A thought on draft day strategy... (1 Viewer)

[BigGreenMachine]

I have always been the first to say that you NEED to draft RB/RB. However, in my 12 team redreaft PPR league it has consistently been the QB that leads the field far and away in pts. So...I have thought about doing the unthinkable and either drafting QB in the first round or going RB then QB to make sure I get a top notch rb. Have you guys broken the 11th commandment of thou shalt not draft anything other than RB/RB in the first 2 rounds? Has it been successful. At the end of the day I am sure that i will stay with my old ways but if someone can help merationalize this it would be great.

Gents...I bow to your expertise!

 

[Mr. Pink]

It depends on your draft position. That usually dictates who you should be picking to maximize value. Obviously, if you have one of the top three or four picks, you will most likely draft a RB. However, at the 2/3 turn, the value rests with the WR position. In PPR, this could be even more the case.

I don't automatically go RB/RB anymore, and the logic in doing so fades with each season. There's plenty of RB value in the middle rounds of the draft.

 

[pidgeonmanza]

even if your scoring system makes it so the qb's score the most. It means that the not top qb's will also be scoring more, and you only need one qb compared to 2 or 3 rb and 2 or 3 wr

 

[BigGreenMachine]

even if your scoring system makes it so the qb's score the most. It means that the not top qb's will also be scoring more, and you only need one qb compared to 2 or 3 rb and 2 or 3 wr

True and that has been my thinking all along...is that there are plenty of solid QBs in the middle but very few true RB values after the first 25-35 picks. I am drafting 5th so it looks like a Steven Jackson/Chris Johnson will be there from a RB persective with Petersen, Turner, forte, and jones-drew gone already.

 

[turfman]

The RB/RB theory has gone away as more teams have a RBBC approach. There aren't enough sure things at RB anymore. The better value is in WR and then go back to RB in the 3rd through 6th rounds where you see more value.

 

[Topes]

11th commandment?

 

[texasbirdfan]

The RB/RB theory has gone away as more teams have a RBBC approach. There aren't enough sure things at RB anymore. The better value is in WR and then go back to RB in the 3rd through 6th rounds where you see more value.

One would think more people would get this approach after this trend has been going on for several seasons. The RBBC helps NFL teams keep their caps more in line year in year out by not putting all their $$$ (eggs) into one basket (stub RB) only

 

[davegod2]

The RB/RB theory has gone away as more teams have a RBBC approach. There aren't enough sure things at RB anymore. The better value is in WR and then go back to RB in the 3rd through 6th rounds where you see more value.

So wouldn't the better strategy be to look to draft RB until all non-RBBC RB's have been taken, and only then look to take best available WR? If that lands you two RB's in succession, so be it, but you certainly can't (or shouldn't) pass on one of the non-RBBC RB's in favor of a WR, as that type of RB is becoming more rare, and hence even more valuable.

 

[turfman]

The RB/RB theory has gone away as more teams have a RBBC approach. There aren't enough sure things at RB anymore. The better value is in WR and then go back to RB in the 3rd through 6th rounds where you see more value.

So wouldn't the better strategy be to look to draft RB until all non-RBBC RB's have been taken, and only then look to take best available WR? If that lands you two RB's in succession, so be it, but you certainly can't (or shouldn't) pass on one of the non-RBBC RB's in favor of a WR, as that type of RB is becoming more rare, and hence even more valuable.

I agree if there is a workhorse back he should be an option. But don't take a RB just to take a RB. There are very few true 3 down RB and by the time the second round comes a long most of those are gone. Thats why the value lies in WR. I am not saying take a WR over a legit back though.

 

[Sweet Love]

I was in a PPR last year (that I happened to win) and agree with your thought on the QB being a big factor. Truth is though, I waited on my QBs, drafted Cutler (around 10 overall taken for QBs) and Rivers (around 14th-15th overall for QBs). They finished top 5-6 each in my league (I traded Cutler for Steve Smith early on), but I doubt I would be able to have that kind of luck when drafting my RBs. Sure, I could have stumbled upon Slaton and Forte as my top RBs in the later rounds and had the same return, but the bottom line is that going into last year guys like CJ, Slaton and Forte had much greater floors than did Cutler and Rivers and I got those two in roughly the same rounds I would have needed to secure CJ and Slaton. The risk is greater waiting on RB (barring injuries of course). I am not saying it can't be done (because it is, every year), but if you wait too long on RBs, you are taking a more of a risk.

 

[coachjim]

With the advent of more and more leagues going to PPR for receivers and not for RB's, or at least less points per reception for RB's I don't think you can go into any draft with a set plan to go RB, RB or any other combination. Unless you have one of the top 3 picks I think you getter draft for strength. If I am drafting 6th and feel that Fitz is the best pick I will take him. In my opinion you must be able to change your strategy to whatever way the draft goes. It used to be an axiom that 9 of the first 10 picks would be RB's. Not so any more so be ready to improvise.