Has the dreaded RBBC changed the way you should draft in your dynasty start-ups? Has the fact that teams are able to replace their once heroic, workhorse back with multiple, cheaper replacements crippled the value of the running in all formats? Have the bigger, faster, more explosive athletes in the NFL today drastically shortened the shelf life RBs? Is drafting RB/RB dead?
My assertion is yes, definitely. It has created a huge gap between the elite RBs and the rest of the class. A gap so big that elite WRs should be should be valued more than any RB outside of the top 3. The NFL has picked up on this, drafting running backs often and late in the draft. It is time that the dynasty fantasy football world caught up.
Before stating my case, I would like to address the points that I see coming, most of which are valid.
-VORP: Value over replacement player has been the biggest reason to draft a RB over a WR. There are far fewer RBs worth playing every Sunday, than there are WRs. Thus, locking up runningback spots should be more important than locking up your WRs spots. It is a lot easier to lock up your WRs spots. You can find a playable WRs in the waiver wire week after week, even in bigger leagues. The same can not be said for RBs. I understand, appreciate, and take this into account. This is the primary reason why my theory applies to dynasty leagues.
-Consistency: RBs are more consistent than WRs. This is for a couple reasons. The biggest being that the RB relies on more touches. Because of that, the RBs number vary less on each touch. Most running backs can have a good day without many carries over 10 yards. Because a WR typically relies on 5-10 touches, having that cut down to 3-6 on a single week, will drastically cut their numbers. Wide receivers also rely much more on the big play. Because of this, their numbers will vary more, week to week, as by nature, the big play is much less consistent. Again, I understand, appreciate, and take this into account.
I am also aware that there are more reasons, such as % of redzone touches, ratio of productive RBs to WRs on a team, or even on the field on any given play, and so on.
Here is my reasoning:
WRs last longer: I won't go too much into this, as we all know this is basic information.
WRs are more talented, at their draft spots: My wording might be a bit tricky there. Let me go a bit more into this. I was part of a draft in which Pierre Thomas was drafted above Brandon Marshall. I think most of the owners in my league would have made the same pick, based on the format (r/r/w/w/f/f). This goes back to VORP. But I think most can agree that Brandon Marshall is much more talented than Pierre Thomas. A way that I look at it is like this, Brandon Marshall is Brandon Marshall. If he was traded tomorrow, he would still be a #1 WR. Pierre Thomas is "insert name of starting Saints RB". He is being drafted based on his opportunity and not his talent. Because of this, PT is much easier for the Saints to replace, making it more likely he will be replaced or have his role reduced. PT would not start on most NFL teams. If he did, it would only be as a 1A in a RBBC. Another example is Arian Foster. Arian Foster is being valued as a top 8-14 dynasty fantasy back. Opinions vary, but based on the drafting of Ben Tate, I think Houston agrees with me, Foster is an average NFL talent. I will use Foster in my next example, which is very closely related to talent level.
Threat of the RBBC: Arian Foster is the starting runningback of a top 5 offense in the NFL. Because of that, he has major value, and could score RB1 numbers this season and possibly into the future. But because Foster is not an all world talent, they threat of the RBBC is very prevalent and could happen as soon as next season. I used the following example in another thread: "Houston brings in a back to keep Foster fresh. It could be a new back or a healthy Ben Tate. Because there are good odds that the new back is close in talent level, the idea that Foster is the only back needing to be fresh is quickly irradiated. A move to a 60/40 split is made. That does not include the 3rd down work of a guy like Slaton." Arian Foster is no Brandon Marshall, but will almost certainly be drafted before him in most startups next year (24 YO RB1). Arian Foster is "insert name of starting Texans RB". If he is no longer the starting RB, he only is Arian Foster, who is an average NFL talent. That is only one of many scenarios. Foster is not good enough for Houston to pass on a RB they like in the draft. Every April the Foster (any average starting RB) owner has reason to worry. It makes sense for NFL franchises to place as little premium on the position as possible, as it is arguably, one of the easiest positions to fill, and offers the shortest shelf life. If an NFL team can find 2-3 good players to take the role of RB, you keep them all healthier, fresher, and less valuable on the market. It makes sense for an NFL team to do this, and that is why it is happening. Only special talents are beyond the threat of this happening.
Using my biggest, most recent, and most competitive league as an example, here are the RBs that were drafted before Larry Fitzgerald:
CJ
AP
MJD
Ray Rice
Michael Turner
Frank Gore
Rashard Mendenhal
Chris Wells
Jonathan Stewart
DeAngelo Williams
Steven Jackson
Ryan Matthews
In my opinion, the only players on this list that are more valuable than Larry, in a dynasty format are CJ, AP, MJD, and possibly Ray Rice.
Larry has averaged 1,200 yards and 10 touchdowns over his career (1,300/11.6 the past 3), to this point. The only players on the above list to average those numbers (give or take a bit), and NOT miss major time with injury are CJ, AP, MJD, and Frank Gore, and DeAngelo Williams. Due to Larry being a WR, he has as much gas left in the take as anyone on the list. I say this under the impression that they dreaded 30 yo RB mark is inching it's way to 29, then 28. (See Barber, Jacobs, and a few others) Yet WRs seem to be lasting as long as ever. Donald Driver, Derrick Mason, Randy Moss, Terrell Owens and Ochocinco and the list continues.
Thinking in dynasty terms, you are either gambling on an unproven player, taking a back towards the end of his career, or are lucky enough to get one of the top 3, young RBs in the NFL. Those are the three scenarios in which you would draft a RB over a WR, the last of which is the only that I deem valid.
Thoughts?
Especially the bolded.
