into the mix. All 5 have "ifs" associated with any 2005 projections. Of course it sounds like I'm preaching to the choir. 880570[/snapback] See my post in the "Manning First" thread. The repercussions are far deeper IMHO than just at the RB position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I've got TO going twice in the first two rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted July 15, 2005 Share Posted July 15, 2005 I've got TO going twice in the first two rounds. 880588[/snapback] You've GOT to quit smoking that stuff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 See my post in the "Manning First" thread. The repercussions are far deeper IMHO than just at the RB position. 880579[/snapback] Sorry Captain Caveman, but since you got that new avi I haven't read a word you write... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 Sorry Captain Caveman, but since you got that new avi I haven't read a word you write... 881257[/snapback] He writes? So ... is the depth of RB's, or the vast uncertainty of RB's that makes people load up on RB's .. in other words your #2 is not that sure, so you have to go immediately for another one so that you have someone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizards Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 In our Dynasty League(Live Draft right now): 20 Rb's went in the first 24 picks...only Manning, Culpepper, Moss and Chad Johnson cracked the 24....see below: http://unrealleagues.com/draft_home.asp?DraftID=45 3rd round went: Harrison, Holt, McNabb and Horn in that order.... another live draft...Dynasty--19 of the first 24 were RB's see below: http://unrealleagues.com/draft_home.asp?DraftID=47 basically you get stuck with the Chris brown, Dunn type backs if you go QB or WR in the first two rounds.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 Sorry Captain Caveman, but since you got that new avi I haven't read a word you write... 881257[/snapback] I could put the other one back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 I'd sure love to get my hands on a Holt in the 3rd round. If this is true in most drafts that everybody is taking RBs than I see a good advantage in having the first or second pick in the draft. Take two good RBs and take a top WR to boot, unless Daunte is still there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted July 16, 2005 Share Posted July 16, 2005 I'd sure love to get my hands on a Holt in the 3rd round. If this is true in most drafts that everybody is taking RBs than I see a good advantage in having the first or second pick in the draft. Take two good RBs and take a top WR to boot, unless Daunte is still there. 881901[/snapback] I think with the way RB's are looking and how murky things are this year...I'd rather have a late pick so I have 2 players around 1st/2nd round value...and then get those 2 more picks in rounds 3 and 4...that's where the value is... Only because I think you'll see players like S Jackson, L Jordan, K Jones and Rudi emerge this year around the top 10 easily.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomfin2000 Posted July 17, 2005 Share Posted July 17, 2005 (edited) i'm thinking of drafting rb's in all of the first three rounds. might take gates or gonzo in the 4th round. playing some hunches at wr of people i think are going to step up later in the draft. curious to see what this approach nets me. 880504[/snapback] I tried something similar to that last year and I wasn't very happy with the results: Edge/Fred Taylor/Gonzo/Griffin/Suggs/Bulger I know that looks ridiculous now, but there wasn't much difference in the perception of Griffin and Suggs at this time last year and the perception of the rookie RBs and first year starters that are going in the 3rd and 4th rounds this year. The reason I took Suggs is that all the Tier 2 WRs (and even a couple of the Tier 3 WRs) were already gone by the fifth round, and I thought he was too good of a value at that spot to pass up even though I had already drafted 3 RBs. (Yeah, I know...not one of my brighter moments.) I ended up with Stallworth as my No. 1 WR. I don't have to tell you how ugly that was. I had to make some trades, so prior to the start of the season I traded Taylor for Hines Ward and shortly after the start of the season, I traded Gonzo for Chad Johnson. Those two trades ended up pretty even, but I would have been a lot better off if I had gone: Edge/Holt or Owens/Gonzo/Griffin/Suggs/Bulger or Edge/Taylor/Gonzo/DJax/Suggs/Bulger In short, if you wait until the fifth round to grab your first WR, odds are, you're going to spend the rest of the draft (and the season) trying to compensate for it. IMHO, it's not worth getting that 3rd RB (which will typically carry the same risk this year that Griffin and Suggs did last year) early if it comes at the expense of having a Tier 3 WR as your top wideout. You can go for 3 RBs in the first five rounds, or you can go for a TE in the first five rounds, but if you try to do both, you're in trouble. Edited July 17, 2005 by tomfin2000 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.