What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Foster, McCoy or Rice (1 Viewer)

R

RalphMouth

Footballguy
Foster is on most lists as the #1 pick but what about Houston losing some of their O Line from last year or Foster's injury concerns or the presence of Ben Tate ?

McCoy could be the 1st pick- He's on an explosive offense & he doesn't have anybody breathing down his back for carries but was last year his 'career year' ?

Rice could be the #1 pick as well but is his potential held back because of a sluggish offense without a dynamic QB ?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Redraft league I like Foster, Rice, then Mccoy

Dynasty league Mccoy, Rice, then Foster. Mccoy first because he is younger, and takes less of a beating than the other two.

 
'RalphMouth said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Aaron Rodgers and dont look back
Click to expand...
Draft Rodgers #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB and that's a risk I don't want to take.
Click to expand...
"Draft Foster #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB when Foster gets hurt, and that's a risk I don't want to take. " You can turn that statement around and have it make almost as much sense. Playing devil's advocate here, because I wouldn't draft Rodgers over foster/rice/mccoy, but I also don't think taking Rodgers there is necessarily a losing strategy either. Taking the consensus pick for #1 QB and getting pretty much guaranteed elite production is not going to lose you your fantasy league, but taking a chance on an injury risk RB sure as hell can.
 
'RalphMouth said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Aaron Rodgers and dont look back
Click to expand...
Draft Rodgers #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB and that's a risk I don't want to take.
Click to expand...
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead. ( for now). The true competitive advantage in FFL IMO is at the QB and WR/TE positions, of course this could all change next fall, but IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
 
Also if it is PPR i would strongly consider Calvin Johnson, and then target Forte,Richardson,MJD,Charles,Murray,Martin with the next picks

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to for me. I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys like McFadden, or MJD in the late 1st over sure things like Rodgers/Brady/Brees/CJ. Foster/Rice/McCoy is at least debatable, IMO. With those guys the risk seems to either be not as great or their ceilings are high enough to warrant the risk of taking them.
 
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'BigSteelThrill said:
'butcher boy said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys... MJD
Click to expand...
:confused: 1,389 - 14 (Taylor still in town)

1,765 - 16

1,641 - 7

1,980 - 11

Age 27. Missed only two games in 64 contests. Averages 48 catches.
Click to expand...
It's silly to not recognize MJD's question marks.- 386 total touches last year. 350+ the two years before that. That's a lot for a 27 year old back.

- plays in a terrible offense.

- Jennings is healthy and will get more carries.

I know every year lots of doubters predict MJD's downfall, but one of these years soon they will be right, and a lot of people who only look at last year's stats and don't look at risk factors will lose their fantasy leagues.

 
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:

the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now.

brees 490

rodger 489

brady 462

staff 433

newton 431

eli 366

romo 355

ryan 350

rivers 336

sanchez 314

vick 292

Rice 302

McCoy 282

MJD 264

Foster 256

Lynch 220

turner 217

mathews 191

ADP 189

M.Bush 188

Sproles 185

To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
So, in your opinion, having one of those 5 qbs is more valuable than having rice/mccoy/foster?Or more simply put, the first 5 picks of a draft should be brees, rodgers, brady, stafford, newton?

 
'BigSteelThrill said:
'butcher boy said:
- plays in a terrible offense.
Click to expand...
Thats pretty damn standard for MJDs time in Jacksonville.They were 32nd in offense last year. DEAD LAST.He still had 1,980 11 TDs, 4.7 per carry and 43 catches.
Click to expand...
It still doesn't invalidate it as a concern. He also didnt have a viable backup last year to keep him fresh. This year he does. He's also another year older. It all adds up.When I'm looking at a guy like Rodgers or MJD, the decision comes down to which guy is less of a risk, and IMO the choice is clear.
 
'butcher boy said:
'BigSteelThrill said:
'butcher boy said:
- plays in a terrible offense.
Click to expand...
Thats pretty damn standard for MJDs time in Jacksonville.They were 32nd in offense last year. DEAD LAST.He still had 1,980 11 TDs, 4.7 per carry and 43 catches.
Click to expand...
It still doesn't invalidate it as a concern. He also didnt have a viable backup last year to keep him fresh. This year he does. He's also another year older. It all adds up.When I'm looking at a guy like Rodgers or MJD, the decision comes down to which guy is less of a risk, and IMO the choice is clear.
Click to expand...
Whatever it does or doesn't do...he isn't a question mark guy.And sure, Rogers goes first. Rogers and Calvin have a pretty lofty draft placement for a reason.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:

the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now.

brees 490

rodger 489

brady 462

staff 433

newton 431

eli 366

romo 355

ryan 350

rivers 336

sanchez 314

vick 292

Rice 302

McCoy 282

MJD 264

Foster 256

Lynch 220

turner 217

mathews 191

ADP 189

M.Bush 188

Sproles 185

To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
So, in your opinion, having one of those 5 qbs is more valuable than having rice/mccoy/foster?Or more simply put, the first 5 picks of a draft should be brees, rodgers, brady, stafford, newton?
Click to expand...
First off, I think you need you know your league and where the top QBs will goI think there is something to be said about the top3 RBs, they represent value at their postion above their piers at the position.

Should the top 5 QBs be the top 5 picks? No but IMO Rodgers,Brees and Brady certainly SHOULD be the top3 picks but they wont be. Stafford and Cam have their own set of inherint "risk" and I can see taking a top RB over them.

Im saying use it to your advantage, will Stafford slide to you in round2? can you guarantee it? then take Foster/McCoy/Rice as you see fit up top.

And I stand by my statement that Aaron Rodgers should be the #1 pick in FFL leagues.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'RalphMouth said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Aaron Rodgers and dont look back
Click to expand...
Draft Rodgers #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB and that's a risk I don't want to take.
Click to expand...
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead. ( for now). The true competitive advantage in FFL IMO is at the QB and WR/TE positions, of course this could all change next fall, but IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
IMHO the #1 RB isn't dead if you have these top 3 backs- as long as they stay healthy they will produce as #1 RBs and is why most drafts have them going 1, 2 & 3
 
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
 
'Sweet Love said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
Click to expand...
Excellent points. I couldn't have said it any better.Could those who post their top 3 choice give reasons why they think that way?Why would somebody choose Rice their #1 back for example. I want to know what other Sharks are thinking.
 
It would be interesting to look back and see the Top 5 Preeason Consensus QBs vs. Top 5 End of Season Actual QBs compared to Top 5 PS Consensus RBs vs. Top 5 EOS Actual RBs. I'd imagine a lot more fluctuation in the former but that's just my subjective first-glance hypothesis.

 
'Sweet Love said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
Click to expand...
good points, and obviously the teams with Stafford were killing it if they hit on their early picks last year. Eli had an amazing season, but he is normally in the QB10-12 range, not flirthing with top5 numbers (or in this case top6) To me the true advantage at the top of the draft is with elite QBs, they give you a tremendous advantage over the other 7 teams in the league.
 
'butcher boy said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to for me. I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys like McFadden, or MJD in the late 1st over sure things like Rodgers/Brady/Brees/CJ. Foster/Rice/McCoy is at least debatable, IMO. With those guys the risk seems to either be not as great or their ceilings are high enough to warrant the risk of taking them.
Click to expand...
Why are they sure things? Rodgers has been concussed in each of the last few years, Brady has finished top-5 only 3 times in the last 6 years, Brees is currently holding out, and is going to be in for a tough season (even if he doesn't hold out of TC/regular season) with his HC out for the year, and Johnson has had exactly 2 top-5 seasons (and the last one was followed up by a finish of WR21 the next year).To be clear, I like each of those guys chance to have a good FF season, but to argue that they are "sure things" is questionable.

 
'Bayhawks said:
'butcher boy said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to for me. I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys like McFadden, or MJD in the late 1st over sure things like Rodgers/Brady/Brees/CJ. Foster/Rice/McCoy is at least debatable, IMO. With those guys the risk seems to either be not as great or their ceilings are high enough to warrant the risk of taking them.
Click to expand...
Why are they sure things? Rodgers has been concussed in each of the last few years, Brady has finished top-5 only 3 times in the last 6 years, Brees is currently holding out, and is going to be in for a tough season (even if he doesn't hold out of TC/regular season) with his HC out for the year, and Johnson has had exactly 2 top-5 seasons (and the last one was followed up by a finish of WR21 the next year).To be clear, I like each of those guys chance to have a good FF season, but to argue that they are "sure things" is questionable.
Click to expand...
Sure things may have been too strong a description because nobody's really a sure thing. I meant something more on the order of them being less of a risk IMO, than a McFadden or MJD. Their as close to sure things as you're going to get in fantasy football.

 
'butcher boy said:
'Bayhawks said:
'butcher boy said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to for me. I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys like McFadden, or MJD in the late 1st over sure things like Rodgers/Brady/Brees/CJ. Foster/Rice/McCoy is at least debatable, IMO. With those guys the risk seems to either be not as great or their ceilings are high enough to warrant the risk of taking them.
Click to expand...
Why are they sure things? Rodgers has been concussed in each of the last few years, Brady has finished top-5 only 3 times in the last 6 years, Brees is currently holding out, and is going to be in for a tough season (even if he doesn't hold out of TC/regular season) with his HC out for the year, and Johnson has had exactly 2 top-5 seasons (and the last one was followed up by a finish of WR21 the next year).To be clear, I like each of those guys chance to have a good FF season, but to argue that they are "sure things" is questionable.
Click to expand...
Sure things may have been too strong a description because nobody's really a sure thing. I meant something more on the order of them being less of a risk IMO, than a McFadden or MJD. Their as close to sure things as you're going to get in fantasy football.
Click to expand...
What makes them any more of a sure thing than Rice, McCoy, or Foster? They all have question marks to one degree or another. Rodgers-has been concussed multiple times

Brees-currently holding out, how will bountygate and the loss of HC impact his team/him?

CJ-Hasn't done it consistently; followed his other top-5 season with a bomb of a season

Brady-probably the fewest (or least significant) question mark, but while he's consistently good, he's getting older and has finished out of the top-5 as many times as he has finished in the top-5

 
I go Foster until something is proven otherwise. He has completely shed the injury prone label IMO and all you have to do is grab Ben Tate just in case Foster goes down, and then you have a top 15 back anyway. Pretty easy choice in my opinion.

 
I would definitely choose Foster #1. He has turned in elite production and continued to excel with no QB play last year. After that I'd choose Rice over McCoy but it's a toss up. If I picked 4th, however, it would be hard not to look at Rodgers or even Megatron (hoping he can overcome the Madden curse).

 
'Bayhawks said:
'butcher boy said:
'Bayhawks said:
'butcher boy said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
IMO the top QBs are less risk adverse than the top RBs and the advantage is greater.
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to for me. I cannot comprehend why people take huge question mark guys like McFadden, or MJD in the late 1st over sure things like Rodgers/Brady/Brees/CJ. Foster/Rice/McCoy is at least debatable, IMO. With those guys the risk seems to either be not as great or their ceilings are high enough to warrant the risk of taking them.
Click to expand...
Why are they sure things? Rodgers has been concussed in each of the last few years, Brady has finished top-5 only 3 times in the last 6 years, Brees is currently holding out, and is going to be in for a tough season (even if he doesn't hold out of TC/regular season) with his HC out for the year, and Johnson has had exactly 2 top-5 seasons (and the last one was followed up by a finish of WR21 the next year).To be clear, I like each of those guys chance to have a good FF season, but to argue that they are "sure things" is questionable.
Click to expand...
Sure things may have been too strong a description because nobody's really a sure thing. I meant something more on the order of them being less of a risk IMO, than a McFadden or MJD. Their as close to sure things as you're going to get in fantasy football.
Click to expand...
What makes them any more of a sure thing than Rice, McCoy, or Foster? They all have question marks to one degree or another. Rodgers-has been concussed multiple times

Brees-currently holding out, how will bountygate and the loss of HC impact his team/him?

CJ-Hasn't done it consistently; followed his other top-5 season with a bomb of a season

Brady-probably the fewest (or least significant) question mark, but while he's consistently good, he's getting older and has finished out of the top-5 as many times as he has finished in the top-5
Click to expand...
Go back and read my original post, I was comparing taking those 3 QBs over guys like McFadden or MJD, not Foster/Rice/McCoy.I wouldnt take a QB over those 3 RBs, but once you get to the mid-late first round, I just think the question marks surrounding the RBs there are more than the ones surrounding the best of the best QBs.

 
My only concern with Foster is that we have some new starters on the O-line this year and Ben Tate may steal some carries.

Is Rice going to hold out?

What does Andy Reid's history show for RBs? McCoy has been top 5 the last two seasons, right? And prior to 2009, Westbrook had a nice top 5 run as well. I feel like he is a pretty safe pick and therefore deserves a solid look at #1.

 
'butcher boy said:
'RalphMouth said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Aaron Rodgers and dont look back
Click to expand...
Draft Rodgers #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB and that's a risk I don't want to take.
Click to expand...
"Draft Foster #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB when Foster gets hurt, and that's a risk I don't want to take. " You can turn that statement around and have it make almost as much sense. Playing devil's advocate here, because I wouldn't draft Rodgers over foster/rice/mccoy, but I also don't think taking Rodgers there is necessarily a losing strategy either. Taking the consensus pick for #1 QB and getting pretty much guaranteed elite production is not going to lose you your fantasy league, but taking a chance on an injury risk RB sure as hell can.
Click to expand...
No. This makes no sense. If you take Foster (or Rice or Mccoy) you do NOT get "stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jackson as your #1RB." You don't know that they are going to get hurt. For all you know Rodgers could get hurt. And when has Rice been hurt and missed time? He is about as reliable a pick as you can get. I would much rather have Rice as my RB1 and then get say Cam Newton or Matthew Staffaord as my QB1 or Brandon Marshall as my WR1 with my second pick.
 
There is a lot of value in the QB position this year, and my intention is to wait on that position. I would prefer to have multiple RB WR and TE 1's instead of 1 elite QB. Rodgers will probably result in a 5-7 point per game advantage over my value QB but even if I only have a 1 point advantage at each of my RB, WR, and TE position I have closed that gap.....But I believe I am just reciting the principles of value based drafting

 
'Noah Davis said:
There is a lot of value in the QB position this year, and my intention is to wait on that position. I would prefer to have multiple RB WR and TE 1's instead of 1 elite QB. Rodgers will probably result in a 5-7 point per game advantage over my value QB but even if I only have a 1 point advantage at each of my RB, WR, and TE position I have closed that gap.....But I believe I am just reciting the principles of value based drafting
Click to expand...
If you look at last year's data, it's more like a 10-12 point advantage/game and this banks on you picking the right value QB. Value-wise, I'm pretty sure it'd still work out better to take one of Foster/Rice/McCoy over a QB, but after them I think it's really debatable.
 
back to the OP's question...........

Foster and I think he will be the 1.01 in well over 75% of the high stakes FF leagues

McCoy 2nd

Rice in 3rd although if he would show up maybe some would take him over Shady (maybe not in PPR)

 
This is always a hard topic bc there is the "outlier" out there to dispel almost any strategy.

Last years' outlier was Cam Newton. You get cam in round 16 and the rest of your draft meant a lot less. Some guys lucked into a top 5 QB and Cam bc they waited forever for their backup and it paid off hansomely.

The truth is that the top 5 QBs are scattered over the first 5 rounds, and even if you take a few extra QBs and extend to top 7 you can usually find one of those guys when you are starting to talk about 3rd down pass catching RBs.

To me, most drafts "should" look like this:

RB

WR

RB / WR /TE (depends on the TE type of league it is)

RB / WR / TE

QB

Now obviously you move things around depending on the league and the lineup / scoring requirements, but it becomes a much bigger RB crapshoot after round 6 that it does for any other position.

As to the question at hand:

1) Foster: biggest most explosive RB, but you better lock up his backup

2) McCoy: Pass catchin "faulk" type back, but Reid sometimes forgets to use him properly and he screws you

3) Rice: Least flashy, but most consistent of the 3, and has really stayed away from the injury bug.

If you are in PPR, mccoy needs more love. If you are risk averse, then rice. Otherwise, it is Foster.

that's my opinion.

 
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'Sweet Love said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
Click to expand...
good points, and obviously the teams with Stafford were killing it if they hit on their early picks last year. Eli had an amazing season, but he is normally in the QB10-12 range, not flirthing with top5 numbers (or in this case top6) To me the true advantage at the top of the draft is with elite QBs, they give you a tremendous advantage over the other 7 teams in the league.
Click to expand...
I understand why people feel this way, but I do disagree. QB is just so deep this year. Last I looked, Matt Ryan was going off the board as one of the QBs in that 8-10 range. He is coming off of a very good season, has a new OC that wants to emphasize the pass (more screens to the RBs), has Julio poised to emerge.... And he's one of the worst starting QB in a 12 team league? As others have mentioned, if you add the production you can get from a top 3 RB to a guy like Ryan/Rivers/Romo/Eli in the 4th/5th round and compare that to the production you'd get from a top 3 QB and whichever RB you could get in the 4th/5th round, I think the lower level QB/high level RB come out ahead.There's so few bell cow RBs who also catch 50+ passes that they are at a huge premium. On the other hand, there seems to be a huge quantity of talented QBs capable of putting up 4,500 yards and 30 TDs (or at least 4,000 and 27). It's almost to the point where the only way Brady/Brees/Rodgers can justify their draft position is if they have 5,000 yard, 50 TD seasons, which is probably the type of numbers you'd need to make up the deficit you're facing at RB.
 
'RalphMouth said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Aaron Rodgers and dont look back
Click to expand...
Draft Rodgers #1 overall and you get stuck with the likes of Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore or Fred Jacksonas your #1 RB and that's a risk I don't want to take.
Click to expand...
Wow, what leagues do you play in? I've been in a few drafts already and none of those were even close to being taken in the second round.Brush up on your fantasy draft boards my friend.
 
I'd draft Foster, then take Ben Tate somewhere in the 6th-8th. Tate should produce as a RB3 even in a backup role.

 
I would take Rice #1. He's the most consistent player of the 3. Last year I had him in 2 PPR leagues and he scored 19+ points in every game but 2. What a nice advantage to have....being able to almost guaranteed to pencil in 19+ points per game at the RB1 slot. In a H2H league, that's extremely valuable. And he's durable.

Foster has the most upside of the 3, but he does carry a little extra risk of his past injury and Tate is a very capable backup. But Foster still should get 330+ touches again in HOU's run first offense.

McCoy had a career year TD wise that likely won't be duplicated (Vick should steal more rushing TDs in 2012), but I see him catching a few more passes...somewhere in between 2010 and 2011. PHI should have a dynamic offense again in 2012, as long as Vick stays healthy.

You can make an argument for taking any of these guys #1 overall in a PPR league. That's why the #3 pick is the best one in the draft IMO.

 
'Sweet Love said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
Click to expand...
Could not have been explained better.Shhhh
 
'G-King said:
'Sweet Love said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
'rizzler said:
'bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
The importance of having the #1 RB is dead.
Click to expand...
I could not disagree more.
Click to expand...
just based on FBG scoring:The top QB and Top RBs points:the top 5 QBs score so much, regardless of points system. they are the true competitive advantage in FFL now. brees 490rodger 489brady 462staff 433newton 431 eli 366romo 355ryan 350rivers 336sanchez 314vick 292 Rice 302McCoy 282MJD 264Foster 256 Lynch 220turner 217mathews 191ADP 189M.Bush 188Sproles 185To me having one of them, trumps having a top RB, by alot. And to mention they are less likely to get injured.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with this type of analysis...you are comparing positions and not rounds the positions were taken. For example, you get Rodgers in Round 1 at 489 and in Round 2, you manage to get Lynch (around his ADP) for 220 at a total of 709. If I get Rice at 302 in the 1st, I am NOT getting Manning in the 2nd...he will be there for me in the 5th round...instead, I am getting Welker at "X"...but now I have an elite RB and WR and you have an elite QB and an RB2...you start to chase, and so on. Here is the thing; You have an advantage at that first pick, but where you grab a Tier 2 RB is in the 2nd Round...when I grab Eli, it is in the fifth, which means I have Rounds 2-4 to make up ground on you as I am always one positional player (i.e. outside of QB) better than you. It is not Apples to Apples when the tiers of each position are separated by lots of rounds.
Click to expand...
Could not have been explained better.Shhhh
Click to expand...
:thumbup:
 
back to the original question...

I think there are valid arguments for any of these guys. As far as the "odds game" goes, I think they all have better than a 60% chance to be a top 10 back - and probably 30% chance to be top 3 backs - worth the top 5 pick.

I look at them as all equivalent probabilities...

But ultimately I have more faith in Foster - I like a healthy Foster with a healthy Schaub and healthy Andre. Assuming I am picking 1st, then I will make the turn in the 2/3, 4/5, and 6/7 - In a 10 team league, I take Tate at the 6/7 turn, and in a 12 team league, I take Tate at the 4/5 turn. I will play Foster/Tate as RB1 and Flex play every week - protecting against in game injury. My 2/3/4 pick in a 12 teamer will be two elite WRs at 2/3 and the BPA with Tate at 4/5.

I'd rather root for Baltimore than Philly, so I take Rice over McCoy.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
B. Aiyuk vs. D. London in PPR
Replies
17
Views
1K
Lansdowne
Lansdowne
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
309
zamboni
zamboni
Zareh Kantzabedian
Why I Think Adonai Mitchell is a WR2 in 2024 - Plus Talk On Going Against ADP
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
osubuckeyeman
osubuckeyeman

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top