Dynasty Football "Philosophy" (1 Viewer)

[MyopiaBread]

My group of friends will be starting a dynasty league this season. All of us have played redraft for years but haven't taken the plunge into a dynasty league yet. As we've been setting up the rules of our league we've been discussing who a person's #1 pick overall would be. The answers appeared to vary quite a bit from person to person which leads me to believe that an owner's "philosophy" for a successful dynasty team can have a large impact on a start-up draft.I've found even more evidence for this when I begin to look at dynasty rankings and start-up ADP. In a redraft format there appears to be much more consensus on where players are ranked and drafted. When it comes to dynasty ranks and ADP there always appears to be much more variability.There appears to be two different factors within an owner's philosophy. The first one is age/experience - Proven veteran talent vs. young upside talent. The second is based on how an owner views positions on a dynasty team and the factors associated with each position - RB - short shelf life but hardest players to get due to positional scarcity, WR/TE - medium shelf life and a bit easier to acquire due to the depth of the position (but elite WR talent is still difficult to come by) and QB - long shelf life and fairly easy to acquire a solid starter but true stud talent can set you apart for years to come.I am interested in how an owner views these two factors together and how it can shape a start-up draft (especially in the first round). For example the owner of the 1.01 may value proven talent at the RB position and draft Foster or AP but another owner may value young upside talent at the RB position and end up drafting a Richardson or Martin with the 1.01. Another owner could view a proven talent at WR and draft Calvin at 1.01 or a younger option and select AJG instead. Then there are owners that may select a proven QB talent like Rodgers or a young QB talent like Luck.So my questions to the community that deal mostly with a start-up draft but can be expanded to dynasty play in general: Are there any other factors you see in an owner’s “philosophy” that I’ve missed? What is your particular “philosophy” when it comes to dynasty leagues? Is there a “best” or “proven” “philosophy” that you’ve identified in your experience?Obviously an owner’s philosophy can change depending upon starting requirements so we’ll assume a standard starting roster of 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 FlexI thought this could be a very interesting topic that could spark a lot of good discussion. Thanks in advance.P.S. This thread is not me asking who to draft with the 1.01. I'm hoping the discussion goes deeper than that so I can make up my own mind about how I'll choose to play dynasty.

 

[Concept Coop]

My group of friends will be starting a dynasty league this season. All of us have played redraft for years but haven't taken the plunge into a dynasty league yet. As we've been setting up the rules of our league we've been discussing who a person's #1 pick overall would be. The answers appeared to vary quite a bit from person to person which leads me to believe that an owner's "philosophy" for a successful dynasty team can have a large impact on a start-up draft.I've found even more evidence for this when I begin to look at dynasty rankings and start-up ADP. In a redraft format there appears to be much more consensus on where players are ranked and drafted. When it comes to dynasty ranks and ADP there always appears to be much more variability.There appears to be two different factors within an owner's philosophy. The first one is age/experience - Proven veteran talent vs. young upside talent. The second is based on how an owner views positions on a dynasty team and the factors associated with each position - RB - short shelf life but hardest players to get due to positional scarcity, WR/TE - medium shelf life and a bit easier to acquire due to the depth of the position (but elite WR talent is still difficult to come by) and QB - long shelf life and fairly easy to acquire a solid starter but true stud talent can set you apart for years to come.I am interested in how an owner views these two factors together and how it can shape a start-up draft (especially in the first round). For example the owner of the 1.01 may value proven talent at the RB position and draft Foster or AP but another owner may value young upside talent at the RB position and end up drafting a Richardson or Martin with the 1.01. Another owner could view a proven talent at WR and draft Calvin at 1.01 or a younger option and select AJG instead. Then there are owners that may select a proven QB talent like Rodgers or a young QB talent like Luck.So my questions to the community that deal mostly with a start-up draft but can be expanded to dynasty play in general: Are there any other factors you see in an owner’s “philosophy” that I’ve missed? What is your particular “philosophy” when it comes to dynasty leagues? Is there a “best” or “proven” “philosophy” that you’ve identified in your experience?Obviously an owner’s philosophy can change depending upon starting requirements so we’ll assume a standard starting roster of 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 FlexI thought this could be a very interesting topic that could spark a lot of good discussion. Thanks in advance.P.S. This thread is not me asking who to draft with the 1.01. I'm hoping the discussion goes deeper than that so I can make up my own mind about how I'll choose to play dynasty.

Chris Wesseling laid out nicely 3 or 4 keys to success, though I haven't been able to find it since initially reading it. Here are two, from my memory:1. Watch the games. As many as you can. Invest in the NFL Game Rewind if you have the time, it's not too expensive and you filter content, so you can watch who/what you want. 2. Have a circle of people whose opinoins you trust. Find a couple guys from this forum, find a couple from Twitter, etc. He listed Greg Cosell and Matt Waldman, and a few others that I don't remember. This will likely take time, if you don't know where to start looking. Go to a few dynasty threads here and you'll be able to tell pretty early who knows what they're talking about. My advice (Not Wesseling's):1. Decide how much time it is worth to you. That is what is going to sepearate you from the pack; the amount of time you want to invest in research. As much as the $500-$1000 are appreciated when you win, you'd be better off getting a part-time job if you're hoping to be compensated for your time. If you enjoy the dynasty format, it likely won't be an issue; you'll do it because you enjoy it.2. Define endgame. What do you want to get out of it? How do you define win? Ask this question with every roster move you make, initially. Is having the best shot at a championship in the first 1-2 years worth being at a disadvantage after the point, when your investments start drying up (older players)? Do you want to win money? Do you want to play with a 3 year window? Do you want to plan for 2 years from now? Do you simply want to have a good time and learn from your mistakes as you go? 3. Do your start-up homework. Mock draft every round in your startup (not all at once), but do your best to have an idea what will happen between your picks. Every owner in your league will have access to enough information to determine Average Draft Position, but they won't all know how to use it. The startup draft is really an art, and a lot of fun once you "get the hang of it". The most common mistake people make is trying to get the best player with each pick, and that will lead to you surrendering value. Where is the value in round 1? Where will it be in round 2-4? There are 8 QBs off the board in round 5, how long can you wait to get your starter, knowing 3/4ths of the league already has theirs? When do you need to trade up? When can you trade down?Use a tier drafting method; if you are deciding between QB1 and RB1 in the first round, the right pick will be based on what happens AFTER your pick. If you go QB1 and in round 2, QB2 is on the board but RB1-7 are gone, you will have likely made the wrong pick. The owners with the best understanding of what will happen AFTER each of their picks, will be the owners walking away with the most value. A lot more than that, but that's what I have right now. Good luck.

 

[I was in the pool]

Just to add a correction....Game Rewind does not have a search function anymore to only watch a certain player's action.

 

[Concept Coop]

Just to add a correction....Game Rewind does not have a search function anymore to only watch a certain player's action.

I did not know that. Thank you.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I think the longer you play in a dynasty the more you value youth. In a startup with people who haven't done dynasty before, you will PROBABLY find vets drafted a little higher than you might find them in a startup with folks who have a lot of combined dynasty experience. It really is a very different animal.If you are willing to wait a year or two for the dividends to start rolling in, you can maybe jump start a real dynasty by drafting a LOT of youth in the mid-late rounds. Skip any body over 26.In the early rounds, you could maybe a go a LITTLE older for a true stud (thinking Calvin Johnson or a slightly older QB). Going with a true flyer in the early rounds prob won't help you very much. But get a fairly young stud and consider trading him for a younger player/players later. You could also possible bybass the top of the draft altogether. You will be amazed at what you can get for a 1st round pick in a startup in terms of later startup picks or future rookie picks.All that said, if it's more fun, feel free to draft a contender right away, but if you can, try to keep in mind the age of every player on your list.

 

[Shutout]

Welcome to the forum. This is always an interesting topic. In the interest of not writing a novel, a few things that always come to mind based on my playing experience:

1. The goal is to win in the year you are in: Biggest mistake I see in new leagues and ongoing leagues are the guys that try to think TOO far down the road and draft all the super young players, all the "home-run" gambles, always trading players for future and numerous draft picks. In general, yes it's a dynasty but no dynasty becomes a dynasty until you do something meaningful that first time (and then build on it). There is a big difference between saying "I was in a league for 7 straight years" vs. "I was in the playoffs playing for a title 7 years in a row". If you are playing in a dynasty league, be a DYNASTY TEAM, not just another owner. Things change fast in the NFL. Don't kid yourself into thinking you know the future 4-5 years from now.

2. Don't get caught up in "Logan's Run" Syndrome, meaning don't get hung up thinking every player has to be a stud 26 year old. Most good AND consistent dynasty teams I have seen endure long runs of success are ones that have a healthy blend of young and proven players drafted in that initial draft.

I'll leave room for others to add points instead of listing a dozen of my own but I'll leave with this: If I held the 1.01 in a start-up dynasty today and it was a ppr, I'd choose Calvin Johnson.

 

[squistion]

So my questions to the community that deal mostly with a start-up draft but can be expanded to dynasty play in general: Are there any other factors you see in an owner’s “philosophy” that I’ve missed? What is your particular “philosophy” when it comes to dynasty leagues? Is there a “best” or “proven” “philosophy” that you’ve identified in your experience?

Contrary to what some posters like EBAY will tell you, there is no one best or proven philosopy that works better than the others, I have seen them all win championships. That said, I happen to look to a 2-3 year time frame window and seem to have done a lot better than those here who manage their team like a stock portfolio (always talking about the future value of their team in 3+ years and what a player's "exit trade value" will be, rather than actually focusing on winnng something).

I just finished participating in two recent startup drafts and have a few observations I will pass on from that:

1) Have a strategy. It doesn't matter if the goal is short term, long term, win now, in 3 years, or having the most championships in a decade. Decide on what type of team you are putting together and draft accordingly for the entire draft. I see a lot of teams do well for about 5-6 rounds and then lose any coherent directon after that, as if drawing names out of a hat.

2) Every pick is important. Even in a 25 round draft, every pick in every round is important. There are always undervalued players with upside even in the last rounds of a draft. A lot of teams start mailing it in after about round 12 and many seasoned Dynasty players believe that championships are really won in the later rounds of a draft.

3) Don't be afraid to reach (occasionally). A start up Dynasty may be your only opportunity to own a player, so don't be afraid to reach a round or two early for a few players that you really want. For instance Justin Blackmon could be considered a reach in the early 4th round, but if he excels this year he will be untouchable after this season and you may not be able to acquire him for any price in 2014.

And moving away from startup drafts to my own philosphy, saying (as some do) that Dynasty leagues are all about future value and not present value overlooks a maxim from my Dynasty 101 class: The only year you can win is the one you are currently competing in. Even when I am in a rebuilding mode I try to acquire enough pieces to make a run for the playoffs that year, because once you the reach the playoffs with head-to-head matchups, anything can happen.

Good luck with your team and whatever strategy you pursue.

 

[mr roboto]

Be careful not to overvalue youth for the sake of youth. If your team never really matures it doesn't do you any good. I have always had 3 distinct groups on my team and I'm in contention every year. 1. Startable older players or aging studs. Many people trade these for younger players, which can be good, but I like to ride some guys all the way (especially if your league mates value youth too much - it's hard to get value for a guy with a few years left but isn't the hot young guy everyone is obsessing over). 2. Prime studs - you need a few of these in any format. ADP, Calvin, ARod etc. Draft a few in the early rounds. 3. Young Development Players - you need a stable of young talent who mature when your aging vets decline. Guys like Cobb, Crabtree, Kaep, Roddy White all took a year or more to really blossom. Turner and DWill were backups for a few years. These guys came on strong in their breakout seasons and whoever had them either drafted them years earlier, got them off WW etc. Only 50% of these will pan out, so you need a couple at each position.

 

[imagroid]

Don't be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on Jacquizz Rodgers as your RB1.

 

[Concept Coop]

In this particular off-season, I have found the following, in regards to start-ups:-QB is deep; not one is worth a 1st round pick. I see Wilson in the 5th, and Brady in the 6/7th as the best value. Even missing out on them, Peyton/Romo are great value and often going 10th+. -WR is deep; there is great value in rounds 3-6. Put yourself in position to take advantage of that. Go into round 3 needing 2-3 starting WRs (including flex options).-RB is thin, and the value is at the top. Top 4: Richardson, Martin. Top 12: Spiller, McCoy, Foster, Peterson, Foster, Charles, Rice. After than, in PPR formats, there is a major drop in value. If you don't get one of these guys in the first 12-16 picks, you'll need to do some work and put yourself in position to draft the bottom of your tiers from that point on. Meaning, if you value DMC, Murray, Mathews equally, target the last guy left, as not to reach. Move down and up when needed. Once you start drafting for need, and leaving value on the board, you're playing catch up. TE is top heavy and Gronk/Graham have great value anywhere you can get them. Hernandez is great value in the 3rd+, and Witten is great value 5th round on. After that, I would wait as long as you can; round 10+. There just isn't enough of a value gap between even Rudolph and guys like Olsen, who you'll be able to get much, much later.

 

[Concept Coop]

double

 

[lyon812]

Be careful not to overvalue youth for the sake of youth. If your team never really matures it doesn't do you any good. I have always had 3 distinct groups on my team and I'm in contention every year. 1. Startable older players or aging studs. Many people trade these for younger players, which can be good, but I like to ride some guys all the way (especially if your league mates value youth too much - it's hard to get value for a guy with a few years left but isn't the hot young guy everyone is obsessing over). 2. Prime studs - you need a few of these in any format. ADP, Calvin, ARod etc. Draft a few in the early rounds. 3. Young Development Players - you need a stable of young talent who mature when your aging vets decline. Guys like Cobb, Crabtree, Kaep, Roddy White all took a year or more to really blossom. Turner and DWill were backups for a few years. These guys came on strong in their breakout seasons and whoever had them either drafted them years earlier, got them off WW etc. Only 50% of these will pan out, so you need a couple at each position.

I'll second this excellent post. I always seek a balance between veterans and youth. Don't skew too heavily one direction or the other towards veterans or youth. That being said, one way to succeed is to gauge the temperature of your league. Each league is different. For example, two of my leagues couldn't be more opposite; one devalues draft picks and undeveloped youth, because people only trust veterans with a history of production. The other is prospect central, with people devaluing anyone over 27. I'm competitive in both by realizing this, and adjusting my roster/expectations/trade offers accordingly.

 

[GeeYouknit]

When I first entered Dynasty I made the HUGE mistake of going after players that we're generally old, yet productive, but not studs. Then after some bad trades and screwing my team over, 3 years down the road I finally got a hang on how it works and am starting to become a weekly contender (not a playoff contender though). As long as you can put some time into researching it makes it that much more fun IMO. See team1 in my sigMy advice don't undervalue young players that have the skills. Look for the players with the skillset and not necessarily the opportunity (even though that helps) to start your league. This is what I did in team2 in my sig (champion team ) which just finished its first year and I think I have a great foundation.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Don't be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on Jacquizz Rodgers as your RB1.

Instead be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on next year's David Wilson as your RB1.

 

[Concept Coop]

Don't be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on Jacquizz Rodgers as your RB1.

Instead be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on next year's David Wilson as your RB1.Or draft a balanced roster. Whenever I see the wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-qb-te-wr-wr draft strategy, I hear the owner saying, "Yes. In 6 years I'll dominate!"

 

[thriftyrocker]

Don't be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on Jacquizz Rodgers as your RB1.

Instead be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on next year's David Wilson as your RB1.

Or draft a balanced roster. Whenever I see the wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-wr-qb-te-wr-wr draft strategy, I hear the owner saying, "Yes. In 6 years I'll dominate!"Yeah, I'm joking a little bit. Given current tiers/ADP, I would probably go WR TE WR QB RB or WR WR TE QB RB.

 

[Concept Coop]

Yeah, I'm joking a little bit. Given current tiers/ADP, I would probably go WR TE WR QB RB or WR WR TE QB RB.

Who's your 5th round RB target?

 

[imagroid]

Don't be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on Jacquizz Rodgers as your RB1.

Instead be the guy that goes WR the first 5 picks and settles on next year's David Wilson as your RB1.Yes, completely nail your first 6 picks. Another pro tip, write that one down op.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Yeah, I'm joking a little bit. Given current tiers/ADP, I would probably go WR TE WR QB RB or WR WR TE QB RB.

Who's your 5th round RB target?High risk high reward, delayed gratification. Gio? Knile? TBD. Unlike last year I don't think there's a great target in that area. But I think the QB/WR/TE well might be dried up enough that you can take a risky pick at RB. The difference between Maclin/Smith with ADP 5th and Gordon/Patterson/Britt/Shorts with ADP 6th and later is 0. Tier 4 RB (rounds 7-10) is huge with a lot of value. I could see taking RB all those rounds, really.

 

[Concept Coop]

Tier 4 RB (rounds 7-10) is huge with a lot of value. I could see taking RB all those rounds, really.

I agree with you there.

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

1. Everything is subjective... 2. Have Fun3. choose your league mates wisely

 

[Bamac]

Yeah, I'm joking a little bit. Given current tiers/ADP, I would probably go WR TE WR QB RB or WR WR TE QB RB.

Who's your 5th round RB target?If you're drafting young stud WRs, TE, and QB in the first four rounds, I like grabbing discounted vets at RB in rounds 5-10. Bush, Gore, SJax, Bradshaw, Sproles, DWill types. Sets you up to win this year, and your first four picks give you a foundation for the future.

 

[fightingillini]

Welcome to the forum. This is always an interesting topic. In the interest of not writing a novel, a few things that always come to mind based on my playing experience:

1. The goal is to win in the year you are in: Biggest mistake I see in new leagues and ongoing leagues are the guys that try to think TOO far down the road and draft all the super young players, all the "home-run" gambles, always trading players for future and numerous draft picks. In general, yes it's a dynasty but no dynasty becomes a dynasty until you do something meaningful that first time (and then build on it). There is a big difference between saying "I was in a league for 7 straight years" vs. "I was in the playoffs playing for a title 7 years in a row". If you are playing in a dynasty league, be a DYNASTY TEAM, not just another owner. Things change fast in the NFL. Don't kid yourself into thinking you know the future 4-5 years from now.

2. Don't get caught up in "Logan's Run" Syndrome, meaning don't get hung up thinking every player has to be a stud 26 year old. Most good AND consistent dynasty teams I have seen endure long runs of success are ones that have a healthy blend of young and proven players drafted in that initial draft.

I'll leave room for others to add points instead of listing a dozen of my own but I'll leave with this: If I held the 1.01 in a start-up dynasty today and it was a ppr, I'd choose Calvin Johnson.

This, in spades. Especially the Calvin pick. That would be my suggestion for the first pick.

Only look 2-3 years ahead. There are very few players that can you count on for stud production for more than 3 years in the future. The NFL stands for Not For Long.....for a reason.

I would recommend strict roster management. Every roster spot is valuable. The more you can get solid producing players (regardless of age) to go along with your studs, the more spots you have to take fliers on high upside players. The last thing you need is a bench full of mid to older players. You essentially want a core that can compete now, and have your reserves geared toward young talent. If a player isn't helping you now and doesn't possess the upside for the future, you have to get rid of that player.

You need proven performers to be competitive, and some will be age 30 or so. It's no big deal since you're only looking 2-3 years ahead, remember?

Don't be afraid to trade. Always remember that RBs typically hit a wall after 4 years or so, so if you have someone like Foster and you can get a great deal for him, you have to consider pulling the trigger. Knowing when a player's value is at his peak and taking advantage of that in a trade is what really separates great dynasty owners. And don't be afraid to deal for older veterans. They can come cheaply and be that last piece that takes you to the title.

 

[Black]

My biggest mistake was using my redraft philosophy for PPR leagues (and one that might be outdated now), which was load up on WR/QB and pick a bunch of backup RBs late. Problems with that:

[*]Even in 10 team, 24-man roster league, RBs got snapped up and hoarded year to year, so if you miss on your longshot RBs, there isn't much left to pull off waivers.

[*]That strategy doesn't seem to work much anymore, as it depended on WR being more consistent and when an RB goes down, his backup gets all the carries. Both have changed: WR contribute more quickly. RBs (with a few exceptions) rarely have a true backup who will usurp all carries (a la Larry Johnson to Priest Holmes).

So, now my 'stud' WR are having issues year to year (injury, QB suckage), and I have to keep scraping for RB in drafts and on the wire.

So some general advice:

1. In the draft, get best player available, but don't leave yourself at a deficit on any one position.

2. You might actually consider an Auction to kickoff the league...seems much more 'fair' to give all teams a shot at all players.

3. Take younger players, but don't go ALL high risk/high upside. I would not draft older guys like SJax, Gore, MTurner at this point in their careers. I would not have drafted them two years ago. However, I would not 'only' take guys like David Wilson/LaMichael James. I'd take a few years of ADP, guys like LeSean McCoy/R.Rice who have 'done it' before. Then hedge your 'slightly older' RBs and get their backups Bryce Brown/Bernard Pierce (maybe a round early).

I might take a player like Matt Ryan over Kaepernick or Cam if I thought I could get Ryan in the 4th round (vs. 2nd round for a younger perceived stud). If you do go very young or high risk/reward early, hedge with a good backup (Kaepernick, then Eli/Big Ben, etc. in a later round).

4. I would not aggressively take players like Reggie Wayne, but use players like that to fill out your roster in late rounds. Make a list of guys that 'can still play' that have minimal injury history.

5. Avoid guys (if possible) with a bad injury history. Just choose someone else. I've had Hardesty and Jahvid on my team...total loss and it is a real setback.

6. Once you draft/obtain young guys, give them a couple of years to work out. Don't flip them too soon and be impatient. Most of your draftees will take a year or two to 'show.'

7. Even though RBs are hard to find, be careful trading a good WR/QB for an RB. RB's careers are usually much shorter.

8. Draft picks have alot of luster but are highly volatile. You can use them to get young players you already know something about. Watch for and try to obtain highly drafted (in the NFL draft) players that have not 'popped' yet. You know more about players in year 2 or 3, but their owners might be frustrated with them. Draft picks can be moved to get those guys, and they can have a better hit rate.

9. Look at teams with established franchise QBs, and their surrounding cast will have more opportunity to score. I have some thoughts about focusing on teams that have a 'winning' culture or good organizational philosophies, but I think maybe the more direct way to predict a team's potential success is look at their QB situation. It 'can' change overnight (Cutler to CHI, Peyton to DEN, RWilson to SEA), but usually it doesn't (ARI, BUF, TEN even MIA will take some time with Tannehill).

10. When acquiring/researching players, be aware of a player's draft pedigree and age. Watch for those former #1 picks...don't be blinded by it, but you might have a better hit rate looking for guys that impressed Pro Scouts enough to be drafted early. Also, watch for players that get paid by teams. That shows you what NFL teams think of their talent/value.

 

[MyopiaBread]

I appreciate all the feedback given so far. Happy that I joined such a great community. I'll definitely be re-reading through this post as we lead up to our start-up draft. I'm starting to get the itch so bad that I'm thinking of joining a league in the "Looking for Leagues" section of the forum.I was planning on taking a WR or RB with my first rounder, depending on where I pick from, and then just go BPA and hope for some value to fall to me. My initial thought was that as I got into the later rounds I would just start taking young, high-upside players but after reading from some others I wouldn't be averse to taking some of the older, proven options if they come at the right value to fill in some possible weaknesses on my roster.It sounds like there are definitely some redraft concepts that carry over to the dynasty format (pairing proven studs with high upside players at a position/pairing two solid options together to form a committee approach) but there are extra wrinkles (production vs. youth/situation vs. talent) that need to be thought about as well. I'm eager to see how my league mates own thinking will influence not only the start-up draft but the league in general (valuing rookie picks/proven veterans more or less). I believe if you are able to get a pulse on what a league is thinking you can use that to your advantage but that might just be my psych background coming out of me...Keep the advice coming!

 

[gianmarco]

Looking at my various teams, they all have a few things in common. I'm a big believer of being elite in a couple positions, particularly QB and TE. Lately, with the influx of some great QB talent, that pool is much deeper. Still owning one of the top guys is an advantage in the long run. Teams that owned Brees or Brady or Rodgers haven't had to worry about the QB position for years. It's simply a plug and play and enjoy. I'm as high as the next guy on some of these younger QBs, but it's worth investing in. Sure, Eli has put up some great numbers as has Rivers and Ben, but none of them compare to the top guys year after year. And, if you ask anyone, trying to trade for Rodgers or Brees has always been incredibly difficult to do. So, find a true franchise fantasy QB.SImilarly, being elite at the TE position gives a huge advantage. Gronk and Graham owners rarely entertain offers because they rarely make their team better. RBs and WRs come and go and can be fixed in 1-2 years. But if you can have an advantage at QB and TE, then do it. You'll get it "cheaper" in a startup than any time afterward.

 

[EBF]

Stating the obvious here, but avoid busts in the startup draft. Especially in the first 5-6 rounds when there's less need to gamble. Certainty is a big factor in my dynasty transactions. When I'm on the clock, I tend to take the player that I have the most confidence in. Don't take someone because he fills a need. Don't take someone just because he's falling. Take the guy that you have total faith in. If you hit on your first 5-6 picks and you find a gem or two in the late rounds or free agency, you'll probably be a playoff team or right on the cusp.

 

[jwb]

Looking at my various teams, they all have a few things in common. I'm a big believer of being elite in a couple positions, particularly QB and TE. Lately, with the influx of some great QB talent, that pool is much deeper. Still owning one of the top guys is an advantage in the long run. Teams that owned Brees or Brady or Rodgers haven't had to worry about the QB position for years. It's simply a plug and play and enjoy. I'm as high as the next guy on some of these younger QBs, but it's worth investing in. Sure, Eli has put up some great numbers as has Rivers and Ben, but none of them compare to the top guys year after year. And, if you ask anyone, trying to trade for Rodgers or Brees has always been incredibly difficult to do. So, find a true franchise fantasy QB.

SImilarly, being elite at the TE position gives a huge advantage. Gronk and Graham owners rarely entertain offers because they rarely make their team better. RBs and WRs come and go and can be fixed in 1-2 years. But if you can have an advantage at QB and TE, then do it. You'll get it "cheaper" in a startup than any time afterward.

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

 

[Concept Coop]

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

Your team would suffer greatly for it. You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates. You drafting Luck in the top 3 gives the other 11 to 13 owners in your league a major step up on you. 1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 5.03 Wilson is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 5.03 Garcon/Wallace/Torrey1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 2.10 Newton is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 2.10 Cruz/Cobb1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 7.03 Brady is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 7.03 Denario Alexander/Kendall WrightThat's what your doing; you're picking Luck/Kendall Wright over Green/Brady. OR Luck/Garcon over Green/Wilson. Going QB in the top 3 is an awful, awful move right now. The field is packed. Any advantage over guys like Brees/Brady is 3-4 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Rodgers is 5-7 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Wilson/Newton/Kaepernick/RG3 is major gamble on Luck, and against the others, and not likely to pay out, considering the price you are paying Luck, compared to what the others are going for.

 

[squistion]

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

Your team would suffer greatly for it. You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates. You drafting Luck in the top 3 gives the other 11 to 13 owners in your league a major step up on you. 1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 5.03 Wilson is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 5.03 Garcon/Wallace/Torrey

1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 2.10 Newton is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 2.10 Cruz/Cobb

1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 7.03 Brady is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 7.03 Denario Alexander/Kendall Wright

That's what your doing; you're picking Luck/Kendall Wright over Green/Brady. OR Luck/Garcon over Green/Wilson.

Going QB in the top 3 is an awful, awful move right now. The field is packed. Any advantage over guys like Brees/Brady is 3-4 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Rodgers is 5-7 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Wilson/Newton/Kaepernick/RG3 is major gamble on Luck, and against the others, and not likely to pay out, considering the price you are paying Luck, compared to what the others are going for.

Um, yes, and having a top franchise QB for a decade may give you an advantage over your league-mates. Unless you can predict the future, I don't think you can definitively say that when we look back in 10 years that it is not inconceivable that taking Luck that early might turn out to be the smartest pick in the draft. If you had taken Peyton Manning as your 1st pick in 1999 (after his rookie season) and stated you had your franchise QB for a decade you would have been laughed at (although you would have ended up with the last laugh).

That said, Luck has not been falling in the first round in any startups I have seen, so if one has an early pick, they could probably move down near the end of first and get him without any problem - in fact, moving to 2.04/2.05 would probably still do the trick.

 

[Concept Coop]

Um, yes, and having a franchise QB for a decade may give you an advantage over your league-mates.

It's a straw man statement that assumes unrealistic foresight. If you think Luck is worthy of a top 3 pick - state it, and let's discuss it. Manning started in an era where 4,000 yard seasons were impressive. Passing stats are up across the board. 300 fantasy points was a good season. That's not the case anymore; you can get Russell Wilson - whose rookie season was as impressive - in the 5th, Tom Brady in the 7th, Peyton Manning and Tony Romo in the 10th. And that is assuming you don't like Newton/Rodgers in the 2nd, RG3/Kaep/Brees in the 3rd/4th. I don't know how anyone could justify taking Luck in the 1st, given this information.

Unless you can predict the future, I don't think you can definitively say that when we look back in 10 years that it is not inconceivable that taking Luck that early might turn out to be the smartest pick in the draft.

You could use this argument for every pick in the draft. We don't know that Justin Blackmon won't be worth more than AJ Green in 2 years. Still an awful move to trade Backmon for Green right now.

If you had taken Peyton Manning as your 1st pick in 1999 (after his rookie season) and stated you had your franchise QB for a decade you would have been laughed at (although you would have ended up with the last laugh).

SSOG had a great collection of posts showing that Peyton Manning scores on par with Tony Romo; he just has a sexier name, fantasy wise. Peyton Manning has had 3 career 100+ VBD seasons and 0 since 2006. Same number as Arian Foster, who has only started for 3 years (3/3). It know it sexy or easy to look at total years, but Foster for 3 years is worth more than Peyton for 6. Your "'age advantage" comes in 7 years. Assuming Green is a top 3 WR (start 3/1 flex/PPR and Luck is a top 3 QB from here on out, Luck had better play 20 years to Green's 10, or he's not as valuable.

That said, Luck has not been falling in the first round in any startups I have seen, so if one has an early pick, they could probably move down near the end of first and get him without any problem - in fact, moving to 2.04/2.05 would probably still do the trick.

I agree. I haven't seen him go 1st very often.

 

[Concept Coop]

Tony Romo scored 358 points this year; good for 8th in the NFL. Here is how that number stacks up, going back to 1999.3,4,3,2,1,4,1,2,2*(Romo actually finished 2nd with 377),3,5,6,7,8. What was once special, isn't today. The QB field is flooded, talented, and young; and the NFL is becoming more and more of a passing league, and more and more QB's offer running potential/points. 10 years of Peyton Manning (or Tony Romo) isn't what it sounds like. And that is assuming it is reasonable to expect anyone to be Peyton Manning for 10 years(it's not).

 

[jwb]

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

Your team would suffer greatly for it. You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates. You drafting Luck in the top 3 gives the other 11 to 13 owners in your league a major step up on you. 1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 5.03 Wilson is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 5.03 Garcon/Wallace/Torrey1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 2.10 Newton is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 2.10 Cruz/Cobb1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 7.03 Brady is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 7.03 Denario Alexander/Kendall WrightThat's what your doing; you're picking Luck/Kendall Wright over Green/Brady. OR Luck/Garcon over Green/Wilson. Going QB in the top 3 is an awful, awful move right now. The field is packed. Any advantage over guys like Brees/Brady is 3-4 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Rodgers is 5-7 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Wilson/Newton/Kaepernick/RG3 is major gamble on Luck, and against the others, and not likely to pay out, considering the price you are paying Luck, compared to what the others are going for.I'd still be happy doing it.This is a personal opinion (meaning I'm not getting into a long post for post debate over it), but I'm not certain Wilson / Newton / RGIII / Kaep / etc are viable ten years from now. I think Luck is. Now maybe I'm dead wrong, but this influx of super-athletic qb's who are dual threats smells like a wildcat-level fad to me. I do not have confidence in these guys staying elite. To stay on topic, I think a young franchise qb is a fine investment in round 1. And I think Luck is that guy. If you are drafting in a startup with me (you won't be - I'm not starting any new leagues), and planned/hoped to take Luck 2.3, you're not getting him.

 

[squistion]

Um, yes, and having a franchise QB for a decade may give you an advantage over your league-mates.

It's a straw man statement that assumes unrealistic foresight. If you think Luck is worthy of a top 3 pick - state it, and let's discuss it. Manning started in an era where 4,000 yard seasons were impressive. Passing stats are up across the board. You were the one who said:

You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates.

Somehow my response to your statement about having a franchise QB the next decade makes me the one with unrealistic foresight - yes, that makes sense.

 

[Concept Coop]

Um, yes, and having a franchise QB for a decade may give you an advantage over your league-mates.

It's a straw man statement that assumes unrealistic foresight. If you think Luck is worthy of a top 3 pick - state it, and let's discuss it. Manning started in an era where 4,000 yard seasons were impressive. Passing stats are up across the board.

You were the one who said:

You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates.

Somehow my response to your statement about having a franchise QB the next decade makes me the one with unrealistic foresight - yes, that makes sense.I put it in quotation marks for a reason. My apologies if I wasn't clear.

 

[Concept Coop]

I'd still be happy doing it.This is a personal opinion (meaning I'm not getting into a long post for post debate over it), but I'm not certain Wilson / Newton / RGIII / Kaep / etc are viable ten years from now. I think Luck is. Now maybe I'm dead wrong, but this influx of super-athletic qb's who are dual threats smells like a wildcat-level fad to me. I do not have confidence in these guys staying elite. To stay on topic, I think a young franchise qb is a fine investment in round 1. And I think Luck is that guy. If you are drafting in a startup with me (you won't be - I'm not starting any new leagues), and planned/hoped to take Luck 2.3, you're not getting him.

I think it's quite a gamble you're willing to take; betting that Luck is top 2-3 for 10+ years, and that the other talented, young QBs are "fads". It's quite a gamble suggesting that Luck is worth so much more than Russell Wilson, that it justifies giving up Green vs. Garcon value. Or Richardson vs. Lamar Miller value. Or, to take names out of it, 1.03 vs. 5th round value.In other words, Luck is better than Wilson by more than Green is better than Garcon? Or Gronk is better than Witten? Or Richardson is better than Miller?

 

[Ernol]

I'd still be happy doing it.

This is a personal opinion (meaning I'm not getting into a long post for post debate over it), but I'm not certain Wilson / Newton / RGIII / Kaep / etc are viable ten years from now. I think Luck is. Now maybe I'm dead wrong, but this influx of super-athletic qb's who are dual threats smells like a wildcat-level fad to me. I do not have confidence in these guys staying elite.

To stay on topic, I think a young franchise qb is a fine investment in round 1. And I think Luck is that guy. If you are drafting in a startup with me (you won't be - I'm not starting any new leagues), and planned/hoped to take Luck 2.3, you're not getting him.

I think it's quite a gamble you're willing to take; betting that Luck is top 2-3 for 10+ years, and that the other talented, young QBs are "fads". It's quite a gamble suggesting that Luck is worth so much more than Russell Wilson, that it justifies giving up Green vs. Garcon value. Or Richardson vs. Lamar Miller value. Or, to take names out of it, 1.03 vs. 5th round value.In other words, Luck is better than Wilson by more than Green is better than Garcon? Or Gronk is better than Witten? Or Richardson is better than Miller?

I think what he is doing is actually the opposite. He is being conservative (perhaps overly so) and willing to pay the premium for the sure thing despite the big value lost on the back end by taking a gamble on one of the other guys who may ultimately be just as good. He is not so much betting that the others will fade away, but rather paying a premium for a guy he knows will not fade away. I personally don’t think Luck is a particularly good first round choice, but replace him with Aaron Rodgers (still young guy who is already in the 400+ point production tier) and I can buy into that (although not in any case in the first 3 picks). If you think the 4th and 5th rounds contains good value at QB and not so much at the other positions, an owner has the flexibility, since this is dynasty and not redraft, of taking a Russell Wilson in that round for the potential upside play. I often view year 1 as a free pass year anyway where the main goal is to accumulate value for years 2 and beyond. If the value and stability is at QB, I’d carry three of these high upside guys if need be. It may not take too much for one of these guys to jump into the next value tier where a nice profit can be made down the road.

 

[thriftyrocker]

I think it's quite a gamble you're willing to take; betting that Luck is top 2-3 for 10+ years, and that the other talented, young QBs are "fads". It's quite a gamble suggesting that Luck is worth so much more than Russell Wilson, that it justifies giving up Green vs. Garcon value. Or Richardson vs. Lamar Miller value. Or, to take names out of it, 1.03 vs. 5th round value.

I wouldn't take Luck til late 1st, but to suggest he's not worth a lot more than Wilson is equally wrong. He's worth a lot more than Wilson. Green vs. Blackmon is an apt comparison.

 

[Concept Coop]

I wouldn't take Luck til late 1st, but to suggest he's not worth a lot more than Wilson is equally wrong. He's worth a lot more than Wilson. Green vs. Blackmon is an apt comparison.

If you feel that way, you should still be able to find plenty of QBs you feel are closer to Luck, including Newton, Rodgers, Kaepernick, RG4, Brees, etcetera. Taking Luck over Rodgers becuase in 7 years Luck will be worth more - that's a gamble. Add into that draft position (Luck 1.03 vs. Rodgers 1.11-2.5)...As for your comment re: Wilson, I have to disagree. I do have Luck at the end of tier 1, and Wilson in tier 2 - but I wouldn't call that "a lot" at all. Wilson will score more points on the ground and had an equally impressive rookie season through the air. Different, but equally impressive. I would be mildly surprised if he's not one of the best QBs in the league within the next 3-4 years. There's not much to impove over "one of the best", so I'll gladly take that. Wilson would go 1.03 in the NFL draft, if Cleveland could do it over again, so I think his 3rd round "pedigree" is moot, at this point.Our opinions on guys won't match up 100%, so perhaps my point is better made with out names; Wilson + 1.03 start-up pick or Luck + 5.03 start-up pick?

 

[fightingillini]

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

Your team would suffer greatly for it. You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates. You drafting Luck in the top 3 gives the other 11 to 13 owners in your league a major step up on you. 1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 5.03 Wilson is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 5.03 Garcon/Wallace/Torrey1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 2.10 Newton is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 2.10 Cruz/Cobb1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 7.03 Brady is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 7.03 Denario Alexander/Kendall WrightThat's what your doing; you're picking Luck/Kendall Wright over Green/Brady. OR Luck/Garcon over Green/Wilson. Going QB in the top 3 is an awful, awful move right now. The field is packed. Any advantage over guys like Brees/Brady is 3-4 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Rodgers is 5-7 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Wilson/Newton/Kaepernick/RG3 is major gamble on Luck, and against the others, and not likely to pay out, considering the price you are paying Luck, compared to what the others are going for. While I agree Luck is going to be stud for years, there is no reason to waste a 1st pick on Luck.As I said before, think only 2-3 years ahead in dynasty. There are a slew of solid QBs for the next 2-3 years.....the only "elite" QB that I would be worried about is Peyton. But I have no problem drafting Rodgers, Brees, Brady, RGIII, Cam, Kaepernick, Wilson, Ryan, Luck, Romo, Big Ben, and even Eli Manning as my starter.If I can't get Calvin, I am looking at AJ Green, Richardson, and Martin at the 1.03 slot.

 

[fightingillini]

I'd still be happy doing it.This is a personal opinion (meaning I'm not getting into a long post for post debate over it), but I'm not certain Wilson / Newton / RGIII / Kaep / etc are viable ten years from now. I think Luck is. Now maybe I'm dead wrong, but this influx of super-athletic qb's who are dual threats smells like a wildcat-level fad to me. I do not have confidence in these guys staying elite. To stay on topic, I think a young franchise qb is a fine investment in round 1. And I think Luck is that guy. If you are drafting in a startup with me (you won't be - I'm not starting any new leagues), and planned/hoped to take Luck 2.3, you're not getting him.

You don't know if Luck is going to be viable 10 years from now. He's a good bet to, but 10 years is a long time. You also don't know that Wilson/Newton/RGIII and Kaepernick won't be viable in 10 years. The problem with your logic is that, sure you will get a upper tier QB for years to come......but drafting him in the 1st is going to make it very difficult for you to compete NOW. Luck isn't going to give you the value needed next year to build a strong team today. AJ Green will. Or Trent Richardson. Or Doug Martin. Or CJ Spiller. Or Julio Jones. Or Dez Bryant. These players are going to be elite for the next 2-3 years while allowing you to take a solid QB that will allow you to compete the current year. If you do draft someone like Tony Romo as your QB, then you will need to be on the lookout for the next stud QB. But in a dynasty startup, there are way too many solid QBs that will be very productive in the next 2-3 years.....that you should draft Luck in the 1st.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Wilson will score more points on the ground

Because of one game against buffalo? It's a small sample size. You're free to think that way but I would caution the optimism.

and had an equally impressive rookie season through the air. Different, but equally impressive.

Different. I like Wilson a lot but saying he's Drew Brees is like saying Blackmon is a perennial 90 catch WR. Yes it is possible and I won't disagree with someone saying they think it will happen but it is not a good bet right now.

Our opinions on guys won't match up 100%, so perhaps my point is better made with out names; Wilson + 1.03 start-up pick or Luck + 5.03 start-up pick?

Yes, I agree Luck at 1.3 is a stretch and ADP reflects that. If the question turns into Luck at 3.3 (which is his actual ADP) then yes I would rather have Luck.

 

[Concept Coop]

Because of one game against buffalo? It's a small sample size. You're free to think that way but I would caution the optimism.

He nearly doubled Luck's yardage production. And he's half black.

Different. I like Wilson a lot but saying he's Drew Brees is like saying Blackmon is a perennial 90 catch WR. Yes it is possible and I won't disagree with someone saying they think it will happen but it is not a good bet right now.

I agree with you, here. But I don't need Wilson to be Drew Brees for him to be worth more than the gap between 1.03 - 5.03 would suggest.

Yes, I agree Luck at 1.3 is a stretch and ADP reflects that. If the question turns into Luck at 3.3 (which is his actual ADP) then yes I would rather have Luck.

I don't mind him at his ADP either, but that wasn't the conversation.

 

[Concept Coop]

Luck isn't going to give you the value needed next year to build a strong team today. AJ Green will. Or Trent Richardson...

I agree with this. There are a lot of players who will give you an advantage in both production and window. When I am using a top 5 pick I want both.

 

[Biabreakable]

If I were in a startup right now, and I couldn't get Calvin, then I'd make Luck my #1 pick and not look back.

Your team would suffer greatly for it. You don't win by "having a franchise QB for a decade" - you win by having advantages over your league-mates. You drafting Luck in the top 3 gives the other 11 to 13 owners in your league a major step up on you. 1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 5.03 Wilson is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 5.03 Garcon/Wallace/Torrey1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 2.10 Newton is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 2.10 Cruz/Cobb1.03 - Green (Richardson) + 7.03 Brady is much better value than 1.03 Luck + 7.03 Denario Alexander/Kendall WrightThat's what your doing; you're picking Luck/Kendall Wright over Green/Brady. OR Luck/Garcon over Green/Wilson. Going QB in the top 3 is an awful, awful move right now. The field is packed. Any advantage over guys like Brees/Brady is 3-4 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Rodgers is 5-7 years down the road, AND you give up immediate advantage. Any advantage over Wilson/Newton/Kaepernick/RG3 is major gamble on Luck, and against the others, and not likely to pay out, considering the price you are paying Luck, compared to what the others are going for.

I'd still be happy doing it.This is a personal opinion (meaning I'm not getting into a long post for post debate over it), but I'm not certain Wilson / Newton / RGIII / Kaep / etc are viable ten years from now. I think Luck is. Now maybe I'm dead wrong, but this influx of super-athletic qb's who are dual threats smells like a wildcat-level fad to me. I do not have confidence in these guys staying elite. To stay on topic, I think a young franchise qb is a fine investment in round 1. And I think Luck is that guy. If you are drafting in a startup with me (you won't be - I'm not starting any new leagues), and planned/hoped to take Luck 2.3, you're not getting him.Rushing QBs and the QB option are not gimmicks like the wildcat. They do increase the QBs risk of being injured and most QBs lose some of their rushing ability as they get older (because of design likely more than necessity). However it is not a novel thing that is going to fade away soon imho.What stikes me as odd about this however is that you do not seem to realize that Luck is a pretty mobile QB himself. Luck had 62 rushing attempts for 250 some yards and 5TD as a rookie himself which is above average for a QB. It is still only half as much as you see Griffith and Cam running the ball, so half that risk. I still consider Luck a mobile QB capable of doing damage both ways like the other QB you mentioned.Concept Coop's point about using your draft picks to gain an advantage is an important one. The QB position does not always offer much of an advantage but when it does more often than not it is a running QB in their prime that is distancing themselves in FF points from the pocket passers. The running QBs may not be able to keep running the ball as much in their later years but they will give you an advantage while they can.Luck is somewhat the best of both worlds here. He can do both and you already see signs that he will function well as a pocket passer as he gets older. Perhaps the other QBs like Cam will not develop that ability in their later years? To me that means you are betting against their health but not Lucks because of this perceived difference in play style.Generally in FF it is best to wait on the QB position unless you are in a start 2QB league there just is not enough value and separation between most of the QBs to warrant using a high pick on one. If I was going to use a high pick on one I would be going for the QB like Cam who can give you great passing and rushing numbers that will give you an advantage over your opponents QB in HtH matchups because of being a dual threat. Keeping in mind that you need a good back up QB if your #1 is a dual threat guy because of the increased risk of injury.While it is a luxury to have the position covered for a decade (hopefully) and be able to focus your resources elsewhere because of that. I still would not consider a QB until the 3rd round. I like Luck a lot and it looks like he will have a long and productive career, I just think that in most scoring systems you can find better value at the other positions before drafting a QB.I think a good way to look at this is by tiering the QBs and then targetting the ADP of the bottom of each tier to get an idea of return on investment.

 

[ghostguy123]

If you are doing a startup this year and plan to take ANY QB in the first round you need to do one of two things...........Either GET A NEW PLAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!........................Or trade down a few rounds, pick up a ton of value, and grab a comparable QB.

 

[Azhais]

When would you consider starting drafting rookie picks or IDPs in a new 12 team startup?

 

[Andrew74]

I thought EBF or SSOG made a good point in another dynasty discussion about being flexible in rotating between positions over time based on scarcity. As some have stated, QB and WR are deep, but RB is not. A few years ago, QB wasn't so deep. So I've been trying to incorporate that into my roster management, which has meant focusing on RB and TE where value difference between the top and mid-range players is greatest.

 

[Concept Coop]

When would you consider starting drafting rookie picks or IDPs in a new 12 team startup?

In PPR formats, I have the 1.01 graded out as late 3rd round pick. Non PPR, I'd feel comfortable taking the 1.01 early in the 3rd round. Beyond that, I'd just follow the flow of the draft and and analyze each pick as they happen. When the pool of established players worth more than the 1.02 has been drafted, I'd consider the 1.02. Same with 1.03 and so on. My only IDP league is very IDP heavy (JPP went #6 overall), so I couldn't really comment on a more traditional IDP format.

 

[jonboltz]

When would you consider starting drafting rookie picks or IDPs in a new 12 team startup?

I've done two startups this offseason -- early Jan and early Feb. In both, the 1.01 pick was around overall pick #50, +/- 5 spots. Someone else mentioned late 3rd -- this is much too soon for my tastes, as guys like Blackmon will probably still be on the board.