Why does everyone interpret "flex" to mean another RB? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Why does everyone interpret "flex" to mean another RB?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Why does everyone interpret "flex" to mean another RB?

Postby Big Pimpin » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:53 pm

I can understand this logic if you draft RB/RB/RB and have three legitimate #1 RBs. Or you start 3 WRs and don't have a great fourth WR. But under some circumstances, it seems appropriate to play with a WR in your flex position.

For instance, in my money league we start 2 RBs, 2 WRs, and a flex. I drafted 12th (of 12) and went Fitz/CJ, then picked up KJones, Droughns, TJones, AGreen. I also couldn't pass up Driver in the sixth when he was still available (and I had him as around the #12 WR). So now I'm playing matchups with my RBs and starting CJ, Fitz, and Driver. After tonight (barring FWP outscoring Heath Miller by 32 points) I should be 2-0, so I can't complain.

So, what are the thoughts? Why do we collectively think RBs are so much "safer" than WRs? I watch every week as guys who are the #1 RB on their respective teams go for 40-70 yards with 0 TDs, so I just don't get why everyone interprets "flex" to mean "the next best RB on your roster."
Big Pimpin
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Eagle EyeCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 853
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: On the dark side

Postby mattb47 » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:56 pm

Normally when there is a flex spot, it is helpful to draft as though there are 3 RBs spots. The big reason is touches, starting RBs will get 20+ touches per game normally which gives them a much higher chance to do well with those touches than a receiver who will get 5-8 usually on a good day. The potential is just much higher considering the amount of opportunities each has, and then RBs are generally more consistent as well.
Image
mattb47
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 14238
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby skinsfan » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:56 pm

RB always will get more yards than WR and usually more TD.
Skins fan through thick and thin.
skinsfan
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2228
Joined: 6 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: DC

Postby Mercer Boy » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:57 pm

The plain and simple reason - RB's touch the ball more often than WR's. Therefore, they have more chances to gain yardage or get a TD. It's also a lot easier to hand the ball off than it is to make an accurate throw and catch the ball. The gain is usually larger, but harder to accomplish.

There's nothing wrong with using a WR in flex if he has a great matchup. This week I used Reggie Brown in a flex over Chris Brown (note RBBC are probably as good as a #2 WR if you're lucky :-P), and Reggie outscored Chris by a substantial margin. I still lost, but at least I picked the right player... :-/
The One, the Only, the Incomparable Mercer Boy.
My My YouTube.
Mercer Boy
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterLucky Ladders ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 12045
Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: New Castle, PA

Postby FatFoot » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:01 pm

skinsfan wrote:RB always will get more yards than WR and usually more TD.


The first part, you're wrong on. The second part is debatable.

IMO, the factor is not position as much as it is points. A top WR is better than a bottom RB. But RBs generally have a more predictable output, so they're more reliable, points-wise. The other reason for going RB is that RBs get hurt, and you're out of luck. There are usually enough WRs around to get some value even when a stud goes down.
FatFoot
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerEagle Eye
Posts: 3259
Joined: 28 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: In the Belly of the Beast

Postby Matthias » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:09 pm

FatFoot wrote:But RBs generally have a more predictable output, so they're more reliable, points-wise.


That's it right there.

If you have an RB who has the job to themself, they might have a bad week like Caddy did and end up with less than 40 yards and no TDs. But that's not the norm. The norm is getting 20+ touches which, just by virtue of quantity, normally adds up to 80+ yards. And a decent shot of a TD.

Most #1 WRs (there's a few elite exceptions) have about a 30% probability of busting for over 100 and 1+ scores, a 40% probability of doing under 50 yards and no scords, and about a 30% chance of getting less than 20 yards (approximately). So you might get a day like Driver had yesterday, but you might get the big donut.

If you're entering Monday down 20 pts, that might be a good option for you over an RB. But, as a general rule, it's always good to rack up the safe points.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 2398
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Big Pimpin » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:25 pm

"Safe points" is the exact thing I'm questioning... Maybe it's just the virtue of the RBs on my team (Droughns, KJones, TJones, Green, Barber, and Lundy) that I don't consider any of them to be "safe points." Maybe I should have gone with a McGahee or Westbrook with one of my first two picks, and this would be moot. However, what's done is done.

In any case, I was told pre-season that I should be starting TJones over Driver in my flex spot. Fitz and CJ are starters every week regardless for me, but I'm very high on Driver, and consider him to be pretty "safe" for points. I know Favre's going to throw the rock, I know he's going to target Driver, and I would not be surprised to see Driver put up 1300-1500 yards this year.

Are guys we would consider #3 RBs really safer than WRs? Admittedly, my RBs are serviceable at best, and I certainly lack the "stud" guy (but then ask an Edge/Lamont owner how "safe" their so-called "studs" are ;-) ) who is a must-start every week. And maybe I just have a great #3 WR who makes this a different situation for my team than most. However, there is a laundry list of guys who are #2/#3 RBs who I don't consider as "safe points." Anyone with the last name Jones, JLew, CTaylor, FTaylor, the Bells, Foster, Dillon, Duece, etc.

Heck, look at Droughns. He has zero competition for the job, and has a grand total of 25 carries in two games. That's not guaranteed production by any means. And when you really start looking at the RBs it really makes me question why (outside of 10-15 guys) we consider them to generally be "safer" than WRs.

Just trying to get a feel for this phenomena. ;-D
Big Pimpin
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Eagle EyeCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 853
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: On the dark side

Postby saundman2000 » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:41 pm

skinsfan wrote:RB always will get more yards than WR and usually more TD.


This is becoming less and less the case with all the RBBC's. If you have a #3 RB that is not part of a RBBC, you are in good shape, but I think the majority of owners in 10 or 12 team leagues do not have a featured back as their #3.

If you compare a #3 RB to a #3 WR, it could be the case that you would want to start the WR all year. It totally depends on who you have.
RIDERS OF THE STORM
QB Vick
RB Adrian Peterson, Matt Forte, Lesean McCoy
WR Brandon Marshall, Kenny Britt
TE ?
DEF Flavor of the Week
K ?

=====> Post Feedback if my Reply Helped you
saundman2000
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Cafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 1883
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Illinois

Postby Dan Lambskin » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:43 pm

during the season i will draft to fill that spot with 3 RB's every week...but during the season i will play matchups and start the player i think will score the most points that week, regardless of position

at the beginning of the season i'd have told you start Jones over Driver too, but now i would put in Driver until either Jones can show you something
Dan Lambskin
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 7054
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: being a fan of the worst franchise in the NFL

Postby My team is injured » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:58 pm

you know, this is something that I begin to change my view on early last season and have completely gone full swing by now... I now view WRs as the much better play for a flex spot for most fantasy teams in 10 or 12 team leagues..

I only speak for PPR leagues as I don't know the scoring for non PPR leagues...

but I honestly don't think it's all that close anymore... I don't have much time now but I can rattle off plenty of receivers drafted as 3rd or 4th WR who I think are better plays than your average number 3 RB... Antonio Bryant, Laveraneus Coles, Donald Driver, Drew Bennett (though TEN's rotating QB situation worries me), Matt Jones, etc..

I'll try to post a more thorough analysis later, but I value WR a lot more in PPR leagues for flex spots and I disagree that they aren't every bit as consistent.. in fact, I think it's easier to find a consistent 3rd WR than a consistent 3rd RB
All of my analysis is based on PPR
My team is injured
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

Cafe Blackjack ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 413
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football


Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 7:48 hours
(and 36 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact