The problem with the I will just grab an elite QB in the 1st or 2nd is that even this year the elite options haven't really panned out. Manning/Palmer/McNabb/Bulger/Brees all have under preformed, Brady is really the only that has over preformed. While TO and Moss are scoring pts left and right you could have easily picked SSmith/Holt/Harrison/CJ/Fitz/Boldin/AJohnson/Walker. While some of these guys are starting to pickup again you might already be out of the race.
RBs still should go early. How many top running backs this year were consistently found past the sixth or even fifth round? Apart from the occasional drop of AD and Lynch, nobody. How many top QBs were found there? At quarterback, you have Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, Brett Favre, Derek Anderson, Matt Hasselbeck, and Jeff Garcia all having years worthy of either starter or elite backup consideration, when most of these players were either drafted as backups or not drafted at all. At wide receiver, there are much more: Braylon Edwards, Bobby Engram, Wes Welker, Santonio Holmes, Greg Jennings, Brandon Marshall, Derrick Mason, and Joey Galloway are all having good years, and rarely did any of these players go before the sixth round.
Not to mention that running backs get more touches that net points than anyone else in football. Quarterbacks touch the ball every snap, but almost half the time it's to hand off, and other times it's incompletions, fumbles, and interceptions. Wide receivers are lucky to get more than 10 touches per game. Starting running backs consistently get 20-25 touches per game on average, and most of these touches net positive points. Running backs can perform well even if the team doesn't have a great day running the ball, whereas a quarterback or wide receiver almost always suffers if the team can't pass the ball.
Kudos to Leber for the amazing sig and to Metroid for the userbar and making them both fit 2008 and 2009 Defunct Dynasty League Champion
FatFoot wrote:You draft RBs first due to positional scarcity.
That basically sums it up.
This season will not change my thought process of drafting. I will draft RB's first, because if you wait, you'll get no one. The people that got ADP, Moss, Brady, etc. came out lucky. What has happened this year changes nothing. You can get lucky. No need to change your philosophy because the 1st Round RB's haven't been very good this season. You know why? I'm sure there will be many new 1st Round RB's to pick from next year. And there will be busts. That's how fantasy football works. The only reason people will be questioning the RB philosophy is because there have been more 1st round busts then usual years because of injuries. Injuries. Injuries have plagued RB's this year, causing bad stats. RB's that weren't injury prone have gotten injured. You can't expect this to happen. Sometimes you just get unlucky.
jcde7ago wrote:For example, in a 12-team league, i was lucky to get the 1st pick; obviously, that honor went to LT. However, by the time my 2nd pick would come around i knew there would be little chance i could get a 2nd elite RB option, and Manning was long gone so i nabbed Brady/T.O. back to back with my 2nd/3rd sandwich picks. That gave me a nice, top-tier core at the QB, WR and RB positions. Then i just played vulture and tried to draft to fill in the rest of my positions based on value. On my 4th and 5th sandwich picks i was able to grab Moss and Barber; on my 6th and 7th picks Lynch and Branch. Needless to say, based on this year this team has pretty much dominated.
Now if you're drafting toward the end, say 10-12th position, then i would go RB/RB. Even still, with the lack of quality QB's in the NFL, a very good argument can be made by going RB/QB. Either way, drafting an elite core at RB/QB/WR to me in that order this year has somewhat changed my drafting strategy pretty much from now on; if i am a top 2-3 pick, i'll probably opt out of an RB/RB/WR situation and instead nab a top tier QB.
What would your strategy be if you pick in the 5-8 range?
Last edited by chipper on Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This is brought up every year and every year the answer is pretty much the same. The big reason why you take RBs early is summed up nicely in the Value-Based Drafting strategy. This pretty much includes looking at position scarcity and how players finish comparatively with other players at their position.
The fact that so many QBs are finishing with very big numbers is evidence itself that you don't need to take a QB high because you'll get very good numbers from any number of different QBs who will all finish high in the league's scoring system. And when you only have to start 1 QB, there will be plenty for you to choose from in the mid rounds of a draft.
This would be a completely different discussion if you're talking about a 2 QB league, but in normal leagues where you start 1 QB and usually 2-3 RBs, the fact that there are so few true starting RBs in the NFL who you can depend on for weekly production makes the position a must have early on. Say you're in a 12 team league. You have 32 starting QBs to choose from for probably just 24 spots (starter and backup for each team) in your league. If you start 2 RBs each and a flex (which many leagues do now), that's at least 24 starting RBs in your league, plus flex players, plus backups. Considering how many backs are part of a committee approach and you have far less than 24 true starting RBs to choose from.
Remember, we had a year when QBs dominated a few years ago with Peyton and Culpepper going nuts, and people got burned by going with QBs early the following year.
I understand the issues of scarcity, draft positions, consistency, etc...In order to back up those points though, you must be able to show some numbers - some actual production. What I'm seeing right now is awful inconsistency out of RBs, not QBs. I think we are having a hard time separating what we thought would be a great idea from what really is - what we think is good strategy from what actually happens.
What does that mean when the top 9 players in FF are QBs? it means they score more point. isn't that the purpose? right now Earnest Graham = Willie Parker, Edge = MJD, Henry = Alexander (both awful), Portis = McGahee (probably expected) but they are still the 5th and 6th overall RBs scoring only 13 pts per week. The difference between the top-half average Fantasy starting RB and the 30th overall RB is about 5 points a week, actually less (ultimately depends on your scoring system).
I think its a big deal that to this point in the season I could have drafted kenny watson and derrick ward and been equal or better in comparison to alexander, henry, the list goes on. Sure, Derek Anderson fits that mold, but the list grows slim after that..the order may be different, but the players are at least the same. At the end of the day, any active waiver wire watcher can do decent at the RB position as the year goes on. 2 of your 4 RBs will get hurt and you just have to hope its not the first 2 you drafted. I'm not saying to abondon the RB position at all, or even to stray from picking up an RB first, but QBs are just more valuable - how that translates to "strategy" and the law of averages, standard deviations, or positional scarcity I'm not sure everyone will agree, but I know what is winning my fantasy league right now...the guy that picked Peyton Manning first and the best remaining RB left in the draft.
scotch27 wrote:What does that mean when the top 9 players in FF are QBs? it means they score more point. isn't that the purpose? right now Earnest Graham = Willie Parker, Edge = MJD, Henry = Alexander (both awful), Portis = McGahee (probably expected) but they are still the 5th and 6th overall RBs scoring only 13 pts per week. The difference between the top-half average Fantasy starting RB and the 30th overall RB is about 5 points a week, actually less (ultimately depends on your scoring system).
You're still missing the point that you start 1 QB and usually 3 RB's.