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.

Draft ALL RBs theory (rookie draft) (1 Viewer)

kittenmittens

kittenmittens

Footballguy
I'm seeing UTH and some others including the player profiler guys advocating for only drafting RBs in your rookie draft.  The thinking is that rookies gain value right away when they play, and you will know right away if they are not going to break out. 

IMO this is a really, really bad philosophy... Unless your league is a very shallow dynasty league, this does not make sense.  The only way I would ever even think about this is in a format like FFPC where you don't have deep 25+ roster spots, and even then I don't like it.  

I laughed all the way to the bank in one of my leagues where an owner had a lot of picks and obviously adopted this philosophy. He took David Montgomery in front of Miles Sanders too..

He took Darrel Henderson a pick before AJ Brown.  🤣

He took Justice Hill two picks before Deebo Samuel and three licks before Marquise Brown. 

He took Ryquel Armstead one pick in front of Diontae Johnson.  

He took Bryce Love right in front of Terry McLaurin. 

Somebody else took Damien Harris in front of Deebo and Marquise Brown. 

That is an absolutely catastrophic draft, and it's because you tried to take a certain position instead of best player available. 

Who has higher value right now, Harry or Darrel Henderson?  It's not even close....  WRs may not always break out instantly, but they do hold their value for a lot longer.  Parris Campbell is also much more valued than Henderson and their range was closer.  AJ Brown is going for more in my dynasty startup auctions than either Jacobs or Sanders, so I don't even think you can say RBs have more value of they do break out. 

I didn't look back any further yet, but best player available should be your philosophy.  Don't be getting cute with this crap, unless you're in my league. 

 
The folks who the OP is talking about being advocates for this should know better.

A lot of the theory is based on being able to trade these RB for high value if they hit. It's certainly not based on the long term stability of other positions.

Same folks advocated for RB zero type strategy for dynasty 5 years ago. Proof they do know better, yet here we are and recency bias clouds the issue.

 
kittenmittens said:
I'm seeing UTH and some others including the player profiler guys advocating for only drafting RBs in your rookie draft.  The thinking is that rookies gain value right away when they play, and you will know right away if they are not going to break out. 
Click to expand...
I actually agree with this approach but look at it a little more nuanced then just simply going RB over WR.

Mainly if it's close I'd go RB, but don't drop a tier.

Also I don't put RB's I view as entering the league as backups in this formula so players like Damien Harris and Mattison last year would not have applied as to me they actually have less chance to show something and gain immediate value then WR who actually has a chance to start or get significant playing time.

All of this typically only applies to first few picks of most drafts, at most usually ending in late round one if the draft is deep at RB mainly because any RB  I view as having a real shot to start and get significant playing time is usually gone.

 
It's a reminder to me that things are cyclical. 

This is basically the same as drugrunners stud WR strategy back on the yellow board. At least that included having a stud WR or two before using all draft picks on RB.

I do think you have to take RB whenever you can because the churn rate is so fast, you always need replacements, but I am not going to take lower tier RB over WR just because they are RB.

There are a lot of good WR this draft which may be another reason why RB picks bottleneck at the top of the draft.

 
Thanks all. It seems so obvious to me that this is a bad strategy, but I see how menobrown uses it and that makes more sense. 

Usually when something seems obvious like this I am missing something about the other side of the argument, so I probably don't understand it well enough. 

 
Andy Dufresne said:
Attempt to draft the best player you can at every draft spot. Trade if you get a surplus.

That's the best philosophy IMO.
Click to expand...
The same philosophy most smart team sports GMs use. Never reach, always go for value that you can flip at a later time if your team ends up unbalanced.

 
Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie RB's have...

- finished RB1 nine times
- finished RB2 six times
- finished RB3 eleven times
- finished RB4 fifteen times
- finished RB5 seven times

I chose to include anyone finishing as a RB5 or WR5, as many rookies aren't starters from the outset.

Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie WR's have...

- finished WR1 one time
- finished WR2 five times
- finished WR3 six times
- finished WR4 six times
- finished WR5 six times

The numbers above show RB's provide a more immediate ROI vs WR's.
48 of 114 drafted RB's (42%) finished RB5 or better
24 of 160 drafted WR's (15%) finished WR5 or better

I ran the numbers for years 2 and 3, and RB's still hold a sizable advantage, but WR's do start closing the gap in year 3.

 
I think you should place a higher value on RB’s but not to the extreme of taking all RB’s. I tend to place value as something close to this depending on draft class:

Tier 1 RB

Tier 1 WR

Tier 2 RB

Tier 2 WR

Tier 1 TE

Tier 1 QB

So on and so forth from there.

 
I'm not advocating the strategy, but it's not like there haven't been years where the exact opposite was true, and with much larger payoffs to boot.

Like 2017 where this would have had you grabbing RBs like CMC, Mixon, Fournette or Cook over Corey Davis or Mike Williams early in the draft.  And then grabbing guys like Kamara and Hunt later in the draft.

 
Just want to throw in that during the draft last year we didn't know if Gurley was going to be playing at all let alone the whole season, and Henderson was some people's top rb in the draft. Him slipping to the 8-10th pick was considered a steal.

 
This is why in my rankings I go talent first.  That way when I come up with my board, I can still take WR's that are more talented over a secondary RB.  RB's get elevated sure, but not to the extent that I'm only drafting RB's over good quality WR prospects.  Just a simple movement piece I use of putting their values close together.  A tier2 RB is equal to a tier1 WR in terms of rookie pick draft capital but the WR can still edge out the RB depending on who I like more.  

I definitely agree RB is more valuable than WR though, which seems like the premise of that.  But you can't go overboard and just say a top 30 rookie players is only RB's.  

I know who the OP is referring too, I listen to them a lot, and I don't recall them taking a guy like Henderson over AJ Brown or Harry who were their top WR's.  Nor a guy like Justice Hill over them.  I don't subscribe to their rankings but I'm pretty sure off memory they had AJ Brown and Harry as top5 picks.

At the time I wouldn't have thought Armstead over Diontae or Love over McLaurin were bad picks.  That's not an indictment on their process that 2 late round picks panned out.  

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I'm not advocating the strategy, but it's not like there haven't been years where the exact opposite was true, and with much larger payoffs to boot.

Like 2017 where this would have had you grabbing RBs like CMC, Mixon, Fournette or Cook over Corey Davis or Mike Williams early in the draft.  And then grabbing guys like Kamara and Hunt later in the draft.
Click to expand...
For sure, I actually think that there being more years like this than like 2019 in the recent past is skewing the data.  I think this is likely a bunch of small sample size fooled by Randomness situations.

 
After looking into this a bit more, the basis of this seems to stem from hit rates for different positions drafted in different rounds of the NFL draft.  I'm skeptical of this data as well because it seems like there are a lot more factors. As I mentioned above, this could be fooled by Randomness and I want to dig into it further. 

Some of the things I am thinking of are:

Do bad franchises who are always drafting in the top 10 skew the hit rate numbers?  When a bad franchise drafts a QB in the top 10, how much does the fact that it was a bad franchise drafting the player affect the results?  If Sam Darnold fails, how much of that is due to the Jets/Gase?  Would he have succeeded if he were picked by Baltimore instead? How much does that skew that data on a top 10 QB hit rate vs a late 1st round QB hit rate? 

Franchises that make stupid reach picks routinely can also skew the numbers.  Dumb reach picks that were widely panned at the time that only one of 32 teams would have made... John Ross, Phillip Dorsett, Kevin White, Heyward-Bey, Corey Coleman.  These were just bad picks by bad organizations, and we all thought so at the time.  How much do these players skew the numbers for first round WR hit rate? 

The other thing probably not factored in is off the field stuff.  Why did Justin Blackmon bust?  Matt Jones?  There are a lot of these, and sometimes it's more subtle. 

I am all about analytics, but being somebody who knows baseball analytics inside and out, I am very wary of the way small sample sizes can be skewed by outlier data that lacks context.   Compared to baseball and a lot of other uses of analytics, football presents a much more complex problem combined with less of a sample size, so it's much more challenging to isolate the trends from the noise. 

 
Zyphros said:
This is why in my rankings I go talent first.  That way when I come up with my board, I can still take WR's that are more talented over a secondary RB.  RB's get elevated sure, but not to the extent that I'm only drafting RB's over good quality WR prospects.  Just a simple movement piece I use of putting their values close together.  A tier2 RB is equal to a tier1 WR in terms of rookie pick draft capital but the WR can still edge out the RB depending on who I like more.  

I definitely agree RB is more valuable than WR though, which seems like the premise of that.  But you can't go overboard and just say a top 30 rookie players is only RB's.  

I know who the OP is referring too, I listen to them a lot, and I don't recall them taking a guy like Henderson over AJ Brown or Harry who were their top WR's.  Nor a guy like Justice Hill over them.  I don't subscribe to their rankings but I'm pretty sure off memory they had AJ Brown and Harry as top5 picks.

At the time I wouldn't have thought Armstead over Diontae or Love over McLaurin were bad picks.  That's not an indictment on their process that 2 late round picks panned out.  
Click to expand...
Just to make sure I'm clear, it wasnt the experts that are in my league making horrible picks, I think it was somebody who listened to that and took it a bit too far. 

I obviously listen to it too and like those analysts or I would not listen/read, but I do question a lot of it and would like to put it to use in the right way and improve my own version of it. 

 
TheWinz said:
Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie RB's have...

- finished RB1 nine times
- finished RB2 six times
- finished RB3 eleven times
- finished RB4 fifteen times
- finished RB5 seven times

I chose to include anyone finishing as a RB5 or WR5, as many rookies aren't starters from the outset.

Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie WR's have...

- finished WR1 one time
- finished WR2 five times
- finished WR3 six times
- finished WR4 six times
- finished WR5 six times

The numbers above show RB's provide a more immediate ROI vs WR's.
48 of 114 drafted RB's (42%) finished RB5 or better
24 of 160 drafted WR's (15%) finished WR5 or better

I ran the numbers for years 2 and 3, and RB's still hold a sizable advantage, but WR's do start closing the gap in year 3.
Click to expand...
I am not sure how you compiled these numbers?

A rookie RB hasn't finished in the top 12 since 2017 when Kamara, Hunt and McCaffrey were RB 3 RB 4 and RB 8 respectively.

Elliot was RB two as a rookie in 2016. Gurley was RB 5 in 2015.

In the study I did on this, I found the rookie season was the lowest average VBD year of the first six seasons of a RB career and I am not seeing the last 5 seasons as really deviating from that.

It is not very useful to compare the first 3 seasons of RB to WR careers. Rb takes less time to develop and get the ball more. RB also have their careers end and decline earlier than WR so the career value of a WR is often higher and as you mention this evens out in year 3 when most of the WR who were good will be producing at a peak level unlike their first two seasons.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable said:
It is not very useful to compare the first 3 seasons of RB to WR careers. Rb takes less time to develop and get the ball more. RB also have their careers end and decline earlier than WR so the career value of a WR is often higher and as you mention this evens out in year 3 when most of the WR who were good will be producing at a peak level unlike their first two seasons.
Click to expand...
That is the whole premise of the podcaster's strategy though.  That the trade value is more immediately accessible if you want to use it, and it also helps you to know whether or not to give up on a player more quickly (IE not holding Corey Davis for 4 years because surely that big breakout is right around the corner).

We happened to have several rookie WRs far exceed what would even be considered a normal good rookie wr season this year. But if you compare a pretty typical good wr rookie season like Hollywood to a good RB rookie season like Jacobs', Jacobs trade value is significantly higher right now. 

Heck Jacobs' ADP is even ahead of the big breakout rookie WRs like Brown/Metcalf/McLaurin/Sanders even though his rookie season was much more modest relative to past rookie rb success than theirs was to past rookie wr success. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
That is the whole premise of the podcaster's strategy though.  That the trade value is more immediately accessible if you want to use it, and it also helps you to know whether or not to give up on a player more quickly (IE not holding Corey Davis for 4 years because surely that big breakout is right around the corner).
Click to expand...
Yes exactly. 

I've though about this over the last few years and my term for it is the value of immediacy. Let's say for instance Corey Davis had actually broke out in year two.  Great. Well if you had drafted Fournette, Mixon, Cook or CMC over him you could have traded any one of those players for Corey Davis and a whole lot more after year one.

In that sense, if short term valuation is key, the strategy makes perfect sense and I actually think so long as top flight RB's are on the board it's very valid. I just don't like the part of the strategy that keeps taking second tier RB's, RB's I view as backups who barring an injury to the RB(s) ahead of them offer the value of immediacy and don't like dipping down a tier just to keep taking RB's.

Also I don't think actual performance of the RB's should be all that is looked at with respect to their potential immediate value and I'd use someone like David Montgomery as an example. He might not have performed so great, but he was going in round 3-4 for a chunk of last off-season in redrafts.   Not always easy correlating redraft to dynasty but I feel pretty certain he carried more trade value in most leagues up until at least a few weeks into the season then any WR in this draft.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
That is the whole premise of the podcaster's strategy though.  That the trade value is more immediately accessible if you want to use it, and it also helps you to know whether or not to give up on a player more quickly (IE not holding Corey Davis for 4 years because surely that big breakout is right around the corner).

We happened to have several rookie WRs far exceed what would even be considered a normal good rookie wr season this year. But if you compare a pretty typical good wr rookie season like Hollywood to a good RB rookie season like Jacobs', Jacobs trade value is significantly higher right now. 

Heck Jacobs' ADP is even ahead of the big breakout rookie WRs like Brown/Metcalf/McLaurin/Sanders even though his rookie season was much more modest relative to past rookie rb success than theirs was to past rookie wr success. 
Click to expand...
I appreciate what you guys are saying in regards to the short term value vs the long term. I even try to push for the players who will produce sooner than others in how I value the rookies relative to each other. I rank rookie WR who I think will produce sooner like Deebo Samuel than I do otherwise similarly talented WR just because of the early pop of production and the opportunity that creates to trade the players sooner if I want to.

That said I have respect for my league mates understanding of these matters and I am not going to use a strategy that is based on fleecing them in trades because of short term thinking.

 
Biabreakable said:
I am not sure how you compiled these numbers?

A rookie RB hasn't finished in the top 12 since 2017 when Kamara, Hunt and McCaffrey were RB 3 RB 4 and RB 8 respectively.

Elliot was RB two as a rookie in 2016. Gurley was RB 5 in 2015.

In the study I did on this, I found the rookie season was the lowest average VBD year of the first six seasons of a RB career and I am not seeing the last 5 seasons as really deviating from that.

It is not very useful to compare the first 3 seasons of RB to WR careers. Rb takes less time to develop and get the ball more. RB also have their careers end and decline earlier than WR so the career value of a WR is often higher and as you mention this evens out in year 3 when most of the WR who were good will be producing at a peak level unlike their first two seasons.
Click to expand...
Here are the 9 rookie RB's - Barkley (2018), Kamara, Hunt, CMC, Fournette (2017), Zeke, Howard (2016), DJ, Gurley (2015) - I used PPR scoring, but of all 9 listed, CMC is the only one who falls out of the top 12 in non-PPR

I find it very useful to compare every year, not just the first three.  Of course RB's peak first, and then fade away, compared to WR's.  As for careers, I said WR's are closing the gap in year 3, but RB's still have the lead.  I will compile for seasons 4 & 5 to see when WR's take over, but my guess is not until season 5.  

 
Just some quick numbers during my research, because they stood out to me...

- In the last 2 years, only 5 RB's have finished RB24 or better (Ingram, Bell, Hyde, Peterson, Miller) that were in season 6 or later
- In the previous 8 seasons, that number skyrockets to 73

Is the sample size too small for this to matter?  Or are we seeing the beginning of the end for the Frank Gore's of the world?

 
TheWinz said:
Just some quick numbers during my research, because they stood out to me...

- In the last 2 years, only 5 RB's have finished RB24 or better (Ingram, Bell, Hyde, Peterson, Miller) that were in season 6 or later
- In the previous 8 seasons, that number skyrockets to 73

Is the sample size too small for this to matter?  Or are we seeing the beginning of the end for the Frank Gore's of the world?
Click to expand...
More about the way teams now run their offense than the individual talent?  NFL seems to be edging away from the classic bell cow. RBs do seem to be going more the way of WRs.

 
TheWinz said:
Here are the 9 rookie RB's - Barkley (2018), Kamara, Hunt, CMC, Fournette (2017), Zeke, Howard (2016), DJ, Gurley (2015) - I used PPR scoring, but of all 9 listed, CMC is the only one who falls out of the top 12 in non-PPR
Click to expand...
Ok. So there were 60 top 12 seasons by RB over this 5 year period.

9 of them by rookie RB which is 15% of the sample.

I wonder how that compares to WR? I am guessing the frequency of rookie top 12 seasons is higher for RB than WR although 2014 was a pretty anomalous year as far as WR producing right away.

I am not sure you can construct a good argument for valuing the rookie RB over other positions based on how the players have performed. But I would like to hear it I guess.

Perhaps the thing to focus on here is that RB careers are most valuable while they are still in the first six seasons in the league. If you are parting ways with RB when they pass the age apex of 25 then you will need to be constantly stocking your team with young RB. Once the RB starts producing they become very valuable while they are, so the best way to acquire them is when they are young. You may only want to roster RB who are 25 years or less.

Really this is more about roster construction philosophy that was put forth by Drugrunner decades ago. You are going to end up with a roster that only has so many spots dedicated to non RB players and you want to have those players be as few as possible so you can use all of the other roster spots on RB. Whether you start out that way or end up that way organically over time because of drafting near exclusively the RB position.

To give an example on a 40 player roster you might see 2 QB 4 WR 2 TE and the other 32 roster spots are RB.

Does anyone actually think that is how they should manage their dynasty teams?

 
This post is in response to @Biabreakable questions.

Top 12 seasons by year...

RB
1 = 9
2 = 13
3 = 12
4 = 9
5 = 3
6 = 3
7 = 2
8 = 4
9 = 3
10 = 1
11 = 0
12 = 1

Kind of what I think most would expect here.  RB's burn bright, but not long.  72% of the top 12 are from years 1 thru 4.  Pretty fast drop after season 4.

WR
1 = 1
2 = 6
3 = 10
4 = 3 (this is an anomaly, see below)
5 = 12
6 = 11
7 = 5
8 = 4
9 = 4
10 = 1
11 = 1
12 = 0
13 = 1
14 = 1

Years 2 thru 9 account for 92%, with the bulk in years 3 thru 6.  Year 4 is really weird.  My first thought was it was a crappy crop of WR's, until I realized the years are rolling.  The only WR's to make the year 4 list are Jarvis Landry (2017), Stefon Diggs (2018), and Michael Thomas (2019).  I am convinced regression after a breakout year 3 plays a big part.

It's worth noting that 22 (37%) of the top 12 RB seasons occurred in the first 2 seasons, but only 7 (12%) for WR's.  To me that's not all that shocking, but it deserves mentioning.

As you said for 2014, rookie WR's did great, but only OBJ finished top 12 PPR.  Prior to that, you have to go back to 2003 to find the next rookie in the top 12 (Anquan Boldin).  And before Boldin it was 1998's Randy Moss.  Only 4 rookie WR's in the top 12 in the last 22 years.  There were 4 rookie RB's in the top 12 in 2017 alone.

You also mentioned RB's careers are most valuable in the first 6 seasons, but the numbers suggest it's only the first 4 seasons.  Of course the best of the best can continue producing at RB1 level after year 4 if healthy, but you may benefit by trading for a goldmine after a strong year 4 performance.  As I said above, 37% of the top 12 seasons were by players in their first 2 seasons, but only 28% were by players in season 5 or later.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting stuff Winz

I guess my next question is how does one configure this information into something accurate enough to be actionable?

Maybe the folks the OP is talking about have come closer to answering that question.

 
The idea of going only RB is stupid but I do generally lean towards RB for a few reasons.
1. as shown by multiple people above, WRs typically don’t emerge year one. I find that the hype wears off and it’s usually easier to buy a wr going into year two. Courtland Sutton, DJ Moore and Gallup all fit the bill as buys after their rookie years and could’ve been gotten for a mid to late 1st in some cases.

2. On the other end, RBs emerge more frequently year one and even if they don’t, RB hype doesn’t seem to die down the same way going into year two and they still gain value. RBs only have to show a little bit of flash to keep their value going into year two. This seems more pronounced in recent years because of how the last few RB classes have been.

3. Rookie contract RBs seem to be on better teams. Of the top 11 highest paid RBs last year, 1 was on a playoff team, Dion Lewis (3 were still on rookie deals but they were 1st rounders). Of the top 12 biggest RB contracts in the league, 2 are on playoff teams and it’s Duke Johnson at 10th and Mark Ingram at 12th. Rookie scale wage RBs tend to be on better teams because those better teams seem to have adopted the #rbsdontmatter mentality.

Just my 2 cents to toss in. I don’t think a strict philosophy of RBs>WRs is a good one but if I’m looking at two similarly talented players that I have no special feelings for and I can’t trade out, the RB seems more likely to make use of an early opportunity and return a better value next offseason

 
I'm happy with CMC, Hunt and Jacobs. I passed on Kamara for Ross. Best player available, period.

 
metoo said:
Best player available, period.
Click to expand...
The people advocating drafting running backs aren't necessarily disagreeing with that.  They are arguing that it is much easier to predict when a running back is going to be good.  Running backs drafted in the first round of the NFL draft have a much better track record than wide receivers drafted in the first round.  As a side benefit, it is known more quickly whether a running back will be good which helps prevent the wasting of a roster spot waiting to see if the player is good or not.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don Hutson said:
The people advocating drafting running backs aren't necessarily disagreeing with that.  They are arguing that it is much easier to predict when a running back is going to be good.  Running backs drafted in the first round of the NFL draft have a much better track record than wide receivers drafted in the first round.  As a side benefit, it is known more quickly whether a running back will be good which helps prevent the wasting of a roster spot waiting to see if the player is good or not.
Click to expand...
The part about first round RBs having a better track record seems obvious to me.  The NFL values WR a lot more than RB, so it requires a much more special RB to get drafted in the first round. This is especially true for the top of the first round. 

NFL teams historically reach for risky WRs in the first round all the time.  Usually if a RB is drafted in the first, especially high in the first, they seem intuitively safe. 

This is a good discussion.  At the very least this is helping me improve my process and question my current thinking. 

One of my questions for @TheWinz is if we have enough of a sample for that data to be predictive and actionable?  How many other factors are at play? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TheWinz said:
Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie RB's have...

- finished RB1 nine times
- finished RB2 six times
- finished RB3 eleven times
- finished RB4 fifteen times
- finished RB5 seven times

I chose to include anyone finishing as a RB5 or WR5, as many rookies aren't starters from the outset.

Assuming a 12 team PPR league, in the past 5 seasons, rookie WR's have...

- finished WR1 one time
- finished WR2 five times
- finished WR3 six times
- finished WR4 six times
- finished WR5 six times

The numbers above show RB's provide a more immediate ROI vs WR's.
48 of 114 drafted RB's (42%) finished RB5 or better
24 of 160 drafted WR's (15%) finished WR5 or better

I ran the numbers for years 2 and 3, and RB's still hold a sizable advantage, but WR's do start closing the gap in year 3.
Click to expand...
I posted this in the D’Andre Swift thread:

As I’ve mentioned before over the last several years the #1 RB has outperformed the #1 WR (rookie) by a wide margin over the course of their contract and it’s not even close. Now that the year has ended the #1 rookie RB was Jacob who finished as the #14 running back with 172.6 points. The #1 rookie WR was AJ Brown as the #10 WR with 165.1 points. This with Jacobs missing 3 of the last 4 game with injuries yet people constantly draft WR over RB even though the tide has turned. I know we’re talking about two different draft classes but the same rule applies. Jacobs at one point before the injury was ranked #6 in my Dynasty league.

2015 Gurley (188.4 points) he didn’t start until week 3 and sat out week 17 vs Amari Cooper (141.7 points)

2016 Zeke (294.4 points) vs Treadwell, Doctson, Coleman and Fuller (Doesn’t matter)

2017 Kamara (234.4) vs Corey Davis (36.5)

2018 Barkley (294.8) vs C. Ridley (143.8)

I use 3-5 window to evaluate the trend and Running backs dominate WRs at every turn. As much as I love Jeudy, Higgins, Lamb, and Ruggs recent history shows they’ll be outperformed by their running back rivals and I like this years WRs vs 2019 WRs. Swift, Etienne, Taylor and Dobbins are studs in their own right. IMHO Swift looks to be the next running back to carry that 200-250 torch.

Tex

 
Very seldom does NFL pay running backs big money after their rookie contract expires. It seems that teams just draft another running back to replace them and use that money on a different position. Once the QB gets his “payday” the team suffers and so does the running back. So it’s not that the talent drops it’s that the NFL teams draft another running back.

Tex

 
I think the consensus is to take Swift, Dobbins, Taylor before the WR, but then after that it's more WR heavy with a couple RB sprinkled in. I didn't think there was much controversy with taking the 1st round drafted RBs at the top of rookie drafts. That works more often than not.

 
BigTex said:
Very seldom does NFL pay running backs big money after their rookie contract expires. It seems that teams just draft another running back to replace them and use that money on a different position. Once the QB gets his “payday” the team suffers and so does the running back. So it’s not that the talent drops it’s that the NFL teams draft another running back.

Tex
Click to expand...
It's difficult to really get a good read on this, because we went through a 5 year gap there where there weren't really any very good RBs entering the NFL.  You'll also remember this from a few years ago when everyone shifted their dynasty perception to WRs being the end-all/be-all and RBs being a waste of time because there was so much turnover there.  But that was really predicated on a big stretch of really weak RB classes. 

Once the good RB classes started coming again, things leveled out and people started chasing RBs again.  Most of these guys haven't finished their first contracts yet so we don't yet know how the NFL will treat them.  We know they didn't feel the need to pay guys when the best RBs coming out were guys like Gio Bernard or Eddie Lacy who had faded away by the time their contract expired.  We've already seen Zeke and Gurley get paid.  It will be interesting to see how it works out when guys like Barkley, CMC, Cook, Mixon hit the end of their rookie deals.

 
Biabreakable said:
I appreciate what you guys are saying in regards to the short term value vs the long term. I even try to push for the players who will produce sooner than others in how I value the rookies relative to each other. I rank rookie WR who I think will produce sooner like Deebo Samuel than I do otherwise similarly talented WR just because of the early pop of production and the opportunity that creates to trade the players sooner if I want to.

That said I have respect for my league mates understanding of these matters and I am not going to use a strategy that is based on fleecing them in trades because of short term thinking.
Click to expand...
Is it really "fleecing" though?  Would you consider trading Josh Jacobs for Diontae Johnson and a 1st to be fleecing someone?  I would wager most would say the side getting Jacobs was doing the fleecing.

I think this is a good illustration of how much easier it is for RBs to gain immediate value than WRs.

Josh Jacobs was a breakout star this year.  Rookie RB, had a huge year.  2.04 in current startup ADP off of that.  But was it really a huge year?  Relative to other rookie RBs I would say it was merely a pretty good year.  In fact, Jacobs rookie years was only the 40th best rookie RB fantasy season since the year 2000.

Jacobs is going about a round ahead of AJ Brown, so presumably you could get Brown and a little cherry on top for Jacobs.  But here's the thing about AJ Brown.  He just had the 10th best rookie WR fantasy season since the year 2000.

So let's say you're staring at a similarly ranked RB and WR in the draft (I know Jacobs/AJB weren't), just consider that for the WR's value to keep pace with the RBs for the next year if the RB has a merely pretty good rookie season the WR has to have one of the greatest rookie WR seasons of our generation in order to keep up.  That's basically what happened here.  Jacobs eh, pretty nice season.  AJB one of the best rookie WR seasons ever.  Value = about the same.

Obviously it's much easier to hit on a "pretty good" season than it is to hit on an all time great season.  So the chances of the value of that RB blowing up are much higher than they are for the WR, at which point if you prefer the WR you can probably get the WR and then some.

So why did I bring up Diontae Johnson up top?  Because coincidentally Diontae just had the 40th best rookie WR season since the year 2000.  That's right, Jacobs' season relative to his rookie RB peers was exactly the same level of good as Diontae's was relative to his rookie WR peers.  They finished in the exact same spot at their position, for rookies since the year 2000.  Darrius Slayton just had the 36th best rookie WR season since the year 2000.  While these guys having the 40th and 36th best rookie WR seasons has certainly given them some decent value, it's nowhere near what you can sell Jacobs for right now coming off the 40th best rookie RB season.

 
kittenmittens said:
I'm seeing UTH and some others including the player profiler guys advocating for only drafting RBs in your rookie draft.  The thinking is that rookies gain value right away when they play, and you will know right away if they are not going to break out. 

IMO this is a really, really bad philosophy... Unless your league is a very shallow dynasty league, this does not make sense.  The only way I would ever even think about this is in a format like FFPC where you don't have deep 25+ roster spots, and even then I don't like it.  

I laughed all the way to the bank in one of my leagues where an owner had a lot of picks and obviously adopted this philosophy. He took David Montgomery in front of Miles Sanders too..

He took Darrel Henderson a pick before AJ Brown.  🤣

He took Justice Hill two picks before Deebo Samuel and three licks before Marquise Brown.-
Click to expand...
Wait, how many licks does it take to get to Marquise Brown again?

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Is it really "fleecing" though?  Would you consider trading Josh Jacobs for Diontae Johnson and a 1st to be fleecing someone?  I would wager most would say the side getting Jacobs was doing the fleecing.

I think this is a good illustration of how much easier it is for RBs to gain immediate value than WRs.

Josh Jacobs was a breakout star this year.  Rookie RB, had a huge year.  2.04 in current startup ADP off of that.  But was it really a huge year?  Relative to other rookie RBs I would say it was merely a pretty good year.  In fact, Jacobs rookie years was only the 40th best rookie RB fantasy season since the year 2000.

Jacobs is going about a round ahead of AJ Brown, so presumably you could get Brown and a little cherry on top for Jacobs.  But here's the thing about AJ Brown.  He just had the 10th best rookie WR fantasy season since the year 2000.

So let's say you're staring at a similarly ranked RB and WR in the draft (I know Jacobs/AJB weren't), just consider that for the WR's value to keep pace with the RBs for the next year if the RB has a merely pretty good rookie season the WR has to have one of the greatest rookie WR seasons of our generation in order to keep up.  That's basically what happened here.  Jacobs eh, pretty nice season.  AJB one of the best rookie WR seasons ever.  Value = about the same.

Obviously it's much easier to hit on a "pretty good" season than it is to hit on an all time great season.  So the chances of the value of that RB blowing up are much higher than they are for the WR, at which point if you prefer the WR you can probably get the WR and then some.

So why did I bring up Diontae Johnson up top?  Because coincidentally Diontae just had the 40th best rookie WR season since the year 2000.  That's right, Jacobs' season relative to his rookie RB peers was exactly the same level of good as Diontae's was relative to his rookie WR peers.  They finished in the exact same spot at their position, for rookies since the year 2000.  Darrius Slayton just had the 36th best rookie WR season since the year 2000.  While these guys having the 40th and 36th best rookie WR seasons has certainly given them some decent value, it's nowhere near what you can sell Jacobs for right now coming off the 40th best rookie RB season.
Click to expand...
The difference in the players is mostly about volume.

Josh Jacobs had 269 opportunities to touch the ball in 2019 compared to Johnsons 96 opportunities. Thats almost a 3 to 1 difference although the targets generally lead to more yards.

Beyond the opportunity is the relative value of the positions. The top RBs are worth more than WR because they get the ball more. WR have a harder time separating themselves the pack of many many WR who could do what Johnson did.

So stating the performance of their rookie seasons isn't really speaking to their value for fantasy.

I was impressed with what I saw of Jacobs and he was pretty universally considered the best rookie prospect of 2019 and Johnson was not even a top 12 rookie prospect. Outlook for the Steelers in the near term seems to hinge on Big Ben coming back and throwing the ball a ton again. I don't know if Ben can do it again. He has been talking about retirement for several years now. The QB who will replace Ben are not inspiring anyone. Maybe they can get a rookie this year and that outlook improves. Jacobs in the center piece of the Raiders offense and should continue to be so for the next few seasons. He didn't get as much opportunity as a receiver as I think he is capable of maybe that caps his upside unless that changes.

Its like apples to oranges to me. The advantage is almost 3 to 1.

 
Biabreakable said:
The difference in the players is mostly about volume.

Josh Jacobs had 269 opportunities to touch the ball in 2019 compared to Johnsons 96 opportunities. Thats almost a 3 to 1 difference although the targets generally lead to more yards.

Beyond the opportunity is the relative value of the positions. The top RBs are worth more than WR because they get the ball more. WR have a harder time separating themselves the pack of many many WR who could do what Johnson did.

So stating the performance of their rookie seasons isn't really speaking to their value for fantasy.

Its like apples to oranges to me. The advantage is almost 3 to 1.
Click to expand...
Again, that's kind of the whole point.

RBs are typically going to get the ball more right out of the gate, so their value is going to increase a lot more quickly even if it doesn't necessarily say much about their long term prospects being any better.

 
I am not really a dynasty player, but I enjoy crunching data.  I am willing to spend time to compile, but I don't know exactly how present it for others to effectively use it.  I think a 20 year sample size would be more than enough.  So, what data should I compile?

- Year drafted, and draft spot relative to all others in their class?  For example, Josh Jacobs was selected a full round ahead of the next RB, so one would expect him to have a better fantasy career than all others.
- Should I track all finishes, or just top 12?

I assume the end goal is to try to figure out true dynasty value of RB vs WR?  Also, at what point should you consider trading?
 

 
Often RB is the obvious way to go with the #1 pick in the rookie draft. I think that's been true each of the past 5 years, with Gurley, Zeke, Fournette or CMC, Barkley, and Jacobs. A RB who goes in the top 10 of the NFL draft usually belongs at the top of your fantasy draft board, and in 2019 there weren't any great WR prospects to bump Jacobs off the top spot.

The success of those guys doesn't tell us much about what to do during the rest of the rookie draft.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
It's difficult to really get a good read on this, because we went through a 5 year gap there where there weren't really any very good RBs entering the NFL.  You'll also remember this from a few years ago when everyone shifted their dynasty perception to WRs being the end-all/be-all and RBs being a waste of time because there was so much turnover there.  But that was really predicated on a big stretch of really weak RB classes. 

Once the good RB classes started coming again, things leveled out and people started chasing RBs again.  Most of these guys haven't finished their first contracts yet so we don't yet know how the NFL will treat them.  We know they didn't feel the need to pay guys when the best RBs coming out were guys like Gio Bernard or Eddie Lacy who had faded away by the time their contract expired.  We've already seen Zeke and Gurley get paid.  It will be interesting to see how it works out when guys like Barkley, CMC, Cook, Mixon hit the end of their rookie deals.
Click to expand...
The recent wave of stud RBs is what has me questioning if we are just chasing this. We had the stud WRs for a while (Calvin through 2014) with no stud RBs, then it totally flips (Gurley through 2019).  That doesn't seem predictive of this next generation of players when it comes to roster construction. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ZWK said:
Often RB is the obvious way to go with the #1 pick in the rookie draft. I think that's been true each of the past 5 years, with Gurley, Zeke, Fournette or CMC, Barkley, and Jacobs. A RB who goes in the top 10 of the NFL draft usually belongs at the top of your fantasy draft board, and in 2019 there weren't any great WR prospects to bump Jacobs off the top spot.

The success of those guys doesn't tell us much about what to do during the rest of the rookie draft.
Click to expand...
Sure, but this applies beyond the top as well.

Devin Singletary and Diontae Johnson were both picked right around the same area of the NFL draft.  Singletary just had the 60th best rookie RB fantasy season since 2000 while Diontae just had the 40th best WR season, yet via the most recent ADP Singletary is going a good 3 rounds ahead of Diontae.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Sure, but this applies beyond the top as well.

Devin Singletary and Diontae Johnson were both picked right around the same area of the NFL draft.  Singletary just had the 60th best rookie RB fantasy season since 2000 while Diontae just had the 40th best WR season, yet via the most recent ADP Singletary is going a good 3 rounds ahead of Diontae.
Click to expand...
One had a dramatic change in usage the second half of the season while the other did not. End of year stats are not always the most revealing.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Sure, but this applies beyond the top as well.

Devin Singletary and Diontae Johnson were both picked right around the same area of the NFL draft.  Singletary just had the 60th best rookie RB fantasy season since 2000 while Diontae just had the 40th best WR season, yet via the most recent ADP Singletary is going a good 3 rounds ahead of Diontae.
Click to expand...
Singletary went way ahead of Johnson in all of my rookie drafts. Looking at which receivers were drafted closest to Singletary in a few leagues, generally people were choosing between him and a WR like Deebo Samuel, Mecole Hardman, Marquise Brown, Arcega-Whiteside, or Metcalf. Similarly, people were choosing between Diontae Johnson and a RB like Bryce Love, Elijah Holyfield, Ryquell Armstead, Mattison, or Dexter Williams.

Generally a RB is worth about as much as a WR who was drafted 1 round earlier. I use this draft value chart as the starting point for my generic rookie rankings.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
It's difficult to really get a good read on this, because we went through a 5 year gap there where there weren't really any very good RBs entering the NFL.  You'll also remember this from a few years ago when everyone shifted their dynasty perception to WRs being the end-all/be-all and RBs being a waste of time because there was so much turnover there.  But that was really predicated on a big stretch of really weak RB classes. 

Once the good RB classes started coming again, things leveled out and people started chasing RBs again.  Most of these guys haven't finished their first contracts yet so we don't yet know how the NFL will treat them.  We know they didn't feel the need to pay guys when the best RBs coming out were guys like Gio Bernard or Eddie Lacy who had faded away by the time their contract expired.  We've already seen Zeke and Gurley get paid.  It will be interesting to see how it works out when guys like Barkley, CMC, Cook, Mixon hit the end of their rookie deals.
Click to expand...
I already have the data. Will have to find it. I’m off this weekend I will see if I can find it.

Tex

 
ZWK said:
Singletary went way ahead of Johnson in all of my rookie drafts. Looking at which receivers were drafted closest to Singletary in a few leagues, generally people were choosing between him and a WR like Deebo Samuel, Mecole Hardman, Marquise Brown, Arcega-Whiteside, or Metcalf. Similarly, people were choosing between Diontae Johnson and a RB like Bryce Love, Elijah Holyfield, Ryquell Armstead, Mattison, or Dexter Williams.

Generally a RB is worth about as much as a WR who was drafted 1 round earlier. I use this draft value chart as the starting point for my generic rookie rankings.
Click to expand...
Yeah but all that says is that people are already applying the strategy that the OP is rejecting out of hand. 

Why was Singletary drafted 1.5 rounds earlier than Diontae in FG drafts when Diontae was drafted 1/3rd of a round earlier in the NFL draft?

Because FFers know that RBs get more immediate opportunity, take less development, provide fantasy points earlier, and gain value that can be spent more quickly. 

That is the strategy of giving enormous extra weight to RBs already in action. And it bore true, as Singletary is worth more despite Diontae having a much better rookie season relative to positional expectations. 

The reality is that even when FFers expect guys to take a few years to develop they get bored waiting for it. 

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Yeah but all that says is that people are already applying the strategy that the OP is rejecting out of hand. 

Why was Singletary drafted 1.5 rounds earlier than Diontae in FG drafts when Diontae was drafted 1/3rd of a round earlier in the NFL draft?

Because FFers know that RBs get more immediate opportunity, take less development, provide fantasy points earlier, and gain value that can be spent more quickly. 

That is the strategy of giving enormous extra weight to RBs already in action. And it bore true, as Singletary is worth more despite Diontae having a much better rookie season relative to positional expectations. 

The reality is that even when FFers expect guys to take a few years to develop they get bored waiting for it. 
Click to expand...
It’s also positional scarcity.  Everyone wants the next bell cow back but there are very few of those in the NFL.  So good backs are hard to find but when you have one they get more opportunities than WRs as already mentioned above. 

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Yeah but all that says is that people are already applying the strategy that the OP is rejecting out of hand. 

Why was Singletary drafted 1.5 rounds earlier than Diontae in FG drafts when Diontae was drafted 1/3rd of a round earlier in the NFL draft?

Because FFers know that RBs get more immediate opportunity, take less development, provide fantasy points earlier, and gain value that can be spent more quickly. 

That is the strategy of giving enormous extra weight to RBs already in action. And it bore true, as Singletary is worth more despite Diontae having a much better rookie season relative to positional expectations. 

The reality is that even when FFers expect guys to take a few years to develop they get bored waiting for it. 
Click to expand...
Anybody who is applying a "rule" to fantasy football universally and not taking things case by case is an idiot. Nobody was picking Singletary because RBs get more immediate opportunity etc. They picked him earlier because the guys in front of him were Gore (literally 90 years old) and Yeldon (low dollar signing who was cuttable after 1 year) and you knew he was going to get a shot to be the guy by the 2nd half of the year. Johnson, on the other hand, had a new signing (Moncrief, laughable in hindsight) and a 2nd rounder from 2018 (Washington) in front of him. He also had a reputation as a slot guy which is Juju's role.

As I stated above, I do agree that there should be a little extra weight given to RBs because I feel they do develop faster (on average) and maintain/gain value into their 2nd year with less difficulty. But it's case by case, it's not a blanket rule

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
College RB Quinshon Judkins, Ohio St.
Replies
22
Views
871
Wigglytuff's Gruff
Wigglytuff's Gruff
P
**Official 8th spot draft position**
Replies
7
Views
632
shadrap
shadrap
massraider
College WR Jermaine Burton, Alabama
Replies
13
Views
432
Faust
Faust

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top