Let's Talk 7-12 round WR

[Kensat30]

So in one sentence you say you draft your WR3 and WR4 to get a surprise WR2 and then say you don't want Mason and Driver as your WR3 because they are consistently mediocre. You realize they both finished last year as WR2's and were drafted as a WR3/WR4 right?

I think it is pretty foolish just to write off the older guys who have been around the block a few times because of whatever misconception you have of them. Too many people spend too much of their time looking for that pipe dream WR1 in the 10th round. The allure of that "sexy" pick is what makes it sexy - no one has any idea how he will turn out and we all come up with our little theories while completing overlooking guys that have been getting it done for years. Some players overlook these guys because there isn't any fun in exploring what is already known. These aren't regularly competitive players.

Its a "give up" pick because why exactly? It doesn't require some trivial analysis that may or may not pan out? If you are the kind of fantasy player that is more interested in just being able to say you landed SoandSo last year in the 10th round, then by all means overlook the "give up" picks. But I'd be willing to wager that you completely wiff on these kind of players more often than you hit, making it a completely worthless pursuit.

I drafted Derrick Mason last year as my WR5 for terrific value, but I also dumped him after week 1 to grab Donte Rosario off the waiver wire. You can look up the week 1 waiver wire pickup thread in this forum from last year to see my explanation. After the season was over and Rosario was confirmed a total bust, I was criticized by several forum members for the dumb decision.

Personally, I think I made the right move even though Rosario busted. I drafted Derrick Mason as a WR5 as an insurance policy in case someone else turned out to be a massive bust on my team. I had both Steve Smith and Brandon Marshall serving suspensions early in the season and Mason was actually my early WR3. I drafted the guy as "depth" knowing that I could safely drop him to waiver to chase another hot player and that is exactly what I did. Rosario didn't pan out, but as the season progressed Mason's waiver spot eventually got filled with players like Mewelde and Lance Moore. Those guys ended up being difference makers for me for a period of time. I could have saved Mason and used him as a bye week filler all year and had an adequate WR3, but the guy would have cracked my lineup maybe one single time and only as a desperation play. I would rather have had Devone Bess and his 2 or 3 week stretch than guy like Mason all year long.

Bottomline, 1000/5 type WRs are good enough to roster but not good enough to play. I'd much rather grab a 800/6 type players that has a 3 or 4 week stretch where he is averaging 12 points a game. That's a guy that might see the field if he's playing the Detroit Lions. Versus a guy like Mason who looks good on paper, but ends up catching 6 catches for 60 yards in any given week. So how can a 10th round pick, that I feel that I have a high probability of replacing even with a waiver wire player, be considered a good pick? That comes a point in the draft when every player is value (Mason last year as a WR5 in round 14ish), but do I target those players at their "low" ADP? Absolutely not.

Donald Driver back in the day was an entirely different story. But Brett Favre is retired and Greg Jennings is there. I think the guy is a safe bet for 1000/5 type numbers but not much more than that. I'll draft him in the 14th round of my draft though if I see him there.

[loothor]

If you are the kind of fantasy player that is more interested in just being able to say you landed SoandSo last year in the 10th round, then by all means overlook the "give up" picks. But I'd be willing to wager that you completely wiff on these kind of players more often than you hit, making it a completely worthless pursuit.

You and I are on opposite ends of the fantasy spectrum, and that really seems to represent the division that has formed in this discussion. Of course you completely whiff more often on these kinds of picks more often than you hit, but if you draft decently in the upper rounds and hit one of these picks you have the kind of team that wins a championship. Derrick Mason was just a waste of one more chance to grab the difference-maker from the get go and would likely sit on my bench all year while I debate using that bench space to pick up some risky WW material that might pay off.

I see the upper rounds for drafting as safely as possible and the lower rounds for finding a diamond in the rough. I don't feel like I've ever lost a season because my WR3 or RB3 put up a 0 instead of a 7 or 8. When I've lost it was because I lost major producers and didn't find good replacements or just got blown out by somebody else having a career day.

Last year was a perfect example. In further refutation of the "safe" way of thinking, I had mega-bust Braylon Edwards as my WR1 pick and still ended up with the best record in the league. Why? Because I drafted a flier named Matt Forte "too high" as my RB3, skipped my stud QB spot and drafted Anquan Boldin "too high" as my WR2 and then drafted a flier QB in Jay Cutler. Stud pick fails, riskier picks make up for it. I didn't win the championship game because another "too early" flier pick, DeAngelo Williams, went ballistic on me and turned my pretty good score into a loser.

Safe picks in late rounds get you a decent team that won't embarrass you, but isn't likely to win it all either. It's a no-brainer to me to risk Harvin, Hester, or Morgan over Derrick Mason as my WR3 pick. If they pay off, I'll have a great season, if they bust, I'll spend most of the season fighting to do well enough to scrape up a playoff spot and make a ton of moves until I hopefully find my flier gold in FA or crash and burn trying. Either way, I will have done everything I can to avoid going down in the 1st or second round of the playoffs with a reliable, low-ceiling team that will lose to someone else's high-risk high-reward picks that hit.

I think a HUGE factor in this discussion is the size of your bench. I play in a league with 4 bench spots, so regular low-production guys are out there in FA. If we had 8 bench spots I'd probably look to pick up one or two of those guys as a safety net.

[mattUTD20]

You are only talking best case scenario though... You are counting on those guys to breakout in that event.. You never mention what you are gonna do if your #1 WR is a bust and then your Harvin / Hester combo flop as well. Hester gets his 50+/- rec and Harvin flops like many 1st year wrs do...... Bye Bye season.. Where you would still have a fighting chance with a balanced roster of scoring wrs that will each get 80 rec / 1000 yds and 5-7 tds...

As I said 4 years in a row Busted WR1, First 2 missed the playoffs 2nd 2 made it.

Those first 2 years I was far more conservitive I didn't spend as much time researching and I genrally choose the more proven guys.

A balanced roster of scoring WR's that will each get 80 rec/ 1000 yds and 5-7 tds?

So after my WR1 busts I will have drafted 4 WR's that will finish anywhere from the 15th best to 20th best? I don't know for sure but It would seem rather hard to pull that off even taking all the proven guys.

Yeah If my WR1 busts and my Up/syde guys bust I'm probably screwed but I'm still on the ww looking for this years lance Moore.

In 2007 I wouldn't have made it into the playoffs after M. Harrison busted if I had filled the back end of my roster with Issace Bruce/Mason instead of Jennings/Welker.

Its Fantasy Football and technically its considered gambling, with good reason. I've just found that your better off taking a few risks here and there. Some people are comfortable with that and some people arn't, to each his own I suppose.

Alright so you haven't been able to get your WR1 pick right for the last four years but you feel good about picking sleepers in your WR3/WR4/WR5 slot. Ok then. It's funny how everyone is the Ms. Cleo of fantasy football before the season starts and everything seems to make sense and be easy.

I am not saying I don't take any risks and only pick the safe guy. I like Harvin this year, I think he has a good chance of being OROY. And I might take him as my WR3 in a few leagues. I don't completely write off these guys as it seems like other people do with the old guys.

Anyway, I think there are too many variables going on right now (10 teamers, 4 bench spots) to make any meaningful comparisons without having to spend an entire afternoon writing it. It seems like the people arguing for the high risk strategy are in smaller leagues or have small benches and in those cases I probably would go with a riskier strategy because you need to get lucky on picks in those cases.

Winning more championships with a high risk strategy is debatable, you might end up with an extra stud but do you have the depth to play the matchups and make those crucial decisions when it counts? Of course if you are playing in a 10 teamer or 4 man bench then the waiver is more important and there are fewer people making claims. But I think a safer strategy will land you in the playoffs more frequently and most people will agree winning it all after making the playoffs is about luck, not skill or strategy.

[Purple1]

This thing has gone all googly and I'm not even sure what I'm arguing or the point I'm trying to make anymore lol.

The league I've been refencing is 12 teams with 7 bench spots 16 man roster and its been around for almost 20 years with basically the same owners. The competion is brutal you make 1 or 2 bad desicions cut the wrong guys, draft poorly, get riddled with injurys and you get eaten alive it happens to the best of us sometimes its just not your year for me this was 2006.

I'm not planning on taking Harvin as a WR3 I see him more as WR 4,5,6 with the potential to be a WR3 maybe even WR2(god I hope so). Hester I would go with as WR3 for sure over a Driver/Mason but If I'm looking at a bench slot between Havin/Mason/Driver I'd go Havin.
I guess this puts me more in the camp where you fill out your starters and then fill your bench with the Boom/Bust guys hoping they can replace your starters and if they don't work out you work the WW. I do agree that going all out on "Sleepers" is not a good idea and will get you killed in most leagues so I guess its more of a balancing act between risk/safer picks.

So I thnk we may actually be syaing the same thing or maybe I'm just confused

[petedog9]

I agree as well purple1....

My main $$ league is a 10 team (3 man) keeper with a group of good freinds that has been established for 9 years now. 5 of which I have won.... We are deeper in the wr department then most as we start 4 wrs. When starting 4wr even in a 10 teamer, it's imperative that you have a solid stable of wrs and also hit on a few sleepers to get you through the bye weeks...

Also, you must consider the value in a name when drafting and I am referring to this for trading purposes... Its hard to get value when trying to trade an up and coming inconsistant wr who has had 4 bad weeks and 1 good week come week 5. It is much easier to trade off a Ward / Driver combo for a stud wr then it is to try and trade a Ginn / Harvin before they have actually proven themselves.... I dont draft a team with plans on runnning that team all year. I draft the best "value" team knowing I will probably make a trade or two before we even break the draft / poker party we hold ..... My roster may be half turned over by week 3....

I guess what I am trying to say is if I was in a public yahoo league where I didnt know anyone, my drafting recipe would be different knowing that I may not get anyone to trade all year..... So in a sense, I guess it depends on your own personal league and the make up of that league...

Great discussion though fellas.... I love seeing things through others eyes... It's an advantage knowing what the "other guy" may be thinking and the value he may place on a player might be one that is completely different then yours...

[programatik]

I just wanted to say that this thread was an excellent read. I usually go the route of consistency and predictability almost through the entire draft. Usually it nets me a good record and decent playoff run, but I haven't won a championship. I've gotten close, but someone always boomed when I didn't. My players didn't bust, but they produced their consistent mediocrity.

Our leagues usually have a decent amount of bench spots, and I appreciate the 'digging' that was done to shine light on the most likely break out players. Last year I had the highest scoring average for the league on a week to week basis. I finished 4th in the league standings. Going into the playoffs, I lost week 15 when someone, like in the regular season, blossomed.

[smackthefirst]

I've gotta throw my hat in the ring here and agree with Kensat. I think we're both coming in with the same logic but I think I would explain it differently. And I'll use Mason as the basis of the argument because his name has come up more times than others through this thread.

Right now Mason's ADP is 9.03 at FFC so we're talking about a 9th round pick as your WR3 (or worse) that, while consistent, is going to explode out of no where this year. I think we can all agree on that. My argument is that you're ultimately better off taking more of a flier pick like a Harvin, Ginn, or Hixon in this area over a Mason. The reason is that those three have much more of a possibility to outproduce their draft slot and end up as an upper WR, but at that same time they could completely fail and it would be a wasted pick. Mason on the other hand is a model on consistency and while you know he's not going to explode, you also know that he's most likely not going to fail. Again, I think we all agree on that.

But here's where we all disagree. With Mason, at best you're looking to use him as a bye week or injury replacement but he is never going to knock off you starting WRs based on production. With the other three, you have three outcomes. The first outcome is they product similar to Mason and then they are used for the same purpose. The second outcome is they outproduce Mason and possibly take over one of your starting WR slots or at worst allow you to make trades involving either them or one of your starting WRs. The third option, which everyone is singling out, is that they bust (which I agree is highly likely) and under perform Mason and become WW fodder. But here's where you guys stop the discussion but it doesn't really stop there. The minute that my upside WR busts, I simply go to the WW and find a replacement and the chances are very high that I will be able to find a replacement that can come very close, if not match, Mason's production over a span of a couple of weeks. Last year in a PPR Mason had games of 8-8-21-8-13-20-1-28-7-15-7-21-15-5-15-13. On average you were looking at 12-13 points per game. I feel confident that over and 2-3 game stretch that I can find a WR off the WW that can match what Mason would do over that same stretch and that's the key to drafting for the upside. Just because your drafted guy busts, doesn't mean you're left rostering him the rest of the season. You simply go and find a replacement.

The only other argument to drafting a guy like Mason is that he can fill in if one of your starters goes down. To me that strategy just enables you to stay above water but it's not going to win you any championships. Personally, I don't want to just stay above water.

So I will always draft to have my needed starters at WR and then I'm going for the guys who have the potential to break out from there on in even though I know the likelihood of finding that gem is slim to none. But when I do find him, my team becomes championship level strong; and when I don't find him, I still end up with a team on the same level as the team who drafted Mason after a few WW moves.

***Note this is in regards to a 2WR and 1RB/WR flex league. I realize that the more WRs you are required to start, the greater value the role players like Mason begin to have.***

[Dan Lambskin]

yeah i think it really comes down to the size of the league. i play in a 12 team Dynasty with 25 roster spots that allows you to start between 3-4 WR's, so aint a whole lot out there on the WW

in a 10 teamer with 2 RB, 2WR and a FLEX, then yeah, Mason isnt all that valuable

i think the other thing that's being overlooked is if you do draft Mason to be that consistent WR3 you can still spend another 2-3 roster spots on flier WR's. so if one of them does pan out ...if not you still have a WR3 that can give you steady (if unspectacular) production

[biju]

Ok, I'm ready to start a "challenge" to all of these people who think they can accurately predict which WW guy is going to outperform Derrick Mason weekly. Here's the challenge:

1. Rules are 1 pt./10 yds, fractional. PPR with no bonuses or any of that garbage.
2. We use the Cafe PPR Rankings as players that cannot be used. We assume 12 teams, half have 4 WRs and the other half have 5 meaning the first 54 WRs from the rankings are gone.
3. Your goal is to pick a WR each week that will outproduce Derrick Mason. On Mason's BYE week you merely have to outproduce his average.

I'm already willing to bet that a majority of you guys won't be able to beat him more than 6 times a year. Who's up for the challenge?

[buffalobillsrul2002]

Ok, I'm ready to start a "challenge" to all of these people who think they can accurately predict which WW guy is going to outperform Derrick Mason weekly. Here's the challenge:

1. Rules are 1 pt./10 yds, fractional. PPR with no bonuses or any of that garbage.
2. We use the Cafe PPR Rankings as players that cannot be used. We assume 12 teams, half have 4 WRs and the other half have 5 meaning the first 54 WRs from the rankings are gone.
3. Your goal is to pick a WR each week that will outproduce Derrick Mason. On Mason's BYE week you merely have to outproduce his average.

I'm already willing to bet that a majority of you guys won't be able to beat him more than 6 times a year. Who's up for the challenge?

This is a somewhat fair challenge; however, you are completely missing that you initially get an extra shot at WR sleepers, and also, once you pick a guy up from the WW, you can keep him for the rest of the year if necessary. Here's a challenge that I think would be more fair: To start, your opponent picks a WR ranked below Mason on the WR rankings. After this, each week your opponent can either keep that WR or may change his pick. If the pick is changed, it must be changed to a WR ranked below the top 54.

I also will say that doing your challenge in a PPR format may be a bit unfair: Mason is a possesion receiver, and hence, is much much more valuable in a PPR than a non-PPR. I know I would think about taking mason in a PPR. In a non-PPR, no chance (within a round of his current ADP, of course).