What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

RB Darrell Henderson, LAR (3 Viewers)

Hankmoody said:
You might wanna ask all the Mike Thomas owners that reached for him over Treadwell about that.  Or better yet, ask all us guys who "took value" while "hoping to get Thomas at 1.05" how they felt when that didn't happen.  Or us Kamara owners that said "he's in an RBBC, I'll get him later" and then drafted Corey Davis "for value".

The surefire way to fix your team is to be right.  It's nice to be right late, but it's far more important to just be right.  You know what sucks?  Being right about those two guys but watching them tear is up on some other dude's roster.  I can live with being wrong, that's learnable and fixable.  I can't live with being right and letting someone else reap the reward.
Click to expand...
You better be really really right of you go that route.

If you're going to pay way above market prices, there isn't any room for error.  Sticking with the example, Jacobs is the consensus 1.01 and will hold value whether he gets off to a slow start or not.  You'd still be able to exit for value and try again.  Or if you don't like him all that much in the first place, wait for training camp hype to start or an early season big game and then deal him.  If you take Henderson 1.01, he's likely going to be eased into the season given Gurley is on the roster, so the hype will be slower and opportunities to gain value fewer.  Which whatever, if you reach for him you're going to want to hold anyway, I get that.  You're just not going to have many options.

The hit rate on rookies being what it is, it's wise to weigh the forecast of value into the equation pretty heavily.  But I'll concede that very occasionally you should have a get your guy mentality.  Thats a big part of what makes this hobby fun.  Shove your chips in sometimes, plant your flag.

You just better be really really right when you do.  

 
Hankmoody said:
You may not be alone but you sure aren't in a consensus either.  A whole bunch of people have Harry #1 and he's gone before Jacobs in two of my drafts.
Click to expand...
OK, so not 100% consensus.  But it is worth pointing out that 7 of the 8 FBGs that do rankings for the site have Jacobs at 1.  So not 100% consensus, but we can qualify it that 88% of the guys who get paid to evaluate fantasy football players for a living on FGB's site would take Jacobs 1 overall.  I know, I know...the experts are often wrong.  Not really the point.  Right now, today, before any of these guys play a down, Jacobs is number 1 according to 88% of the FBGs who have submitted rankings in the past 21 days.  That is not disputable.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
skinfanjon said:
You better be really really right of you go that route.

If you're going to pay way above market prices, there isn't any room for error.  Sticking with the example, Jacobs is the consensus 1.01 and will hold value whether he gets off to a slow start or not.  You'd still be able to exit for value and try again.  Or if you don't like him all that much in the first place, wait for training camp hype to start or an early season big game and then deal him.  If you take Henderson 1.01, he's likely going to be eased into the season given Gurley is on the roster, so the hype will be slower and opportunities to gain value fewer.  Which whatever, if you reach for him you're going to want to hold anyway, I get that.  You're just not going to have many options.

The hit rate on rookies being what it is, it's wise to weigh the forecast of value into the equation pretty heavily.  But I'll concede that very occasionally you should have a get your guy mentality.  Thats a big part of what makes this hobby fun.  Shove your chips in sometimes, plant your flag.

You just better be really really right when you do.  
Click to expand...
You are simply putting your narrative on this which happens to be the opposite of his narrative and this could easily read just the opposite - go find some of Bojang's posts on Jacobs if you're interested.  We don't know what's likely and you don't know who else in his league might also be a believer.  I know I'm sitting in two leagues just watching the Henderson owner for any sign he might be regretting taking a backup - I'll be all over it.  And I hope he does get off to a slow start, because I will be right there with a fist full of "value" for him.

For the record I am all in on Jacobs and wouldn't consider Henderson over him.  But you say there isn't any room for error, and I say there isn't any room for error the other way either.  The opportunity cost of having been right but missing the guy because you got cute on draft day is much higher than the gain of taking the "value" guy and trying to recoup his value later.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
OK, so not 100% consensus.  But it is worth pointing out that 7 of the 8 FBGs that do rankings for the site have Jacobs at 1.  So not 100% consensus, but we can qualify it that 88% of the guys who get paid to evaluate fantasy football players for a living on FGB's site would take Jacobs 1 overall.  I know, I know...the experts are often wrong.  Not really the point.  Right now, today, before any of these guys play a down, Jacobs is number 1 according to 88% of the FBGs who have submitted rankings in the past 21 days.  That is not disputable.
Click to expand...


You can’t stand someone holding you accountable for using this argument, so much so that anyone disagreeing with you is “going down a dark path” and is only looking to argue, yet you steadfastly keep going to that well over and over.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
OK, so not 100% consensus.  But it is worth pointing out that 7 of the 8 FBGs that do rankings for the site have Jacobs at 1.  So not 100% consensus, but we can qualify it that 88% of the guys who get paid to evaluate fantasy football players for a living on FGB's site would take Jacobs 1 overall.  I know, I know...the experts are often wrong.  Not really the point.  Right now, today, before any of these guys play a down, Jacobs is number 1 according to 88% of the FBGs who have submitted rankings in the past 21 days.  That is not disputable.
Click to expand...
Also of note...The highest anyone has Henderson is 7th and overall and in the blended rankings, he is 13th.  Range is 7-15.

 
Bronco Billy said:
You can’t stand someone holding you accountable for using this argument, so much so that anyone disagreeing with you is “going down a dark path” and is only looking to argue, yet you steadfastly keep going to that well over and over.
Click to expand...
"Dark path" was overly dramatic.  My apologies for using that term.  I can delete it if you want.  I really dont want to argue with you.  I am just discussing the notion of drafting Henderson 1.1.  I am not into fighting on message boards anymore.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
"Dark path" was overly dramatic.  My apologies for using that term.  I can delete it if you want.  I really dont want to argue with you.  I am just discussing the notion of drafting Henderson 1.1.  I am not into fighting on message boards anymore.
Click to expand...


I just would like to hear you flesh out your position with more than that a bunch of other people agree with you.  You could absolutely be correct in your assessment, but give us more than some kind of imagined consensus.  I feel the same way about “first round RB” or “first RB off the board” arguments.  Those kinds of things don’t mean squat when the guys hit the field and games are going.  We can list plenty of group-think or high-pick failures that maybe we could have had a little more foresight on if we start discussing (or arguing about) our supporting data beyond those kinds of easy outs.

I’m not sure a whole lot of people think Jacobs is a sure-fire stud, but given what’s been shown on the field to date and how the pre-draft process shook out, I’m struggling to see how Jacobs is a better and more talented prospect than Henderson right now, or how his game translates so much better to the NFL.  There are so many more questions and unknowns with Jacobs - IMO of course.

 
Hankmoody said:
You are simply putting your narrative on this which happens to be the opposite of his narrative and this could easily read just the opposite - go find some of Bojang's posts on Jacobs if you're interested.  We don't know what's likely and you don't know who else in his league might also be a believer.  I know I'm sitting in two leagues just watching the Henderson owner for any sign he might be regretting taking a backup - I'll be all over it.  And I hope he does get off to a slow start, because I will be right there with a fist full of "value" for him.

For the record I am all in on Jacobs and wouldn't consider Henderson over him.  But you say there isn't any room for error, and I say there isn't any room for error the other way either.  The opportunity cost of having been right but missing the guy because you got cute on draft day is much higher than the gain of taking the "value" guy and trying to recoup his value later.
Click to expand...
Getting cute on draft day is taking Henderson 1.01.

It's not MY narrative and it IS what's most likely.  Jacobs is a first round draft pick with only the corpse of Doug Martin to compete with for carries.  Henderson is a 3rd round pick with Todd Gurley ahead of him on the depth chart. This isn't rocket science.  Jacobs is the runaway favorite between the two to get off to a good start and have more value quickly.

 
skinfanjon said:
Getting cute on draft day is taking Henderson 1.01.

It's not MY narrative and it IS what's most likely.  Jacobs is a first round draft pick with only the corpse of Doug Martin to compete with for carries.  Henderson is a 3rd round pick with Todd Gurley ahead of him on the depth chart. This isn't rocket science.  Jacobs is the runaway favorite between the two to get off to a good start and have more value quickly.
Click to expand...


Here’s a question for you:

Which of the two do you feel is a more talented RB.  Situation completely set aside.  Say they both get drafted by the same team and are competing head to head for workload.  Who do you feel would put up better numbers this year and for the next 3 years?

 
Bronco Billy said:
That should be taken with a caveat.  I’d argue that drafting the wrong guy will sink your team a lot faster than picking the right guy higher than the group wisdom thinks they should be picked.  All it takes is one owner ahead of you in the draft who recognizes the value of a player and uses your greed to their advantage after you’ve traded down.  If you have targeted a guy who you are convinced is the right guy, it’s better to reach for them a bit to make sure you get them.
Click to expand...
I agree. The concept of a reach in a rookie draft is so overblown. Sure you shouldn't grab a guy like Harmon, even if you love him, in the top 5 because you know you can get him later but taking a guy you have head and shoulders above everyone else at 1.02 instead of 1.08 just because you "should wait" is not such a franchise ruining move. Lets face it (at least) half of the first round picks in your rookie draft are going to bust anyway. May as well get the guy you believe in then to leave him for someone else and watch him thrive while the guy you were "supposed" to take rots on your bench losing value. If some one takes Henderson at 1.01/1.02 and he's Jamal Charles it's not going to matter that he could have had an extra second round pick if he moved down to 1.08 and hoped for him to fall there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bronco Billy said:
I just would like to hear you flesh out your position with more than that a bunch of other people agree with you.  You could absolutely be correct in your assessment, but give us more than some kind of imagined consensus.  I feel the same way about “first round RB” or “first RB off the board” arguments.  Those kinds of things don’t mean squat when the guys hit the field and games are going.  We can list plenty of group-think or high-pick failures that maybe we could have had a little more foresight on if we start discussing (or arguing about) our supporting data beyond those kinds of easy outs.

I’m not sure a whole lot of people think Jacobs is a sure-fire stud, but given what’s been shown on the field to date and how the pre-draft process shook out, I’m struggling to see how Jacobs is a better and more talented prospect than Henderson right now, or how his game translates so much better to the NFL.  There are so many more questions and unknowns with Jacobs - IMO of course.
Click to expand...
Well as I have explained a few times now, group think is literally the only thing that mattered to my original point, which was actually made in a whimsical light simply stating that the guy at 1.2 would be psyched if someone took Henderson at 1.  Unless that guy at 1.2 also felt that Henderson was the best pick in this draft, then that point stands.  Even if he did think that, he should still be psyched because his 1.2 essentially just became the 1.1 and now has significantly more value.  

If you were at 1.2 and someone took Henderson at 1, would you be psyched?  If not, you are in the extreme minority, and yes, that was my entire point.  I assume you didnt undertstand that which is why this keeps dragging on.  We good now?

 
Bronco Billy said:
Here’s a question for you:

Which of the two do you feel is a more talented RB.  Situation completely set aside.  Say they both get drafted by the same team and are competing head to head for workload.  Who do you feel would put up better numbers this year and for the next 3 years?
Click to expand...
Jacobs, but it's pretty irrelevant since we don't live in that world.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
If you were at 1.2 and someone took Henderson at 1, would you be psyched?  If not, you are in the extreme minority, and yes, that was my entire point.  I assume you didnt undertstand that which is why this keeps dragging on.  We good now?
Click to expand...


Not necessarily pysched, but happy to take Montgomery there.

 
skinfanjon said:
Jacobs is the consensus 1.01 and will hold value whether he gets off to a slow start or not. 
Click to expand...
I'm not sure this is true - the fact that he is walking into a golden opportunity and then failing in it is probably not going to increase or even stabilize the value of a guy that was the "default" 1.01 in the first place. Jacobs has a bunch of red flags to begin with. If he gets off to a slow start people are going to wonder why they ignored them in the first place.

Plus you don't draft a guy at 1.01 to flip him after a slow start for what would most likely be considerably less value than you paid - you're going to stubbornly go down with that sinking ship.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bojang0301 said:
I don’t know about slot specific. My knowledge comes from Graham Barfield, who is a favorite of mine. He does Yards Created series. In that he stated that Henderson split out wide an estimated ~23% of the time, he also had zero drops. Combine that with Rams use of shotgun, Henderson had the third highest yards created from shotgun since the articles began behind Dalvin Cook and Joe Mixon.
Click to expand...
Shotgun use is sky-high around the league but the Rams are not listed in the top-20 users of shotgun.

In 2018 more than half the teams ran at least 60% of their total plays from the gun.  

Anthony White‏ @AWhite_73

The NFL offensively with each passing season is becoming more of a shotgun league. In 2018 more than half the teams ran at least 60% of their total plays from the gun.

2:43 AM - 15 May 2019

------------------------------------

The above Twitter post showed the top-20 NFL teams use of shotgun last year, Rams were not one on the list.

Bojang0301 said:
Rams outside zone usage vs. Henderson success in outside zone
Click to expand...
The above shows the QB under center with Henderson reading zone blocks.

I think Gurley's arthritic knee is going to be an issue and this kid can pop some big runs in the scheme and can be a weapon if they split him wide even if the Rams did not use the gun as much as the rest of the league.

 
skinfanjon said:
Pretty much.  What matters is figuring out how Jacobs will do for the Raiders and Henderson will do for the Rams.
Click to expand...


And I guess that is exactly where we don’t have a meeting of the minds.  I firmly believe that talent will find its way onto the field and create  opportunities whereas opportunity can change quickly, and sometimes can be taken away quickly if there isn’t enough talent.  But that discussion is very worthy IMO.

 
EBF said:
You can rank a guy #1, but that doesn't mean you need to take him there. I have Deebo as a top 5 prospect in this WR/RB class, but I haven't taken him higher than #7 and have usually risked letting him fall to #10-11. Obviously the cheaper you can get your guy, the better. Even if I loved Henderson (I don't), I wouldn't take him higher than ~6th-8th in this draft because there shouldn't be any need to do so. Only the biggest stans are even going to consider him that high.

Based on generic odds of a 1st round back vs. a 3rd round back, Jacobs is worth maybe two Hendersons. Nobody on the side giving Jacobs should make that trade because it's totally lopsided. If you have a top 2-3 pick and you go with Henderson there, you're gambling against the house, sacrificing value, and narrowing your margin for error. Better to jump down a couple spots, pick up some extra value, and still get your guy.
Click to expand...
If I have a guy #1, and I do not think he will be there when I pick again, then I am taking him over the "value" pick. Who cares if I am considered to be "reaching." If I am right, then I get the last laugh. Most of these picks will bust, so I may as well go with my board and take my top guy. I'd love to trade down, but if no one is biting then I will just take him.

Dr. Octopus said:
I agree. The concept of a reach in a rookie draft is so overblown. Sure you shouldn't grab a guy like Harmon, even if you love him, in the top 5 because you know you can get him later but taking a guy you have head and shoulders above everyone else at 1.02 instead of 1.08 just because you "should wait" is not such a franchise ruining move. Lets face it (at least) half of the first round picks in your rookie draft are going to bust anyway. May as well get the guy you believe in then to leave him for someone else and watch him thrive while the guy you were "supposed" to take rots on your bench losing value. If some one takes Henderson at 1.01/1.02 and he's Jamal Charles it's not going to matter that he could have had an extra second round pick if he moved down to 1.08 and hoped for him to fall there.
Click to expand...
This is where I stand too.

Last year I tried to "get cute" and trade down to try and get my WR later. He went the pick after the one I traded away and I was stuck taking a WR I was not terribly thrilled with. I have since traded him for 2 firsts but the lesson I learned was to take my guy even if it was considered a reach. Especially in this draft, where you can't predict what the next guy will do. I can see Henderson going at #4 to the Gurley owner. So if I try to trade down to 6 or 7, which would be a more reasonable place to take Henderson, I will probably miss. So then is whatever I got by trading down worth it now? Probably not, especially with the talent in this draft.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Dan said:
If I have a guy #1, and I do not think he will be there when I pick again, then I am taking him over the "value" pick. Who cares if I am considered to be "reaching." If I am right, then I get the last laugh. Most of these picks will bust, so I may as well go with my board and take my top guy. I'd love to trade down, but if no one is biting then I will just take him.

This is where I stand too.

Last year I tried to "get cute" and trade down to try and get my WR later. He went the pick after the one I traded away and I was stuck taking a WR I was not terribly thrilled with. I have since traded him for 2 firsts but the lesson I learned was to take my guy even if it was considered a reach. Especially in this draft, where you can't predict what the next guy will do. I can see Henderson going at #4 to the Gurley owner. So if I try to trade down to 6 or 7, which would be a more reasonable place to take Henderson, I will probably miss. So then is whatever I got by trading down worth it now? Probably not, especially with the talent in this draft.
Click to expand...
Who were the wide receivers?  You turned one first into two firsts, that's a good thing.

 
skinfanjon said:
Who were the wide receivers?  You turned one first into two firsts, that's a good thing.
Click to expand...
In the end, yes it worked out. I drafted Sutton

It turned out to be: Kirk for AJ Brown, Rosen, Gallup, 2020 1st (likely high IMO). In the end, a big win I think but I am currently hurting at WR and I have talent to win it all... except WR2/3/4

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Dan said:
In the end, yes it worked out. I drafted Sutton

It turned out to be: Kirk for AJ Brown, Rosen, 2020 1st (likely high IMO). In the end, a big win I think but I am currently hurting at WR and I have talent to win it all... except WR2/3/4
Click to expand...
Good thing you got cute, check out that amazing value.

 
Hankmoody said:
You might wanna ask all the Mike Thomas owners that reached for him over Treadwell about that.  Or better yet, ask all us guys who "took value" while "hoping to get Thomas at 1.05" how they felt when that didn't happen.  Or us Kamara owners that said "he's in an RBBC, I'll get him later" and then drafted Corey Davis "for value".

The surefire way to fix your team is to be right.  It's nice to be right late, but it's far more important to just be right.  You know what sucks?  Being right about those two guys but watching them tear is up on some other dude's roster.  I can live with being wrong, that's learnable and fixable.  I can't live with being right and letting someone else reap the reward.
Click to expand...
Isn't player projeciton a probability exercise, more so than a binary right/wrong call? Maybe we weren't wrong to put our chips on Davis over Kamara - good gambles don't always pay off and bad ones sometimes do. 

Bronco Billy said:
That should be taken with a caveat.  I’d argue that drafting the wrong guy will sink your team a lot faster than picking the right guy higher than the group wisdom thinks they should be picked.  All it takes is one owner ahead of you in the draft who recognizes the value of a player and uses your greed to their advantage after you’ve traded down.  If you have targeted a guy who you are convinced is the right guy, it’s better to reach for them a bit to make sure you get them.
Click to expand...
Based on what? 

 
Concept Coop said:
Why is it important to get your guy, in this context? You seem to be suggesting that you're better off reaching for your guy than to pay market value or below for other options. I'm asking what you base that on. A gut feeling?
Click to expand...


On your belief that the guy you picked will perform as well or better than you are projecting.

No one knows if any of the rookies will succeed in the NFL.  We’ve seen enough “sure-fire” or very highly projected picks fail to know that.  To think that you can quantify other later options who you can somehow can foresee will succeed and you shouldn’t reach some to get a guy you have a high degree of confidence looks to me like trying to predict the unpredictable and having a high level of confidence in doing so.  If you see something special in a guy, go get him or risk losing him to a leaguemate who does also - it only takes one other who sees what you do.

 
Bronco Billy said:
On your belief that the guy you picked will perform as well or better than you are projecting.

No one knows if any of the rookies will succeed in the NFL.  We’ve seen enough “sure-fire” or very highly projected picks fail to know that.  To think that you can quantify other later options who you can somehow can foresee will succeed and you shouldn’t reach some to get a guy you have a high degree of confidence looks to me like trying to predict the unpredictable and having a high level of confidence in doing so.  If you see something special in a guy, go get him or risk losing him to a leaguemate who does also - it only takes one other who sees what you do.
Click to expand...
Draft position is a solid predictive model with a strong track record. You seem to be arguing that betting against it for the sake of getting "your guy" is good strategy. I'm asking you what you base that on. I'm not sure you've answered that. 

 
Concept Coop said:
Draft position is a solid predictive model with a strong track record. You seem to be arguing that betting against it for the sake of getting "your guy" is good strategy. I'm asking you what you base that on. I'm not sure you've answered that. 
Click to expand...


Some people, including me, disagree with you.

link

The results of this research displays that the running backs analyzed in the third through seventh round have had more successful careers than the running backs drafted in the first and second round. This information could be significant to NFL front offices due to the fact that decision makers can see data that shows that 60% of the sample of running backs that were drafted in the third through seventh rounds have had more successful careers through the 2012 season than those running backs that were drafted in the first and second round. It is no secret that the earlier the round selected, the more expensive the contract will be, and if decision makers are selecting running backs in the first and second round who do not perform on the field, then they are essentially throwing money away that could have been used to draft a player who will perform.

In addition to the third through seventh round running back sample, the third through seventh round wide receiver sample has shown that 60% of these receivers drafted have had more successful careers than those receivers drafted in the first and second round through the 2012 season.

 
Bronco Billy said:
Some people, including me, disagree with you.

link

The results of this research displays that the running backs analyzed in the third through seventh round have had more successful careers than the running backs drafted in the first and second round. This information could be significant to NFL front offices due to the fact that decision makers can see data that shows that 60% of the sample of running backs that were drafted in the third through seventh rounds have had more successful careers through the 2012 season than those running backs that were drafted in the first and second round. It is no secret that the earlier the round selected, the more expensive the contract will be, and if decision makers are selecting running backs in the first and second round who do not perform on the field, then they are essentially throwing money away that could have been used to draft a player who will perform.

In addition to the third through seventh round running back sample, the third through seventh round wide receiver sample has shown that 60% of these receivers drafted have had more successful careers than those receivers drafted in the first and second round through the 2012 season.
Click to expand...
How hard did you have to look to find this undergrad sports management paper? 

"While literature exists on what statistics are relevant toward evaluating specific positions and how that knowledge is used to select draft picks, there is no existing research that examines NFL success based on statistics and draft position."

Oof. 

 
10 first round picks in ESPN top 20 ppr ranks; 3 2nds, 3 3rds, 2 4ths, 1 5th,  1 undrafted.

1. Saquon BarkleyNYG: 1

2. Ezekiel ElliottDAL 1

3. Christian McCaffreyCAR 1

4. Alvin KamaraNO 3

5. David JohnsonARI 3

6. James ConnerPIT 3

7. Todd Gurley IILAR 1

8. Melvin GordonLAC 1

9. Joe MixonCIN 1

10. Nick ChubbCLE 2

11. Dalvin CookMIN 2

12. Le'Veon BellNYJ 2

13. Damien WilliamsKC  Undrafted

14. Devonta FreemanATL 4

15. Josh JacobsOAK 1

16. Leonard FournetteJAC 1

17. Aaron JonesGB 5

18. Sony MichelNE 1

19. Marlon MackIND 4

20. Mark Ingram II  1

 
Concept Coop said:
How hard did you have to look to find this undergrad sports management paper? 

"While literature exists on what statistics are relevant toward evaluating specific positions and how that knowledge is used to select draft picks, there is no existing research that examines NFL success based on statistics and draft position."

Oof. 
Click to expand...


Here’s another one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/amp/

While I’m guessing you’ll point at the results and say “see, more 1st rounders were starters than any other round” but by doing so you’ll also miss that 56% of the starters were drafted in the 3rd round or later.

So oof all you want.  You cannot accurately predict right now which of this year’s draftees are going to be productive, as much as you want to appear to be the smartest kid in the room.

That said, I say yes, draft the guy you feel after researching that will be the most productive guy available if you really like his chances - even if that means reaching a bit.

I can cite more of these if you’d like.  There are lots of them.  And the decisive conclusion is that being dogmatic to a process when it comes to evaluating individual humans is doomed to fail.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bronco Billy said:
Here’s another one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/amp/

While I’m guessing you’ll point at the results and say “see, more 1st rounders were starters than any other round” but by doing so you’ll also miss that 56% of the starters were drafted in the 3rd round or later.

So oof all you want.  You cannot accurately predict right now which of this year’s draftees are going to be productive, as much as you want to appear to be the smartest kid in the room.

That said, I say yes, draft the guy you feel after researching that will be the most productive guy available if you really like his chances - even if that means reaching a bit.
Click to expand...
You are hella wrong as those ranking two posts up showcase.

 
Bronco Billy said:
Here’s another one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2015/05/22/tracking-nfl-draft-efficiency-how-contingent-is-success-to-draft-position/amp/

While I’m guessing you’ll point at the results and say “see, more 1st rounders were starters than any other round” but by doing so you’ll also miss that 56% of the starters were drafted in the 3rd round or later.

So oof all you want.  You cannot accurately predict right now which of this year’s draftees are going to be productive, as much as you want to appear to be the smartest kid in the room.

That said, I say yes, draft the guy you feel after researching that will be the most productive guy available if you really like his chances - even if that means reaching a bit.
Click to expand...
Did you even read this? It says that 1st round picks are 3 times more likely to become starters than 3rd round picks. And 48% of All-Pros were drafted in the 1st round, compared to 8.8% for 3rd rounders. 

The correlation between draft position and NFL success isn't an opinion - it's a fact. 

I'm asking why you'd trust your gut thoughts over this model, and you haven't really answered that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If we're only drafting according to "perceived" value, then shouldn't everyone be drafting exactly the same players in exactly the same order each time? Why conduct player evaluations of *any* kind if you're just going to go with ADP? The idea is to find the guys that you think are going to do much better than what the market is suggesting. If they are getting expensive then you might have to reach. If they are getting cheaper then it might make sense to trade back.

Henderson was #1RB on a lot of fantasy owners rookie lists. We can argue whether he should or not but that isn't the point here. The point is that he has been getting expensive and to those of us that are high on him, that means if we want him we might have to reach. I think he has as bright of a future as any of the fifty WRs that are available in the mid 1st. Undoubtedly a couple of them will far exceed expectations, but it feels like a lot more of a lottery pick than taking Henderson. 

We can and do all argue about which tools are the best to evaluate players, but to then ignore those rankings because of *perceived* value on the board, seems like a lot of wheel spinning. Don't get me wrong, I've got a few players ranked quite high that I wouldn't take before a certain point. Because yes the market must be accounted for. I'm not drafting Boykin in the 1st but I think he is a steal in the 3rd. Paying mid 2nd for him seems like a reach, but if it's based on *your* rankings, are you really supposed to skip *your guy* for some chalk pick you don't like? Because of a little tiny perceived value? Seems like a waste to me.

My absolute favorite part of crushing redrafts is when there is a whole sleugh of crappy chalk picks that eventually *have* to be taken while I *reach* a round or two for my guys. A bit more dangerous with dynasty rookie drafts, especially with premium picks, but if you're not going to trust your own evaluation process then why go through it?

 
Nobody is relying on their gut here, as far as I can read. We just have different evaluation systems and different ways of using them. If y'all don't like Henderson fine, but I think that's really all this is. We like him, some don't. That's fine. We are all trying to beat the odds of the NFL draft model all the time. Of course it is an uphill and stacked battle. But if we didn't then ADP would be adequate and we could all just play bingo. 

 
barackdhouse said:
If we're only drafting according to "perceived" value, then shouldn't everyone be drafting exactly the same players in exactly the same order each time? Why conduct player evaluations of *any* kind if you're just going to go with ADP? The idea is to find the guys that you think are going to do much better than what the market is suggesting. If they are getting expensive then you might have to reach. If they are getting cheaper then it might make sense to trade back.

Henderson was #1RB on a lot of fantasy owners rookie lists. We can argue whether he should or not but that isn't the point here. The point is that he has been getting expensive and to those of us that are high on him, that means if we want him we might have to reach. I think he has as bright of a future as any of the fifty WRs that are available in the mid 1st. Undoubtedly a couple of them will far exceed expectations, but it feels like a lot more of a lottery pick than taking Henderson. 

We can and do all argue about which tools are the best to evaluate players, but to then ignore those rankings because of *perceived* value on the board, seems like a lot of wheel spinning. Don't get me wrong, I've got a few players ranked quite high that I wouldn't take before a certain point. Because yes the market must be accounted for. I'm not drafting Boykin in the 1st but I think he is a steal in the 3rd. Paying mid 2nd for him seems like a reach, but if it's based on *your* rankings, are you really supposed to skip *your guy* for some chalk pick you don't like? Because of a little tiny perceived value? Seems like a waste to me.

My absolute favorite part of crushing redrafts is when there is a whole sleugh of crappy chalk picks that eventually *have* to be taken while I *reach* a round or two for my guys. A bit more dangerous with dynasty rookie drafts, especially with premium picks, but if you're not going to trust your own evaluation process then why go through it?
Click to expand...
Picking between late round guys in redraft is very different than picking a 3rd round NFL RB over a 1st round NFL RB during a rookie draft. 

The role of a good fantasy owner is to add the fantasy context, imo. That context should move guys up and down your board. But consistently betting against draft position is a losing strategy. Hakeem Butler, for example: 32 NFL teams employed dozens of full-time scouts and analysts, who spent hours and hours breaking down actual film (not just TV broadcasts), running data models, and flying around the country to watch these guys and talk to people who know them. 32 teams passed on Butler an aveage of 3 times and collectively drafted 13 WRs in front of him. Yet some fantasy owners with full-time jobs are picking him top 5 to 8, based on some Youtube clips, for the sake of "getting their guy". I don't see the logic in that. 

 
Concept Coop said:
Picking between late round guys in redraft is very different than picking a 3rd round NFL RB over a 1st round NFL RB during a rookie draft. 

The role of a good fantasy owner is to add the fantasy context, imo. That context should move guys up and down your board. But consistently betting against draft position is a losing strategy. Hakeem Butler, for example: 32 NFL teams employed dozens of full-time scouts and analysts, who spent hours and hours breaking down actual film (not just TV broadcasts), running data models, and flying around the country to watch these guys and talk to people who know them. 32 teams passed on Butler an aveage of 3 times and collectively drafted 13 WRs in front of him. Yet some fantasy owners with full-time jobs are picking him top 5 to 8, based on some Youtube clips, for the sake of "getting their guy". I don't see the logic in that. 
Click to expand...
Do you always draft in your rookie drafts based on draft position?

 
barackdhouse said:
Nobody is relying on their gut here, as far as I can read. We just have different evaluation systems and different ways of using them. If y'all don't like Henderson fine, but I think that's really all this is. We like him, some don't. That's fine. We are all trying to beat the odds of the NFL draft model all the time. Of course it is an uphill and stacked battle. But if we didn't then ADP would be adequate and we could all just play bingo. 
Click to expand...
Sure, I said gut when I shouldn't have, and have corrected it. But I've asked him for the reasoning behind a sizable claim, and have yet to get an answer. 

I'll ask you the same question, to make sure we're having the same conversation: Do you think consistently reaching to get your guy, against both both market value and draft position, is a winning long-term strategy? If so, what do you base that on? 

Edit: I like Henderson above his ADP, actually, more than Montgomery. So that's not what this is. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop said:
Picking between late round guys in redraft is very different than picking a 3rd round NFL RB over a 1st round NFL RB during a rookie draft. 

The role of a good fantasy owner is to add the fantasy context, imo. That context should move guys up and down your board. But consistently betting against draft position is a losing strategy. Hakeem Butler, for example: 32 NFL teams employed dozens of full-time scouts and analysts, who spent hours and hours breaking down actual film (not just TV broadcasts), running data models, and flying around the country to watch these guys and talk to people who know them. 32 teams passed on Butler an aveage of 3 times and collectively drafted 13 WRs in front of him. Yet some fantasy owners with full-time jobs are picking him top 5 to 8, based on some Youtube clips, for the sake of "getting their guy". I don't see the logic in that. 
Click to expand...
NFL evaluation process is dog ####. The success correlation of first rounder has to do with opportunity and cost of investment. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course fantasy owners should invest in Top 100 picks and there is a high correlation between success of 1st vs 3rd rounders. Now look into the anomaly that is Josh Jacobs. Name a back taken in the first with his dominator, his 40 time, his speed score, his agility score, his non existent breakout age? How many players like him have had success vs been drafted irregardless of draft capital? To say one is more anti fragile than the other due to draft capital is putting the cart before the horse and only applying a flawed way to do things. There are other things that suggest success and failure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bojang0301 said:
NFL evaluation process is dog ####. The success correlation of first rounder has to do with opportunity and cost of investment. 
Click to expand...
You're wrong, but even if you were right, it changes nothing. The correlation exists and translates to fantasy points. 

Bojang0301 said:
There are other things that suggest success and failure.
Click to expand...
Can you point me to a model with a with a better track record, that doesn't itself take draft position into account? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop said:
You're wrong, but even if you were right, it changes nothing. The correlation exists and translates to fantasy points. 

Can you point me to a model with a with a better track record, that doesn't itself take draft position into account? 
Click to expand...
Why would you not want to take draft position into account? Lol, you want to troll someone go elsewhere. Just draft based off of where NFL teams take players... I’m sure it will go wonderful for you.

Also when you answer the questions I proposed to you about Jacobs first then maybe I’ll actually answer your questions instead of using diversion for your intellectual dishonesty.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
“He's not a typical 1st round back, in terms of production and workout metrics. But the tape looks a lot better than his production and workout metrics would suggest, too. I'm not sure I see a first round back, based soley on my eyes, but I certainly see a talent with a lot of plus traits.”

Complete intellectual dishonesty. Wants to ignore all metrics except the ones that back up his gut check assessment.

 
It certainly is time for me to exit the conversation. If you've read through it and think my argument is for drafting solely on draft spot (or ADP), I might suggest reading it again or PMing me. I enjoy the owner philosophy convos, but this isn't the thread for it. Sorry to derail. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop said:
It certainly is time for me to exit the conversation. If you've read through it and think my argument is for drafting solely on draft spot (or ADP), I might suggest reading it again or PMing me. I enjoy the owner philosophy convos, but this isn't the thread for it. Sorry to derail. 
Click to expand...
It was relevant for a bit, but it’s long past constructive discussion as it relates to where one should take Henderson in a rookie draft.  Thanks for ending the derailment.

 
Concept Coop said:
Picking between late round guys in redraft is very different than picking a 3rd round NFL RB over a 1st round NFL RB during a rookie draft. 

The role of a good fantasy owner is to add the fantasy context, imo. That context should move guys up and down your board. But consistently betting against draft position is a losing strategy. Hakeem Butler, for example: 32 NFL teams employed dozens of full-time scouts and analysts, who spent hours and hours breaking down actual film (not just TV broadcasts), running data models, and flying around the country to watch these guys and talk to people who know them. 32 teams passed on Butler an aveage of 3 times and collectively drafted 13 WRs in front of him. Yet some fantasy owners with full-time jobs are picking him top 5 to 8, based on some Youtube clips, for the sake of "getting their guy". I don't see the logic in that. 
Click to expand...
Agree on the bolded and already ackowledged the idea. I'm personally not taking Henderson over a 1st round RB in this case. I think Dan said he was considering it though. I adjust based on what the market is doing as well as my own assessments. But I think the main idea is that after applying that fantasy context, as it might mean to me or to you or to whoever else, where do the tier breaks fall? For you or for me? For me they have Henderson way ahead of a lot of WRs. 

As for Butler, I think the fantasy context is huge. How bad do you need a WR, how many picks do you have and what are they? Roster size, etc. When I say I think Butler has a better fantasy future than Isabella, I'm not 2nd guessing the NFL. I am saying I think Butler will fit into a better fantasy role (maybe - it's not a hill I'm trying to die on) than Isabella will, and I think the NFL values the small quick guys right now more than raw big talents like Butler. Isabella may be a more scarce player type. Butler may end up with more fantasy points. I took him once at 2.04 and loved it. Probably would have been willing as early as about 1.10 but I never found a spot like that. Saw him go at 1.03 and thought it was crazy.

And that's just it, there is a line for every owner in terms of the spectrum that goes from reaching to chalk to value pick, on any given player in a given fantasy context. The fact that our lines differ is fine. Why isn't everyone taking Marquis Brown 1.01? 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Starting Gibbs AND Montgomery?
Replies
14
Views
563
ShamrockPride
ShamrockPride
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
187
zamboni
zamboni
rockaction
College RB Tiyon Evans, LAR
Replies
7
Views
924
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top