Make a move or not...my RB's from this weekends draft...

[Clevelander]

alot of replies on this as others have been in similar spots. this is the 1st time ive gone with taking a wr 1st.

without the shopping of harrison first, pending the depth of other rosters how much value can i get do you think for a package with toomer and garner then...? prob. depends on the depth teams have. here a roster grid if you want to look.

http://linkccl.football.sportsline.com/teams/grid

[yoda83]

cornbread, you forgot Exhibit C: last year, i drafted WRs w/ my first three picks, was second in scoring in the league and made it to the championship. would i have taken harrison over henry this year? no. but everyone on this thread is burying cleve's team and that just isnt the case.

i know it's easy to chant "two RBs, two RBs". but a better motto to repeat would be "prepare and adapt". i had to watch my roommate win 3 championships (while emphasising points, not just RBs) until i figured that out. you take what the draft gives you and cleve got a very good team. strongest RB corp? probably not. VERY serviceable? yes. and w/ his other strengths, he could be and should be alright this season (epecially if his backs get rec pts... do they, cleve?).

and corn, it IS about points. that's how you win fantasy football games. SECOND HIGHEST in the league and still no postseason? MOST POINTS and a .500 record? i'll chalk that up to bad luck for one season. any more than that, and that's on the owner.

[Cornbread Maxwell]

Yoda - I agree with your be prepared and adapt philosophy to a point. I also believe in RBs win championships. I guess if you put those 2 mottos together, you would probably have the best advice.

I do not agree that the most points scored wins championships. That simply isnt true. Sure, one objective is to score as many points as you can, but it has to go hand in hand with consistancy. Thats why WRs are not worth as much - they are too inconsistant and they score fewer points. Sure, in tweaked scoring where you get extra points per reception, everything changes.

However, what we are talking about here is at the heart of fantasy philosophy - WRs v. RBs. Your right - it is easy to chant RBs!Rbs!, but the hard part is getting people to understand why. How many times have you gone over to the Rate my team forum and seen this mistake? For me its almost on every team thats posted - they go for WRs when they should be going for RBs. I am not going to sit here and say thats ok. Im going to say, "no, you need RBs more than top teir WRs" every time. Im going to repeat it like a mantra until they listen.

I think its funny that you posted Exhibit 3 - look I took 3 WRs with my first 3 rds and I did Great! - oh, by the way, I also stole Portis. You dont see the hypocracy there?

[mister N]

cornbread...you are all over anyone who disagrees with you. chill out. its just fantasy football.

oh and by the way, there isnt any hypocracy there. he took 3 WR in the first 3 rounds and then stole portis (sleeper) later in the draft. thats his point, that you dont have to have 2 solid RBs in the draft to do well. although i do say you have a better chance if you do so.

also, a guy in my league had owens harrison and mason and 2 OK RBs to start the season. he ended up with the most points in the league and made it into the 4-team playoff