In a league that starts 1 QB, 1 RB, 1 RB/WR, 1 WR, 1 TE, and 1 any offense position, does WR become the new QB? In other words, do you not draft a WR until the middle rounds?
Scoring is not too weird (1 point ever 25 yards passing, 1 point every 10 rushing/receiving), 4 pts passing TD, 6 pts rushing/receiving TD, with small bonuses for long TD runs, throws, and receptions)
Also, I am assuming that you would want to start a RB in the RB/WR slot and a QB in the Util spot?
I would draft 2 backs first and then pick the best available QB or wide receiver and pick whatever wasn't picked in the third in the fourth.
12 Team Roethlisberger Addai, Jones-Drew, T. Jones, K. Smith, Slaton, Bradshaw Colston, Berrian, Burleson, B. Johnson, A. Gonzalez, Meacham L.J. Smith Buffalo
You might get more bites on this thread in the draft, trade, waiver forum.
12 Team Roethlisberger Addai, Jones-Drew, T. Jones, K. Smith, Slaton, Bradshaw Colston, Berrian, Burleson, B. Johnson, A. Gonzalez, Meacham L.J. Smith Buffalo
RBs don't outscore WRs in general. That is a misunderstanding. There is no reason to start an RB in a RB/WR slot unless he is definately better a better player based on points per week.
Look at your league player lists filtered by RB/WR and sort by points for last year. Count the number of RB vs WRs for each set of 24. That tells you which position has the most value. Dont just look at the first 24. Count the second and third sets too.
Because of position scarcity there are only so many great RBs, so in most leagues you usually want to try to get at least two or three of them. However, once your getting down the line, WRs will add as many points or more then a comparable RB.
Because you DONT need to start a second RB, you only really need to make sure you get one RB stud. I'd try to get more, but maybe you can't and after the top 24 or so RBs, WR will give you as many points. No reason to reach for a lower scoring RB over a WR. Get the highest point player.
I think you're right that the util slot should be a QB. Again compare their scoring to what else you have available. You may want to draft QB a little higher then normal since starting two could add up.
RBs don't outscore WRs in general. That is a misunderstanding. There is no reason to start an RB in a RB/WR slot unless he is definately better a better player based on points per week.
Look at your league player lists filtered by RB/WR and sort by points for last year. Count the number of RB vs WRs for each set of 24. That tells you which position has the most value. Dont just look at the first 24. Count the second and third sets too.
Because of position scarcity there are only so many great RBs, so in most leagues you usually want to try to get at least two or three of them. However, once your getting down the line, WRs will add as many points or more then a comparable RB.
Because you DONT need to start a second RB, you only really need to make sure you get one RB stud. I'd try to get more, but maybe you can't and after the top 24 or so RBs, WR will give you as many points. No reason to reach for a lower scoring RB over a WR. Get the highest point player.
I think you're right that the util slot should be a QB. Again compare their scoring to what else you have available. You may want to draft QB a little higher then normal since starting two could add up.
You're missing the premise. Having a starting quality RB in that RB/WR gives you a significant advantage over someone who has the starting quality WR.
Especially considering how few WRs you have to start with that lineup, the depth at WR puts even more priority on RBs. Of course, with such small starting rosters there is alot more depth than usual at all positions. People wont be drafting WRs as early because they won't need them. Depending on who was there with my 2nd rounder, I might not take a WR until the 5th round with this format.
RBs don't outscore WRs in general. That is a misunderstanding. There is no reason to start an RB in a RB/WR slot unless he is definately better a better player based on points per week.
Look at your league player lists filtered by RB/WR and sort by points for last year. Count the number of RB vs WRs for each set of 24. That tells you which position has the most value. Dont just look at the first 24. Count the second and third sets too.
Because of position scarcity there are only so many great RBs, so in most leagues you usually want to try to get at least two or three of them. However, once your getting down the line, WRs will add as many points or more then a comparable RB.
Because you DONT need to start a second RB, you only really need to make sure you get one RB stud. I'd try to get more, but maybe you can't and after the top 24 or so RBs, WR will give you as many points. No reason to reach for a lower scoring RB over a WR. Get the highest point player.
I think you're right that the util slot should be a QB. Again compare their scoring to what else you have available. You may want to draft QB a little higher then normal since starting two could add up.
You're missing the premise. Having a starting quality RB in that RB/WR gives you a significant advantage over someone who has the starting quality WR.
Especially considering how few WRs you have to start with that lineup, the depth at WR puts even more priority on RBs. Of course, with such small starting rosters there is alot more depth than usual at all positions. People wont be drafting WRs as early because they won't need them. Depending on who was there with my 2nd rounder, I might not take a WR until the 5th round with this format.
Really you can work it either way depending on how the draft falls. WRs could be worth your while if you draft say Holt/Moss as starters instead of Holt/DeShaun Foster
ADMIN edit: please note that the overall sig limit is 12k - thanks! (Thanks Leber) AIM is like multiplayer notepad
skibrett15 wrote:Really you can work it either way depending on how the draft falls. WRs could be worth your while if you draft say Holt/Moss as starters instead of Holt/DeShaun Foster
I agree with that statement. I ran Fitzgerald in a flex spot last year and it worked out ok for me. He certainly turned out better than Kevin Jones, who was my other candidate for that position.
Starting RBs don't always give you a siginficant advantage over starting WRs.
skibrett15 wrote:Really you can work it either way depending on how the draft falls. WRs could be worth your while if you draft say Holt/Moss as starters instead of Holt/DeShaun Foster
It can. I wouldnt take any WR over a quality 2nd RB or either of Peyton and Palmer though. Hence i think the in the more typic RB/WR spot around 8th or 9th, I'd end up going RB/QB instead.
not that this erally matters since this is a unique league that neither of us are a part of, but why QB? Assuming Peyton is gone I'd think the top 5 WRs are going to outperform their peers better than the QBs in the second will respectively.
ADMIN edit: please note that the overall sig limit is 12k - thanks! (Thanks Leber) AIM is like multiplayer notepad
skibrett15 wrote:not that this erally matters since this is a unique league that neither of us are a part of, but why QB? Assuming Peyton is gone I'd think the top 5 WRs are going to outperform their peers better than the QBs in the second will respectively.
Figure everyone in the league is going to start a QB in the utility slot, making this in reality a 2 QB league.
Now, is a top5 QB going to outscore a top20 QB by a lot? Exactly.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by John Bonzo » Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:17 am 
