most important, qb, rb's, wr's?

[ou812tim]

if you had to load up in a catagory, in small leauge, which would you load up on?

[JayM09]

running backs are the most important positions in most leagues, so i would stock up on them.

[slowkidz]

It all comes down to how your league scoring is set up, but Jay is correct...RBs usually have more value, followed by QBs and then WRs...

[terpfan]

id put wrs before qbs, since u have to start one or two more wrs than qbs, and qb is a very deep position this year. rb is definately the most important tho.

[Indy Dragons]

This depends on scoring, starting lineup requirements, and size of your league.

You say this is a small league - so I'll assume 8 to 10 teams.

You should load up on RBs, due to the RBBC approach used on many NFL teams and injuries. Extra RBs on your team are always good trade bait, and are easier to trade, than other positions. Getting THREE good RBs will be a big bonus, but I would attempt to get about five good RBs, and about 3 or 4 more spare RBs!

Most NFL do not use the QBBC approach, so even if every team in your ten team league drafts THREE QBs, you haven't even drafted all the starters in the league, AND QBs are not very good trade bait in this type of league, because everybody has a good one, if not, great one!!

WRs. Even if you have to start three on your team, the league will only need to draft about 40 WRs, though they will draft more. There are so many WRs who do not get drafted, and perform quite well for a week or two, or half a season. You simply cannot load up on WRs, hoping to decrease the talent pool, because it won't happen.

[cwebb]

This is quite a philosophical question.

I prefer Rbs too, but in some leagues, QB scoring is so high you can't afford to lose out on the top guys, so getting a stud RB and QB the first two rounds is pretty inevitable, but then I'd still load up on RBs and get a sleeper or promising rookie as third QB, if this guy breaks out, you have great trade bait for the teams that lack a stud QB.

[Homeless]

RB's for sure.

Lots and LOTS of people swear by the stud RB theory, i.e. they draft RB's at 1 and 2 and sometimes even 3rd in their draft.

[joester]

Well different leagues have different systems. For example one of the leagues that i am in give points to QB's for completions making pocket passers like gannon and bledsoe far more valuable than scramblers mcnab and vick. This coring also makes Qb's more valueable in my kleague, but in most standard league RBs r far more important.

[DraftDodger]

If a Tight End is REQUIRED in your small league, that may be the position to load up on (when realistic ... I'm not talking first or second round).

Why? It's the single skill position with no depth. If you have get two of Gonzo, Shockey, and Heap, for example, you are GUARANTEEING that a couple of teams will be without a decent TE. A few TE's are better than a #2 receiver, perhaps making it worth taking a TE in the 4th round (RB,RB,WR,TE). Tight End, IMHO, is the only position where you can deny the opponent in a small league. Your only other "weapon" is smart drafting.

[awwchrist]

You can get away with a mediocre QB.

Productive WRs can be had in FA throughout the year. There's ALWAYS a few every year that are under radar until they break out.

TE's dont get enough reps to warrant a high draft pick. I don't care if Shockey is GOD, im not drafting him before the 4th rd.

But you can't fake mediocre RB play. They are the foundation of a true winning team.