Drafting Strategy--how much should "value" be taken into accou (1 Viewer)

[jvdesigns2002]

Hey everybody--thank you in advance for reading this post (and hopefully adding some feedback). Generally speaking--the motivation behind this new topic for me was created in the numerous mock drafts I've done getting prepared for this season. Here is some background on me-- I'm fairly new to fantasy sports--this is only like my 5th season doing it. I've done very well in the leagues that I have played--between the one fantasy basketball league and the at least 3 fantasy football leagues that I enter--I've won the championship over 30% of the time--and have made it deep in the playoffs many times (a couple championship game losses in there too). I've noticed a lot of the success that I've had in my leagues is taking a "business"-like approach to the draft and the league in general. I manage a very successful retail business--and part of our success is absolutely based on the understanding that the "buying" process is as equally important as the "selling" process. However, in the mocks that I've tried this season so far---it seems as though "value" drafting is being utilized to a minimal effect. For example--in one of the mocks I just participated in--I had the 7th pick in a 12 team non ppr draft. I tried a strategy going calvin with my first pick and jimmy graham with my second pick as an experiment. My original plan was to use my next two picks for running backs--but to my shock--drew brees was still available at my 3rd round--so I took him (the value was just too great for me to pass up). I was shocked to see teams had drafted 3 and 4 rbs before picking a guy like brees who would give any fantasy team a 3-4 point weekly advantage on average. I end up taking an rb 4th and was planning on taking another in the 5th--when to my shock gronkowski was still there towards the end of the 5th round. At this point--I'm thinking to myself--I can either draft possibly the 30th best rb or a guy who is most likely going to be the 2nd best te in fantasy football. I've never had a problem making trades in any of my leagues--and I know for a fact that if gronk basically breathes on a football field this season--I could trade him for a better rb than is available for me to draft in the late 5th--so I drafted him in the mock. If only I could have copied the chat room banter that my gronk pick started. People started slamming me like I was some novice---and honestly--I don't mind--everybody is entitled to their opinions--but my question is: At what point do most fantasy players factor in value when drafting? In every league that I have played--only one team has ever won the championship that didn't make a trade throughout the season--and it happened to be in fantasy basketball. For me personally--with the "business"-like point of view that I have--that buying is just as important as selling-- one of the best places to "buy low" in fantasy sports is at the draft--but is there a point where this strategy should be implemented or abandoned? And of course--can we please try to avoid trolling or using extreme examples in the replies. For example-- I'm not saying that teams should draft 5 qbs in a row to "corner" markets..etc. Thank you again.

 

[Aztec9er]

Most people don't know about VBD. They just draft based on ADP and best player available. Which isn't necessarily the best value. If you use VBD, it is without a doubt going to have you take an RB with your first 2 picks. That is the position with the highest value since there is a great drop off there as compared to Qbs and WRs.

Trades rarely ever happen in my league. Maybe 1 ever other year. We are a 16 team league. Your team is who you draft. Waiver wires are basically empty all year long. So you get get the best value in the draft and know what you are doing.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Most people don't know about VBD. They just draft based on ADP and best player available. Which isn't necessarily the best value. If you use VBD, it is without a doubt going to have you take an RB with your first 2 picks. That is the position with the highest value since there is a great drop off there as compared to Qbs and WRs.

Trades rarely ever happen in my league. Maybe 1 ever other year. We are a 16 team league. Your team is who you draft. Waiver wires are basically empty all year long. So you get get the best value in the draft and know what you are doing.

I appreciate the reply. I think that maybe I have gotten lucky that the owners in the majority of my fantasy league are actually willing to trade. I'm not sure how much I'd enjoy playing in a league where one or two trades occurs all season--it would kind of defeat the purpose of fantasy sports for me. For me--one of the primary reasons why I started the post is because I feel like the running back craze is creating a situation where value based drafting could really be beneficial. Owners are drafting 3rd and 4th running backs before elite wr's and qb's. However--if I played in a league where trading basically didn't occur--a lot of the benefits of value based drafting would basically be void. Thank you for your reply and input.

 

[Aztec9er]

Playing in a league that didn't have much trades would make value based drafting even more important. Not the opposite like you are saying. In a league where there is very little trading, your team for the year is basically the team you drafted. So you have to know what you are doing and be spot on with your drafting. And I actually love that my league doesn't have much trades. I like that the draft is very important. it is a 16 team league and I will never go back to anything smaller than that. It is a whole different ball game playing in that size of a league. And being a part of a league that doesn't have much trades doesn't defeat the purpose of fantasy football lol. The purpose of FF is to win and put together a great team. You do so by drafting your players, looking at the waiver wires, and if you still aren't pleased, then you can try to work a trade. But the draft is most important thing and if you do it right, you don't need to trade. And you should draft just to build up players to trade. If you are going to do that, why don't you just draft the guy you were going to trade for? lol. It is not like you are going to be able to trade up in value that much. So instead of wasting those pics on trade bate, why don't you just draft a player YOU want? That is the purpose of the draft - to put together a winning team, not a trade team. What is the point of that? In re-drafts rosters resets, so why waste your time on a player you are just wanting to trade away? use the pic on a player you actually want. And if you do your homework, you can get the best value at each pick and put together a winning team. If you do that, what is a purpose of trading? The only thing you'd do from there is ruin your team.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Playing in a league that didn't have much trades would make value based drafting even more important. Not the opposite like you are saying. In a league where there is very little trading, your team for the year is basically the team you drafted. So you have to know what you are doing and be spot on with your drafting. And I actually love that my league doesn't have much trades. I like that the draft is very important. it is a 16 team league and I will never go back to anything smaller than that. It is a whole different ball game playing in that size of a league. And being a part of a league that doesn't have much trades doesn't defeat the purpose of fantasy football lol. The purpose of FF is to win and put together a great team. You do so by drafting your players, looking at the waiver wires, and if you still aren't pleased, then you can try to work a trade. But the draft is most important thing and if you do it right, you don't need to trade. And you should draft just to build up players to trade. If you are going to do that, why don't you just draft the guy you were going to trade for? lol. It is not like you are going to be able to trade up in value that much. So instead of wasting those pics on trade bate, why don't you just draft a player YOU want? That is the purpose of the draft - to put together a winning team, not a trade team. What is the point of that? In re-drafts rosters resets, so why waste your time on a player you are just wanting to trade away? use the pic on a player you actually want. And if you do your homework, you can get the best value at each pick and put together a winning team. If you do that, what is a purpose of trading? The only thing you'd do from there is ruin your team.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying-- I would disagree that "trading" doesn't necessarily diminish the "importance" of your draft. The idea of value based drafting is if you decide to draft somebody other than who you were planning on drafting because this other player has a much higher value than the guy you originally wanted. The premise that I am looking at is that every season there are certain draft strategies that are popular. Last year it was drafting elite qbs early--and tight ends--like gronk. This year--there is a massive rush to draft rbs--to the point where elite qbs, te's and wr's are available at bargain draft positions. Knowing that there is a high probability that many of these teams that will go running back crazy will be weak in other positions--qb/wr/te-- I can totally see that this very well could be a "trade friendly" season even in leagues that historically don't do much trading. The idea is to build the best possible way one can via whatever means one can--meaning draft, free agency AND trading. If I'm drafting a team--and I'm in the 5th or 6th round--and lets say I already have jimmy graham, drew brees, calvin johnson, darren mcfadden--do I draft a 2nd rb (a guy like ryan matthews) or do I draft a gronkowski? Ryan Matthews will maybe end up being a top 20-25 rb if healthy--or I do abandon my immediate need for a 2nd rb and draft a Gronkowski--who will almost certainly be a top 2-3 te in a position that is very shallow this year? If I could get all of the guys I want throughout the entire course of a draft--you would have a point--but in reality--when does that ever happen? This is why I disagree when you say that value based drafting is more important in leagues that don't trade much. In my leagues--I can easily turn Gronk into an rb with far more value than matthews--where in a league that doesn't trade-- I'd be stuck drafting by need. I'm certainly not saying to draft solely based on trade bait--that is taking a strategy that should be kept in mind to an extreme. I think drafting without considering the potential trade value of a player is a way to minimize potential strategy--not enhance it. In the case example of my mock draft--with gronk--I could have either drafted a mid level rb2, a mid level wr2 or an elite te. There is no doubt in my mind that I could easily trade Gronk in my leagues for both an rb2 an a low end wr2. Not only that--if I don't draft a gronk--I'd just be letting a team that would have better rb's than I to have an elite te for even a better value. Shouldn't that be taken into account?

 

[chickensoup]

Never ever go into a year with a position deficit that you need to make trades to overcome. Taking Grobk when you have Graham sounds good in theory, but he's left on the table for a reason. People don't value him as high as you do.

Say you leave Gronk and pick up a RB instead. What's the outcome? Someone else gets Gronk and every other team doesn't. Meanwhile you get a player at a shallow position with a ton of uncertainty.

If you get him, what motivation do I have to deal with you? You are weak at RB, which is very hard to come back from unless you hit on a deep guy or get a backup that takes the lead after injury. The guys in my league that try to pull this stuff are never traded with, we just take their $100 and call it a day.

 

[Biabreakable]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

 

[Johnny Rock]

I always look for value but only in guys I actually want. For auctions never bid unless you'd be happy getting the guy. A bunch of mediocre players you got a good deal on can suck.

Back to your example of taking Gronk for value when you already have Graham. Assuming you can't play both there is no reason to do this. I would say if you think Gronk is great value there you should've looked to pick someone else instead of Graham early. Then you are in control of who's on your team. Essentially you traded Graham for a 2nd rounder.

I remember being in a Guppy league for a few years a long time ago. While I dominated it most of the time, one time I was the guppy. What happened was other owners were filling out their starters and I had stars in my eyes for the huge value left on the table. I drafted my RB4 or RB5 instead of a WR1 or QB1. I didn't realize that if I had picked some stud WRs in there the value RBs would still be there later for me too.

Here's another example from last year in a solid league. I had picked QB Vick and knew I wanted RGIII to hedge and got him like in the 8th Rd or whatever. I found out after the draft that the guy who paid big for ARodgers early was considering RGIII as great value a few picks before I got him but was talked out of it by a friend. Here's why. It wouldn't have helped his team since Rodgers is an every week starter. Even if RGIII was blowing up would you bench Rodgers and play the guessing game? You may think you could trade him for a stud but QBs just aren't as valuable in trade since most teams have a pretty good one.

It's good to draft for value but it needs to make sense.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

Thank you for the response. I want to make sure that we don't get off topic here. I merely used the Gronk example in the mock draft as a way of "highlighting' an example of value based drafting. I do mock drafts as a way of seeing what players will be available to me at my various draft positions if I implement various draft strategies. My strategy going into that mock was certainly not to draft both graham and gronk--but my point is-- isn't there some point where value has to be taken into account? In my leagues--where trading occurs at a regular basis-- I know for a fact that Gronk can easily net me more than an rb2--so do I go for the rb2 or do I go for Gronk? I only ask this question because for me personally---I see people completely disregarding value based drafting in almost every mock that I've seen. In the same mock--cam newton went in the middle of the 6th and rg3 in the early 9th. Is there such a perceived shortage on rb's this year that people should abandon the idea of value in their drafting? I don't want to turn this into a debate on the role of mock drafts--rather a discussion on how much most people are taking value into account during their drafts.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Never ever go into a year with a position deficit that you need to make trades to overcome. Taking Grobk when you have Graham sounds good in theory, but he's left on the table for a reason. People don't value him as high as you do.

Say you leave Gronk and pick up a RB instead. What's the outcome? Someone else gets Gronk and every other team doesn't. Meanwhile you get a player at a shallow position with a ton of uncertainty.

If you get him, what motivation do I have to deal with you? You are weak at RB, which is very hard to come back from unless you hit on a deep guy or get a backup that takes the lead after injury. The guys in my league that try to pull this stuff are never traded with, we just take their $100 and call it a day.

First of all--i want to thank you for your reply. You definitely bring up some great and valid points. In the example that I mentioned--in a league that forced 2 starting rbs-- you would be right--I would have a weakness in my lineup. Not that it's relevant--my league gives the option of starting 2rbs, 2wrs, 1 te, 1 flex, or 1 rb, 3 wr's 1 te, 1 flex---and a te is allowed to be used in the flex position--so I would technically be able to play both graham and Gronk in my league---but for the sake of the discussion-- let's assume that this point is not relevant--and that the value based drafting can create some weaknesses in lineups. For me, the risk involved in having a weakness or two in one's lineup by value drafting is no less risky than drafting 4-5 rbs with one's first 6-7 picks. That strategy just creates weaknesses in other positions as well. For me, it's shocking to see that in mock drafts--people are consistently grabbing their 4th and 5th rbs--before thinking about drafting their weekly starting qb or their weekly starting wr's and te's. Isn't this a perfect scenario to where shrewd drafters can spin this to an advantage? Those teams implementing the huge running back craze are literally working on strengthening their benches before they worry about the strength of their starting lineups-- which is no different than value based drafting. The only difference is in the assets that one accumulates on their benches (trade bait). I'd much rather have studs at non-rb positions sitting on my bench over having a bunch of low end rb's sitting on it. For me-- I think the popular drafting dynamic (the running back craze) this year is motivating me to put a higher emphasis on value based drafting this season. I agree with you that it is risky---but every strategy carries some risk. Thank you again for your time and feedback.

 

[GregR]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

Bia, don't we want the mock to be representative of what a real league with that starting lineup and scoring would be? And most real leagues allow trading.

Because he treated it like a real league, the mock shows that you can't count on Gronk getting passed where the OP took him, because someone might take him there even just based on his perceived trade value.

If you want to meet your goal of evaluating where you need to take players, then you really should want people to take it as seriously as the OP.

 

[GregR]

On how much leagues trade, it varies with the league and the owners. One problem I think you can find is that it is novice owners, or at least ones who don't have a good grasp of FF and value, who give you a lot of opportunity to draft with trading in mind. But if they couldn't grasp how value worked during the draft, it can be difficult to get them to see it during the season. It helps when you have actual scoring results coming in, but I've found such owners often tend to cling to where the player was drafted as more indicative of his value than what he's actually scoring.

I'm not saying don't do it. Just realize it can vary how much you can get the tactic to pay off.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I always look for value but only in guys I actually want. For auctions never bid unless you'd be happy getting the guy. A bunch of mediocre players you got a good deal on can suck.

Back to your example of taking Gronk for value when you already have Graham. Assuming you can't play both there is no reason to do this. I would say if you think Gronk is great value there you should've looked to pick someone else instead of Graham early. Then you are in control of who's on your team. Essentially you traded Graham for a 2nd rounder.

I remember being in a Guppy league for a few years a long time ago. While I dominated it most of the time, one time I was the guppy. What happened was other owners were filling out their starters and I had stars in my eyes for the huge value left on the table. I drafted my RB4 or RB5 instead of a WR1 or QB1. I didn't realize that if I had picked some stud WRs in there the value RBs would still be there later for me too.

Here's another example from last year in a solid league. I had picked QB Vick and knew I wanted RGIII to hedge and got him like in the 8th Rd or whatever. I found out after the draft that the guy who paid big for ARodgers early was considering RGIII as great value a few picks before I got him but was talked out of it by a friend. Here's why. It wouldn't have helped his team since Rodgers is an every week starter. Even if RGIII was blowing up would you bench Rodgers and play the guessing game? You may think you could trade him for a stud but QBs just aren't as valuable in trade since most teams have a pretty good one.

It's good to draft for value but it needs to make sense.

First of all--thank you for the reply. You do make some good points. However, I will copy and paste a line from your post that I disagree with:

Back to your example of taking Gronk for value when you already have Graham. Assuming you can't play both there is no reason to do this. I would say if you think Gronk is great value there you should've looked to pick someone else instead of Graham early. Then you are in control of who's on your team. Essentially you traded Graham for a 2nd rounder.

My strategy is that I wanted Graham---the only reason why I picked Gronk (in the late 5th) and Brees (in the late 3rd) is because those were insanely good values that I would have never thought would be available to me so late. It's not like I was planning on having both Graham and Gronk from the beginning. In the mock, I had an opportunity to draft between a 2nd rb like a bradshaw/mendenhall or take an elite te. In the next round, I was able to get Eddie lacy as my 2nd rb--which is rather weak--but is it that much of a downgrade from a mendenhall to where it is worth not having gronk? I know it's a risky play-- but isn't allowing another team to grab gronk in the very late 5th/early 6th round even riskier? I'd rather take the slight downgrade in my rb2 position and accumulate a stud as trade bait than to risk letting another team "steal" him. This is the point of the post--at what point do most people find it appropriate to change a draft strategy because the value is too good to pass up--or do you stick to your strategy no matter what?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I generally agree that you should never draft a guy just to trade him, but Gronk might be an exception if he falls a bit. He's someone that would actually have great trade value if he comes back healthy (which seems far more likely than not based on what we know today).

And if he doesn't have great trade value, you could trade Graham for a stud and keep him.

 

[chickensoup]

If you don't have your starting RBs, don't take the value plays at QB/TE if you took them early. It leaves you far too thin.

The only way going for an upside down draft works is hitting on RB late. Typically the longer you wait on them, the less likely the RB you get is going to perform as even a RB2 which the strategy revolves around. It's already a risky way to draft, you can't add the extra risk by picking value players at positions you are strong on.

 

[GregR]

Ok, third post, since each is sort of about something different.

One thing you need to not neglect is that there are two major different aspects to value. What we normally talk about when say value is based on the pool of players available and how that relates to your starting lineup. Calvin Johnson outscores other players at his position by X, so his value to your team is X.

However, when using a draft there is also supply and demand involved. In normal business, if demand is higher that changes the value of an item. (Just check the price of ammunition as people buy it up frantically, afraid government is going to regulate it).

An easy way to illustrate this is with an example. Say that you're drafting at 1.7 and you can draft QB1 or RB6. Your VBD value tells you that QB1 is more valuable. However our flawless gypsy fortune teller tells you that regardless of who you pick, picks 1.8 through 2.5 will all be RBs as well.

So in essence you can have a team where your first two picks are QB1 and RB16. Or RB6 and QB1. Obviously the latter is the far stronger team. So because of the way that a draft works in distributing players, the actual order that players come off the draft board can strongly impact what your optimal team would be and how you should draft to get there.

Now it would be very true to say the OP, when he takes Gronk to trade, is taking advantage of other owners taking less VBD valuable guys. But it is also probably true that this concept of supply and demand value wasn't paid enough attention to if you get to a situation where you are so RB poor that late in the draft. The nature of a draft means that other drafters depleting a position tends to increase the value of the position in drafting your optimal team your set of picks allows. So following the herd actually is a more correct move than straight up VBD value would suggest.

And by the way, this supply and demand value, we tend to call that Dynamic VBD value. Dynamic VBD you basically look at the drop off between the players available now at positions of need, and the players available next round at positions of need, and use the size of the drop off as a measure of value. So in my earlier example, the drop off between RB6 and RB16 is much bigger than the 0 drop off between QB1 and QB1. Of course I chose that since it is extreme and obvious when it's the same player both picks. We could make it QB2 or QB3 and as long as the drop off was still less than at RB, then drafting a less VBD valuable RB would be the better move.

Now how to incorporate that together with the possibility of trade-and-draft, there is no perfect answer for. It's as much an art as a science. And one that there are other things (like identifying players whose ADP doesn't match your beliefs) that should be included. I do agree with the posters who have essentially said that you want to avoid having a hole that can only be filled by trade. Some leagues no one will trade with anyone. But even if you can trade, you may find there is a shortage of teams with tradeable RB depth who need the TE or other position you have to trade. In such cases, you don't have much leverage if you absolutely need to make the trade to field a competitive lineup because you left a glaring hole on your team. That is why I think most experienced FF owners would advise against getting into that specific of a situation. Draft a player who has trade value yes. But not if doing so leaves you with a hole that can only be filled by trade.

 

[Aztec9er]

Playing in a league that didn't have much trades would make value based drafting even more important. Not the opposite like you are saying. In a league where there is very little trading, your team for the year is basically the team you drafted. So you have to know what you are doing and be spot on with your drafting. And I actually love that my league doesn't have much trades. I like that the draft is very important. it is a 16 team league and I will never go back to anything smaller than that. It is a whole different ball game playing in that size of a league. And being a part of a league that doesn't have much trades doesn't defeat the purpose of fantasy football lol. The purpose of FF is to win and put together a great team. You do so by drafting your players, looking at the waiver wires, and if you still aren't pleased, then you can try to work a trade. But the draft is most important thing and if you do it right, you don't need to trade. And you should draft just to build up players to trade. If you are going to do that, why don't you just draft the guy you were going to trade for? lol. It is not like you are going to be able to trade up in value that much. So instead of wasting those pics on trade bate, why don't you just draft a player YOU want? That is the purpose of the draft - to put together a winning team, not a trade team. What is the point of that? In re-drafts rosters resets, so why waste your time on a player you are just wanting to trade away? use the pic on a player you actually want. And if you do your homework, you can get the best value at each pick and put together a winning team. If you do that, what is a purpose of trading? The only thing you'd do from there is ruin your team.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying-- I would disagree that "trading" doesn't necessarily diminish the "importance" of your draft. The idea of value based drafting is if you decide to draft somebody other than who you were planning on drafting because this other player has a much higher value than the guy you originally wanted. The premise that I am looking at is that every season there are certain draft strategies that are popular. Last year it was drafting elite qbs early--and tight ends--like gronk. This year--there is a massive rush to draft rbs--to the point where elite qbs, te's and wr's are available at bargain draft positions. Knowing that there is a high probability that many of these teams that will go running back crazy will be weak in other positions--qb/wr/te-- I can totally see that this very well could be a "trade friendly" season even in leagues that historically don't do much trading. The idea is to build the best possible way one can via whatever means one can--meaning draft, free agency AND trading. If I'm drafting a team--and I'm in the 5th or 6th round--and lets say I already have jimmy graham, drew brees, calvin johnson, darren mcfadden--do I draft a 2nd rb (a guy like ryan matthews) or do I draft a gronkowski? Ryan Matthews will maybe end up being a top 20-25 rb if healthy--or I do abandon my immediate need for a 2nd rb and draft a Gronkowski--who will almost certainly be a top 2-3 te in a position that is very shallow this year? If I could get all of the guys I want throughout the entire course of a draft--you would have a point--but in reality--when does that ever happen? This is why I disagree when you say that value based drafting is more important in leagues that don't trade much. In my leagues--I can easily turn Gronk into an rb with far more value than matthews--where in a league that doesn't trade-- I'd be stuck drafting by need. I'm certainly not saying to draft solely based on trade bait--that is taking a strategy that should be kept in mind to an extreme. I think drafting without considering the potential trade value of a player is a way to minimize potential strategy--not enhance it. In the case example of my mock draft--with gronk--I could have either drafted a mid level rb2, a mid level wr2 or an elite te. There is no doubt in my mind that I could easily trade Gronk in my leagues for both an rb2 an a low end wr2. Not only that--if I don't draft a gronk--I'd just be letting a team that would have better rb's than I to have an elite te for even a better value. Shouldn't that be taken into account?

I don't think you get it. Yes, the idea of VBD is to get the best value player available, and most likely a guy that you weren't expecting to draft there. You got that part right. But VBD is a tool to help you draft the best value available for YOUR team. Not the best value available for trade bait. So, if in the first 2 rounds you drafted a RB and in the 3rd the highest value player available according to VBD is a RB...you DON'T draft him. You draft the highest VBD player who is not a RB.

And with Gronk. That is the one and only guy. With TEs, him and Graham stand out among the others. So if he FALLS...yes, of course, draft him. But you don't need to follow VBD to do that. And infact, if you follow VBD, it will probably recommend a different player in that moment. Within the first 3-4 rounds, runningbacks have the highest VBD.

You draft to put together YOUR team. And at the end of it, if you are not pleased, then you look to the waiver wire and also possible trades to make YOUR team better. That is what fantasy football is...it isn't about trading. If you want to trade, go buy Madden. Trading can help with your team and should be done with that in mind. But it shouldn't be your mindset in drafting a player.

Also, what size league do you play in? If you play in an 8 man league LOL, ya go ahead and just draft like that, because regardless there are going to be really good players available in the waiver wire. The same can be said for 12 man leagues. But if you are in a 16 team league like myself. There is no waiver wire. You draft your team. You draft your players with the mindset of how they can help you win. You fill your starting spots (WR, QB, RB) before drafting back ups.

 

[GregR]

VBD doesn't tell you when to draft people. It tells you who valuable each player is compared to every other player. But it doesn't tell you if the most valuable player is one who if drafted at a given pick results in your team being optimized. (See my earlier post about the two types of value and VBD and Dynamic VBD.)

What VBD produces is generally made into an ordered list/ranking which people use to draft from. But it doesn't anywhere tell you "Player X is the best pick for you".

Now you can use the output to try to get closer to that answer by imposing rules like "don't draft a position you have the starters filled at when you have other starting slots empty". But that isn't part of VBD's output. That's how you're choosing to use its output (and that may not always be the best way to use it, either).

Dynamic VBD by comparison would tell you who to draft right now. It won't tell you how valuable the player is overall. It only tells you from a very small sampling of players (generally 2 from each position if you are looking a single round ahead), which of the players contributes to the best final roster. It also has shortcomings. It doesn't know if there's a player 3 rounds from now who you think everyone else values wrong and so you should wait to draft his position because you plan to take him.

That last sentence's example, incidentally, is part of what I meant when I said just having a set of rules and drafting from a VBD list isn't necessarily the best way to use VBD. One of the ways VBD should be used is to join it together with ADP/your predictions of how your league will draft, to identify players where his overall value (VBD) and the value caused by demand of players will intersect and give you a really valuable player that you should target, whose taking will impact your other draft decisions so you want to be aware of it in advance.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Playing in a league that didn't have much trades would make value based drafting even more important. Not the opposite like you are saying. In a league where there is very little trading, your team for the year is basically the team you drafted. So you have to know what you are doing and be spot on with your drafting. And I actually love that my league doesn't have much trades. I like that the draft is very important. it is a 16 team league and I will never go back to anything smaller than that. It is a whole different ball game playing in that size of a league. And being a part of a league that doesn't have much trades doesn't defeat the purpose of fantasy football lol. The purpose of FF is to win and put together a great team. You do so by drafting your players, looking at the waiver wires, and if you still aren't pleased, then you can try to work a trade. But the draft is most important thing and if you do it right, you don't need to trade. And you should draft just to build up players to trade. If you are going to do that, why don't you just draft the guy you were going to trade for? lol. It is not like you are going to be able to trade up in value that much. So instead of wasting those pics on trade bate, why don't you just draft a player YOU want? That is the purpose of the draft - to put together a winning team, not a trade team. What is the point of that? In re-drafts rosters resets, so why waste your time on a player you are just wanting to trade away? use the pic on a player you actually want. And if you do your homework, you can get the best value at each pick and put together a winning team. If you do that, what is a purpose of trading? The only thing you'd do from there is ruin your team.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying-- I would disagree that "trading" doesn't necessarily diminish the "importance" of your draft. The idea of value based drafting is if you decide to draft somebody other than who you were planning on drafting because this other player has a much higher value than the guy you originally wanted. The premise that I am looking at is that every season there are certain draft strategies that are popular. Last year it was drafting elite qbs early--and tight ends--like gronk. This year--there is a massive rush to draft rbs--to the point where elite qbs, te's and wr's are available at bargain draft positions. Knowing that there is a high probability that many of these teams that will go running back crazy will be weak in other positions--qb/wr/te-- I can totally see that this very well could be a "trade friendly" season even in leagues that historically don't do much trading. The idea is to build the best possible way one can via whatever means one can--meaning draft, free agency AND trading. If I'm drafting a team--and I'm in the 5th or 6th round--and lets say I already have jimmy graham, drew brees, calvin johnson, darren mcfadden--do I draft a 2nd rb (a guy like ryan matthews) or do I draft a gronkowski? Ryan Matthews will maybe end up being a top 20-25 rb if healthy--or I do abandon my immediate need for a 2nd rb and draft a Gronkowski--who will almost certainly be a top 2-3 te in a position that is very shallow this year? If I could get all of the guys I want throughout the entire course of a draft--you would have a point--but in reality--when does that ever happen? This is why I disagree when you say that value based drafting is more important in leagues that don't trade much. In my leagues--I can easily turn Gronk into an rb with far more value than matthews--where in a league that doesn't trade-- I'd be stuck drafting by need. I'm certainly not saying to draft solely based on trade bait--that is taking a strategy that should be kept in mind to an extreme. I think drafting without considering the potential trade value of a player is a way to minimize potential strategy--not enhance it. In the case example of my mock draft--with gronk--I could have either drafted a mid level rb2, a mid level wr2 or an elite te. There is no doubt in my mind that I could easily trade Gronk in my leagues for both an rb2 an a low end wr2. Not only that--if I don't draft a gronk--I'd just be letting a team that would have better rb's than I to have an elite te for even a better value. Shouldn't that be taken into account?

I don't think you get it. Yes, the idea of VBD is to get the best value player available, and most likely a guy that you weren't expecting to draft there. You got that part right. But VBD is a tool to help you draft the best value available for YOUR team. Not the best value available for trade bait. So, if in the first 2 rounds you drafted a RB and in the 3rd the highest value player available according to VBD is a RB...you DON'T draft him. You draft the highest VBD player who is not a RB.

And with Gronk. That is the one and only guy. With TEs, him and Graham stand out among the others. So if he FALLS...yes, of course, draft him. But you don't need to follow VBD to do that. And infact, if you follow VBD, it will probably recommend a different player in that moment. Within the first 3-4 rounds, runningbacks have the highest VBD.

You draft to put together YOUR team. And at the end of it, if you are not pleased, then you look to the waiver wire and also possible trades to make YOUR team better. That is what fantasy football is...it isn't about trading. If you want to trade, go buy Madden. Trading can help with your team and should be done with that in mind. But it shouldn't be your mindset in drafting a player.

Also, what size league do you play in? If you play in an 8 man league LOL, ya go ahead and just draft like that, because regardless there are going to be really good players available in the waiver wire. The same can be said for 12 man leagues. But if you are in a 16 team league like myself. There is no waiver wire. You draft your team. You draft your players with the mindset of how they can help you win. You fill your starting spots (WR, QB, RB) before drafting back ups.

I thank you again for your time and postings--but I disagree with you on one thing. Value based drafting is based on it helping my team--the idea is do I take value in a position that I'm already strong in--if I'm confident that I can translate that into better value than what is available in positions that I am weak in. In your league that is 16 teams deep and there is no trading--maybe this is an option that is not available for you--but in my leagues trades do happen. The only reason why I would even consider value based drafting is if I'd be confident that with a trade strategy in mind that I could translate it into a better player. The point that people are missing here is that people draft based on "strings". This year the first round 2 rounds are riddled with rbs. That means people with early draft positions are going to have access to the more elite rb's--and the guys in the later rounds are going to have to "chase". You'll then find that in rounds 3-4--a wr string starts-and the guys in the early draft positions will tend to have first access to the wr's (aside from marshall, aj, calvin, and dez). What this means is that--generally speaking--owners with mid-later draft positions have to make up points for being later in the "draft stringing" somewhere else. Otherwise--they are going to be chasing rb's, chasing wr's, te's and the entire way through the draft. I think you are giving sound advice only looking at the exact situation of your league. You play in a 16 team league (which means there won't be much value in the free agency market--and the other owner in your league don't trade)--which means you have to basically draft a fully complete team during the draft at all costs. In your situation--that is understandable and it's a correct strategy. I'm asking you to put yourself in the shoes of somebody that plays in a more regular league than yours--- let's say a 12 team, non ppr, where trades actually occur. What would be your thoughts on value based drafting based on those parameters? I'm not disagreeing with you--I just feel like our situations are polar opposites.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Ok, third post, since each is sort of about something different.

One thing you need to not neglect is that there are two major different aspects to value. What we normally talk about when say value is based on the pool of players available and how that relates to your starting lineup. Calvin Johnson outscores other players at his position by X, so his value to your team is X.

However, when using a draft there is also supply and demand involved. In normal business, if demand is higher that changes the value of an item. (Just check the price of ammunition as people buy it up frantically, afraid government is going to regulate it).

An easy way to illustrate this is with an example. Say that you're drafting at 1.7 and you can draft QB1 or RB6. Your VBD value tells you that QB1 is more valuable. However our flawless gypsy fortune teller tells you that regardless of who you pick, picks 1.8 through 2.5 will all be RBs as well.

So in essence you can have a team where your first two picks are QB1 and RB16. Or RB6 and QB1. Obviously the latter is the far stronger team. So because of the way that a draft works in distributing players, the actual order that players come off the draft board can strongly impact what your optimal team would be and how you should draft to get there.

Now it would be very true to say the OP, when he takes Gronk to trade, is taking advantage of other owners taking less VBD valuable guys. But it is also probably true that this concept of supply and demand value wasn't paid enough attention to if you get to a situation where you are so RB poor that late in the draft. The nature of a draft means that other drafters depleting a position tends to increase the value of the position in drafting your optimal team your set of picks allows. So following the herd actually is a more correct move than straight up VBD value would suggest.

And by the way, this supply and demand value, we tend to call that Dynamic VBD value. Dynamic VBD you basically look at the drop off between the players available now at positions of need, and the players available next round at positions of need, and use the size of the drop off as a measure of value. So in my earlier example, the drop off between RB6 and RB16 is much bigger than the 0 drop off between QB1 and QB1. Of course I chose that since it is extreme and obvious when it's the same player both picks. We could make it QB2 or QB3 and as long as the drop off was still less than at RB, then drafting a less VBD valuable RB would be the better move.

Now how to incorporate that together with the possibility of trade-and-draft, there is no perfect answer for. It's as much an art as a science. And one that there are other things (like identifying players whose ADP doesn't match your beliefs) that should be included. I do agree with the posters who have essentially said that you want to avoid having a hole that can only be filled by trade. Some leagues no one will trade with anyone. But even if you can trade, you may find there is a shortage of teams with tradeable RB depth who need the TE or other position you have to trade. In such cases, you don't have much leverage if you absolutely need to make the trade to field a competitive lineup because you left a glaring hole on your team. That is why I think most experienced FF owners would advise against getting into that specific of a situation. Draft a player who has trade value yes. But not if doing so leaves you with a hole that can only be filled by trade.

Hello Greg--I just really want to thank you for your posts in regards to this topic. I really appreciate all that you have to say as it is insightful and well thought out. I'm just kind of thinking about how my drafts will go down (which is very unpredictable)--and although I have some strategies in mind-- sometimes it's just hard to pass up on guys when I see sooo much potential value there. You are right though--it very well could lead me to have holes in my lineup that if I don't handle accordingly could very well come back to bite me. In any case, I just wanted to thank you for your input and feedback.

 

[Biabreakable]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

Thank you for the response. I want to make sure that we don't get off topic here. I merely used the Gronk example in the mock draft as a way of "highlighting' an example of value based drafting. I do mock drafts as a way of seeing what players will be available to me at my various draft positions if I implement various draft strategies. My strategy going into that mock was certainly not to draft both graham and gronk--but my point is-- isn't there some point where value has to be taken into account? In my leagues--where trading occurs at a regular basis-- I know for a fact that Gronk can easily net me more than an rb2--so do I go for the rb2 or do I go for Gronk? I only ask this question because for me personally---I see people completely disregarding value based drafting in almost every mock that I've seen. In the same mock--cam newton went in the middle of the 6th and rg3 in the early 9th. Is there such a perceived shortage on rb's this year that people should abandon the idea of value in their drafting? I don't want to turn this into a debate on the role of mock drafts--rather a discussion on how much most people are taking value into account during their drafts.

I hear what you are saying. However the people you are doing the mock draft with are not the same people in your league and unless I am mistaken there is no trading after the mock is completed. Correct?

If there is no trading after the draft then how is it reasonable to draft as if there is?

If you can trade Gronk for a RB2 and everyone else drafts their RB2s before Gronk they should not be willing to trade those players for Gronk. They could have just drafted him instead. So while your assessment of his value may be correct, if the folks you are drafting with do not draft him above those players it is unlikely they will trade their 2nd round pick for your 4th round pick of Gronk later.

In a real draft that plays out the season someone may change their mind about that later on when news becomes favorable for Gronk. Or you could decide to draft Gronk to block your competition from having him, which does improve the value of Graham somewhat by doing this. However to maximize the value of your draft you should consider passing on Graham earlier in your draft so that you can capture the even better price of Gronk later. That is what I think the mock should teach you.

Drafting for trade bait in a redraft league is risky business if the trade bait is not useful to your team, as already pointed out with the QB example.

I think drafting best player available by value is a more viable strategy in dynasty leagues than redraft leagues. Your assumption that owners will give up a RB2 for TE1 may not be correct. As there will be few teams who hit on enough of their RB picks to actually be able to afford giving one up and stay competitive. The one or 2 teams who can may be doing well enough to win without the trade anyways, even if Gronk does improve their total points scored each week, the owner may not consider that trade off worth having to face your team with that RB2.

 

[Biabreakable]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

Bia, don't we want the mock to be representative of what a real league with that starting lineup and scoring would be? And most real leagues allow trading.

Because he treated it like a real league, the mock shows that you can't count on Gronk getting passed where the OP took him, because someone might take him there even just based on his perceived trade value.

If you want to meet your goal of evaluating where you need to take players, then you really should want people to take it as seriously as the OP.

I hear what your saying Greg and for the most part I agree. It is not the OP fault that everyone passed on a valuable player for so long. ADP will tell everyone that said player is normally drafted by pick X. You do not even need to mock to know that.

Why did everyone pass? Perhaps a very risk averse group? Hard to say.

If you could draft Graham and Gronk as the OP did AND still get good enough RBs in say rounds 6-8 then do it. Execute your draft and keep your list. See how that plays out over the season. The points gained on the competition for just blocking them from having Gronk may ultimately be worthwhile enough as long as you also hit on your later RB picks. That would be something interesting to track and see if it is indeed worth taking Gronk there or not.

If the pick requires a trade for the value to pay off then it may not be as valuable as you think.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Does the mock draft allow trades? Is it total points? Can you start a 2nd TE as a flex position?

A mock draft is usually meant to be an exercise to help you evaluate where you need to take players to put together the best team. Drafting for trade bait in a mock that will not have trading after it's completion is not a viable strategy.

If you are drafting for dynasty I could see doing something like this in a start up though.

Thank you for the response. I want to make sure that we don't get off topic here. I merely used the Gronk example in the mock draft as a way of "highlighting' an example of value based drafting. I do mock drafts as a way of seeing what players will be available to me at my various draft positions if I implement various draft strategies. My strategy going into that mock was certainly not to draft both graham and gronk--but my point is-- isn't there some point where value has to be taken into account? In my leagues--where trading occurs at a regular basis-- I know for a fact that Gronk can easily net me more than an rb2--so do I go for the rb2 or do I go for Gronk? I only ask this question because for me personally---I see people completely disregarding value based drafting in almost every mock that I've seen. In the same mock--cam newton went in the middle of the 6th and rg3 in the early 9th. Is there such a perceived shortage on rb's this year that people should abandon the idea of value in their drafting? I don't want to turn this into a debate on the role of mock drafts--rather a discussion on how much most people are taking value into account during their drafts.

I hear what you are saying. However the people you are doing the mock draft with are not the same people in your league and unless I am mistaken there is no trading after the mock is completed. Correct?

If there is no trading after the draft then how is it reasonable to draft as if there is?

If you can trade Gronk for a RB2 and everyone else drafts their RB2s before Gronk they should not be willing to trade those players for Gronk. They could have just drafted him instead. So while your assessment of his value may be correct, if the folks you are drafting with do not draft him above those players it is unlikely they will trade their 2nd round pick for your 4th round pick of Gronk later.

In a real draft that plays out the season someone may change their mind about that later on when news becomes favorable for Gronk. Or you could decide to draft Gronk to block your competition from having him, which does improve the value of Graham somewhat by doing this. However to maximize the value of your draft you should consider passing on Graham earlier in your draft so that you can capture the even better price of Gronk later. That is what I think the mock should teach you.

Drafting for trade bait in a redraft league is risky business if the trade bait is not useful to your team, as already pointed out with the QB example.

I think drafting best player available by value is a more viable strategy in dynasty leagues than redraft leagues. Your assumption that owners will give up a RB2 for TE1 may not be correct. As there will be few teams who hit on enough of their RB picks to actually be able to afford giving one up and stay competitive. The one or 2 teams who can may be doing well enough to win without the trade anyways, even if Gronk does improve their total points scored each week, the owner may not consider that trade off worth having to face your team with that RB2.

Thank you again for your reply. I do appreciate it. Of course the mock drafts are not done with the actual people in my league--and of course, there is no trading in a "mock" draft. I'm not drafting as if there is trading in the "mock" draft--I'm using the mock to find out what players will be available if I want to try a specific drafting strategy. However, in the course of the mock drafts that I've done-- I've noticed situations where the running back craze has put me in positions to where I can choose to stick to my strategy or go for what I think are "insane" values anywhere else. Whereas the entire fantasy world is projecting that running backs are saviors at every cost--and many people are drafting 4th rb's and leaving elite players on the draftboard at other positions--I see something else happening. No league that I'm aware of allows for 4 rb's in their starting lineups--so a lot of these teams will start off the season leaving lots of rb points on their benches. They will be so weak in other positions that I can see many teams looking to trade some running back depth to get elite in the positions that they are weak at. Of course, no other owner will trade a guy they drafted ahead of gronk--for gronk--immediately after the draft---but wait two or three weeks--when they realize that there is a vast difference between Greg Olsen and Gronkowski--and then see what happens. Again--I understand your point--it's difficult to recommend drafting a team that might have a weakness in it--and it is risky business to draft by value--but I firmly believe that at some point it makes absolute sense to do it. In any case--I appreciate your feedback and inputs in this post.

 

[Biabreakable]

The ultimate goal is to have the highest scoring team. If there is no way for you to use the 2nd TE pick (It would buffer injury to your Graham pick still) then you may have to pass the value so that you will have the highest scoring lineup.

So if you could post the 4th round of that mock, what we could do is track the points scored for your Gronk pick against the RB picks taken there.

At the end of the season we can then compare the value lost by skipping a RB (or WR whatever you still needed) compared to the value lost by all of the other teams for passing Gronk and what they got there.

I think that would be a very interesting thing to track and see how it works out.

 

[ATSS_0100]

I see what your point is. Based on postion tiers, gronk is your tier 1 TE rank, and at that same point in your draft lets say you only see tier 3/4 RBS and tier 2/3 WRS. IMO it's not out of the question to draft gronk there even when you have graham. Especially if you can trade him. Trading him will be easy IMO once he gets a 100yd 2td game.

You seemed to be drafting by tier value through the draft when you pick Calvin, graham, Bree's and so forth. Stick with it, IMO it's not a terrible idea.

 

[oswizzle]

Drafting two TE1 is the biggest waste of a pick ... I took Graham and Gronk Last year... ended up in Last place.. I passed up on so amazing other players ...

Proven and most consistent way to a championship is through RB's that do it all Run/Catch/TDs

 

[chickensoup]

Drafting two TE1 is the biggest waste of a pick ... I took Graham and Gronk Last year... ended up in Last place.. I passed up on so amazing other players ...

Proven and most consistent way to a championship is through RB's that do it all Run/Catch/TDs

It's only a waste of a pick if you can't play them both. There are some leagues out there that can flex a TE where it could be worthwhile to do it, but with where you have to take them your WR and/or RB core is likely rubbish.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Drafting two TE1 is the biggest waste of a pick ... I took Graham and Gronk Last year... ended up in Last place.. I passed up on so amazing other players ...

Proven and most consistent way to a championship is through RB's that do it all Run/Catch/TDs

It's only a waste of a pick if you can't play them both. There are some leagues out there that can flex a TE where it could be worthwhile to do it, but with where you have to take them your WR and/or RB core is likely rubbish.

I appreciate all of the posts and feedback on this topic. I just want to make clear that we stay on topic here. I merely used the Gronk example in one of my mock drafts as one of the examples of "value" being available in this years draft. In my opinion--the door is open to this value because of this insane rush to draft rbs. My league happens to allow 2 te's because of the existence of a flex spot--but even if it didn't--how is drafting 4 running backs with one's first 6-7 picks not wasteful? I'm not familiar with any leagues that allow 4 starting running backs? Gronk was just an example for why I started the post-which namely is-- how much should one take into account "value" when drafting--basically speaking--should one be willing to postpone their drafting strategy because the value in front of them is just too good? Please take into account--that I started this post with the experience of my leagues being that the other owners in my league do actually participate in trading. Currently in drafts-- rb 3's and rb4's are getting drafted ahead of wr1's, te1's an qb1's. However, is it insane to think that once the season starts and these owners that have weak te's, wr's, and qb's get frustrated seeing massive amounts of rb points sitting on their benches? Part of success in fantasy football is being able to forecast what we think will happen--and the draft trends are a big part of this. In my eyes (coming from a league that does trade)--I can see a guy like gronkowski commanding far more value than a low end rb2/high end rb3 once the season starts. My question is--how much "forecasting" do fantasy football players take into account when drafting--and at what point do you actually act on it (trade your drafting strategy?)--if at all. Thank you for the feedback.

 

[Biabreakable]

Here is the ADP for 250 real MFL drafts since Aug 1st-

4.01 Gronkowski, Rob NEP TE 39.17
4.02 Gore, Frank SFO RB 39.63
4.03 Bowe, Dwayne KCC WR 41.57
4.04 Welker, Wes DEN WR 41.75
4.05 Amendola, Danny NEP WR 42.04
4.06 Manning, Peyton DEN QB 42.60
4.07 Newton, Cam CAR QB 43.12
4.08 Bell, Le'Veon PIT RB 43.18
4.09 Colston, Marques NOS WR 45.10
4.10 Wayne, Reggie IND WR 46.34
4.11 Nelson, Jordy GBP WR 47.09
4.12 Witten, Jason DAL TE 47.63

5.01 Nicks, Hakeem NYG WR 47.98
5.02 Garcon, Pierre WAS WR 53.66
5.03 Ball, Montee DEN RB 54.24
5.04 Brown, Antonio PIT WR 54.94
5.05 Smith, Torrey BAL WR 55.56
5.06 Ryan, Matt ATL QB 56.34
5.07 Davis, Vernon SFO TE 57.02
5.08 Brady, Tom NEP QB 57.21
5.09 Decker, Eric DEN WR 57.81
5.10 Wallace, Mike MIA WR 58.66
5.11 Mathews, Ryan SDC RB 58.94
5.12 Lacy, Eddie GBP RB 61.01

6.01 Gonzalez, Tony ATL TE 61.32
6.02 Kaepernick, Colin SFO QB
6.03 Bernard, Giovani CIN RB 62.24
6.04 Vereen, Shane NEP RB 62.53
6.05 Smith, Steve CAR WR 66.06
6.06 Austin, Tavon STL WR 66.70
6.07 Ivory, Chris NYJ RB 67.34
6.08 Griffin III, Robert WAS QB
6.09 Stafford, Matthew DET QB
6.10 Luck, Andrew IND QB 68.66
6.11 Jones, James GBP WR 72.35
6.12 Shorts, Cecil JAC WR 72.56

7.01 Jackson, DeSean PHI WR 73.80
7.02 Jennings, Greg MIN WR 74.59
7.03 Johnson, Stevie BUF WR 75.82
7.04 Bradshaw, Ahmad IND RB 76.49
7.05 Wilson, Russell SEA QB 77.06
7.06 Mendenhall, Rashard ARI RB
7.07 Romo, Tony DAL QB 80.12
7.08 Hilton, T.Y. IND WR 80.54
7.09 Gordon, Josh CLE WR 82.05
7.10 Williams, Mike TBB WR 84.19
7.11 Rudolph, Kyle MIN TE 85.52
7.12 Austin, Miles DAL WR 85.85

8.01 Britt, Kenny TEN WR 86.00
8.02 Olsen, Greg CAR TE 86.99
8.03 Boldin, Anquan SFO WR 88.42
8.04 Brown, Andre NYG RB 90.26
8.05 Richardson, Daryl STL RB
8.06 Green-Ellis, BenJarvus CIN RB
8.07 Moore, Lance NOS WR 93.92
8.08 Cook, Jared STL TE 94.00
8.09 Ingram, Mark NOS RB 98.36
8.10 Williams, DeAngelo CAR RB
8.11 Finley, Jermichael GBP TE
8.12 Manning, Eli NYG QB 101.77

9.01 Hopkins, DeAndre HOU WR 101.99
9.02 Tate, Ben HOU RB 102.49
9.03 Hillman, Ronnie DEN RB 103.38
9.04 Seahawks, Seattle SEA D 104.65
9.05 Blackmon, Justin JAC WR 105.54
9.06 Floyd, Michael ARI WR 107.45
9.07 Brown, Bryce PHI RB 107.92
9.08 Pierce, Bernard BAL RB 108.30
9.09 Gates, Antonio SDC TE 110.82
9.10 Daniels, Owen HOU TE 111.70
9.11 Stewart, Jonathan CAR RB112.02
9.12 Sanders, Emmanuel PIT WR112.40

So you started your draft Calvin, Graham, Brees and consider Gronkowski the best buy in the 4th round.

What I propose we compare over the season is how much VBD Gronk would have given to your opponents by you passing him compared to the other TE drafted into the 9th round, with how much Gore, Bell or those WR would have added value to your team.

We could just tally the whole VBD for these 6 rounds at the end of the season and see how it works out.

There are valuable TE picks in pretty much every round here so while Gronk might be the highest value buy at that point you need to compare what Gronk does to the guys in the 9th round that most of the teams will likely get as that makes the 11th TE taken. The 12th TE would be Bennett taken in the 10th round.

The RB being taken in the 9th round have a starter ahead of them or a lot of competition for snaps. Many of those players wont score much of anything without an injury to the starter and your losing a lot of value there if you are picking these guys as your 3rd RB.

The RB you will be able to draft who could turn out great would be Giovanni Bernard, Eddie Lacy, Monte Ball, Ryan Mathews, Bradshaw, Mendenhall. It is risky but you are more likely to have one of the rookies pay off big than the others taken later than that (besides DeAngelo Williams who you should take no matter what else you do). But then to draft those rookies you have to skip WR again. You do have Calvin and WR are deep but you should still be trying to get a WR in here before the decent ones are all gone.

Anyhow I hope Gronk plays or else this will be somewhat pointless.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Here is the ADP for 250 real MFL drafts since Aug 1st-

4.01 Gronkowski, Rob NEP TE 39.17
4.02 Gore, Frank SFO RB 39.63
4.03 Bowe, Dwayne KCC WR 41.57
4.04 Welker, Wes DEN WR 41.75
4.05 Amendola, Danny NEP WR 42.04
4.06 Manning, Peyton DEN QB 42.60
4.07 Newton, Cam CAR QB 43.12
4.08 Bell, Le'Veon PIT RB 43.18
4.09 Colston, Marques NOS WR 45.10
4.10 Wayne, Reggie IND WR 46.34
4.11 Nelson, Jordy GBP WR 47.09
4.12 Witten, Jason DAL TE 47.63

5.01 Nicks, Hakeem NYG WR 47.98
5.02 Garcon, Pierre WAS WR 53.66
5.03 Ball, Montee DEN RB 54.24
5.04 Brown, Antonio PIT WR 54.94
5.05 Smith, Torrey BAL WR 55.56
5.06 Ryan, Matt ATL QB 56.34
5.07 Davis, Vernon SFO TE 57.02
5.08 Brady, Tom NEP QB 57.21
5.09 Decker, Eric DEN WR 57.81
5.10 Wallace, Mike MIA WR 58.66
5.11 Mathews, Ryan SDC RB 58.94
5.12 Lacy, Eddie GBP RB 61.01

6.01 Gonzalez, Tony ATL TE 61.32
6.02 Kaepernick, Colin SFO QB
6.03 Bernard, Giovani CIN RB 62.24
6.04 Vereen, Shane NEP RB 62.53
6.05 Smith, Steve CAR WR 66.06
6.06 Austin, Tavon STL WR 66.70
6.07 Ivory, Chris NYJ RB 67.34
6.08 Griffin III, Robert WAS QB
6.09 Stafford, Matthew DET QB
6.10 Luck, Andrew IND QB 68.66
6.11 Jones, James GBP WR 72.35
6.12 Shorts, Cecil JAC WR 72.56

7.01 Jackson, DeSean PHI WR 73.80
7.02 Jennings, Greg MIN WR 74.59
7.03 Johnson, Stevie BUF WR 75.82
7.04 Bradshaw, Ahmad IND RB 76.49
7.05 Wilson, Russell SEA QB 77.06
7.06 Mendenhall, Rashard ARI RB
7.07 Romo, Tony DAL QB 80.12
7.08 Hilton, T.Y. IND WR 80.54
7.09 Gordon, Josh CLE WR 82.05
7.10 Williams, Mike TBB WR 84.19
7.11 Rudolph, Kyle MIN TE 85.52
7.12 Austin, Miles DAL WR 85.85

8.01 Britt, Kenny TEN WR 86.00
8.02 Olsen, Greg CAR TE 86.99
8.03 Boldin, Anquan SFO WR 88.42
8.04 Brown, Andre NYG RB 90.26
8.05 Richardson, Daryl STL RB
8.06 Green-Ellis, BenJarvus CIN RB
8.07 Moore, Lance NOS WR 93.92
8.08 Cook, Jared STL TE 94.00
8.09 Ingram, Mark NOS RB 98.36
8.10 Williams, DeAngelo CAR RB
8.11 Finley, Jermichael GBP TE
8.12 Manning, Eli NYG QB 101.77

9.01 Hopkins, DeAndre HOU WR 101.99
9.02 Tate, Ben HOU RB 102.49
9.03 Hillman, Ronnie DEN RB 103.38
9.04 Seahawks, Seattle SEA D 104.65
9.05 Blackmon, Justin JAC WR 105.54
9.06 Floyd, Michael ARI WR 107.45
9.07 Brown, Bryce PHI RB 107.92
9.08 Pierce, Bernard BAL RB 108.30
9.09 Gates, Antonio SDC TE 110.82
9.10 Daniels, Owen HOU TE 111.70
9.11 Stewart, Jonathan CAR RB112.02
9.12 Sanders, Emmanuel PIT WR112.40

So you started your draft Calvin, Graham, Brees and consider Gronkowski the best buy in the 4th round.

What I propose we compare over the season is how much VBD Gronk would have given to your opponents by you passing him compared to the other TE drafted into the 9th round, with how much Gore, Bell or those WR would have added value to your team.

We could just tally the whole VBD for these 6 rounds at the end of the season and see how it works out.

There are valuable TE picks in pretty much every round here so while Gronk might be the highest value buy at that point you need to compare what Gronk does to the guys in the 9th round that most of the teams will likely get as that makes the 11th TE taken. The 12th TE would be Bennett taken in the 10th round.

The RB being taken in the 9th round have a starter ahead of them or a lot of competition for snaps. Many of those players wont score much of anything without an injury to the starter and your losing a lot of value there if you are picking these guys as your 3rd RB.

The RB you will be able to draft who could turn out great would be Giovanni Bernard, Eddie Lacy, Monte Ball, Ryan Mathews, Bradshaw, Mendenhall. It is risky but you are more likely to have one of the rookies pay off big than the others taken later than that (besides DeAngelo Williams who you should take no matter what else you do). But then to draft those rookies you have to skip WR again. You do have Calvin and WR are deep but you should still be trying to get a WR in here before the decent ones are all gone.

Anyhow I hope Gronk plays or else this will be somewhat pointless.

I got mcfadden in the early 4th..I got gronk in the late 5th--this is my point-- and it's just not about gronk in general--its about value in general. Can we please stay on topic..your data basically proves that gronk is amazing value in the late 5th--but is that value enticing enough to change ones drafting strategy. In my mock--it was enough value to make me change mine. My question is about value in general. The question is--is it a mistake to change one's drafting strategy when we see amazing value in front of us? Can we stick to that as the topic--I merely used Gronk as the example--and your data proves that he's a good value where I got him. The question is--is the right move to stick to ones strategy no matter what--or is ever right to divert from that strategy if we see insane value?

 

[Biabreakable]

Ok. So you drafted Calvin, Graham, Brees, McFadden :streacher: , Gronkowski.

I will assume 12 team PPR? How many starters at each position? 1/2/3/1/DT ?

Depending on your projections I could see the 5th round pick of Gronkowski blocking the competition from getting a player who could score 20-70 points more than what those teams will be starting at the TE position. I used 150pts as the baseline which is something around TE 12-14.

So comparing that with the other picks you could have taken in the 5th round with their corresponding baselines (RB 24-30, WR 36-40. The points positive for your team are going to be better than points negative for their team from blocking. But points are points and you do gain some matchup/injury insurance.

It might not be easy to draft a WR that will give you a similar 20-70 point advantage against the other WR in round 5 and it depends on what RB were left at that point also. If your opponents drafted RB heavy some of the 5th and 6th round RB in the ADP I provided might have also been gone, which would leave more WR value.

I believe in being flexible and drafting for value. But I also think you need to draft the best team you can with the choices your opponents leave for you. Drafting Graham in the 2nd round removed your opportunity to take advantage of Gronk falling to the 5th round. To stay flexible you also need to leave your options open. If you can only start 1QB and 1TE you do not want to draft these positions early because then you remove the opportunity to draft for value later.

 

[Biabreakable]

I think I said this more succinctly about a month or so ago in regards to drafting at the 12/13 turn.

While I agree with the intent to get a top player at a position by drafting Brees and/or Graham is a good idea, and those are very good picks. The are most often only 1 required starter. So you somewhat hurt your options to draft value at those positions. Now those players VBD number might justify it, just pointing out that starting your draft this way limits your options later on.

If the draft does unfold that there is a long RB run in the 1st round, you do not want to be chasing the run. At the same time you do not want the run to go into the 3rd tier of players without getting one if at all possible.The fact that you will not be drafting again until picks 23,24 (unless this gets reversed in 3rd round) makes passing on the RB/WR even more of a problem. You will be chasing 2 RB runs and a WR at that point and the top QB/TE will be gone.

So I think you have to do an upside down draft if this is what happens. If you do not go WR/WR I think you need one of those picks be a WR so you are starting a run not chasing one. The 2nd pick I can see using on Brees or Graham although I would rather be taking the last of Brees/Rodgers/Manning than the 1st team drafting a QB. Likewise Graham would be a better value even towards the end of the 2nd round compared to at the top of it. I do not think that is in the cards drafting at the 3/4 turn.

I have not looked at any ADP info for quite some time, but drafting at the turn does give the advantage of taking 2 players at once. I think part of the strength of this allows you to wait on positions like QB/TE and get good value later in the draft at those positions at the 5/6 turn. Or the other option would be to wait later than that but to draft those positions in pairs at later turns with the intent to pair favorable scheduling.

Having over 20 picks in between your picks forces you to plan ahead more than the other draft positions. I think the thing to do is look at what is the best value at the 5/6 turn and then plan picks 1-4 based off of that.

 

[Biabreakable]

The New England Patriots need help on offense. There's a good chance they'll get it this week.

Tight end Rob Gronkowski is likely to be cleared and make his season debut Sunday against the New Orleans Saints, a person with knowledge of the situation told USA TODAY Sports. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the Patriots hadn't announced anything about Gronkowski's status.

Gronkowski, 24, underwent surgery June 18 to correct a spinal issue that nagged him last season. He was activated from the physically unable to perform list last month but has been limited in practice and missed the Patriots' first five games, including Sunday's 13-6 loss at Cincinnati.

It remains to be seen how quickly Gronkowski can return to all-pro form considering he has been inactive since the Patriots were eliminated from the playoffs in late January — first because of an infection related to his broken forearm, then because of the back surgery.

Gronkowski has 187 catches for 2,663 yards and 38 touchdowns in three seasons. Coupled with injuries that have limited slot receiver Danny Amendola to two games, the Patriots' offense has scuffled. They rank 21st in the NFL in passing.

***

Follow Tom Pelissero on Twitter @TomPelissero

5 weeks of zero certainly hasn't been very good value to tie up a roster spot. If Gronk starts playing soon he could pay off on a PPG basis.