As the 2009 season is winding down (1 Viewer)

[Rounders]

As more and more teams are going by the wayside as we get deeper and deeper into the playoffs, I'm curious to know if anybody will be changing their normal draft strategies going forward? For you Stud RB guys, any thoughts to building a team with Stud WRs or BPA? Or how about those teams that went WR-WR, did it work out, do it again?

Curious to hear how the Shark Pool will react to the 2009 season going forward.

I, for one, have not made up my mind, but I'm leaning on trying a new strategy next year. Usually I'm a Stud RB guy and I had some good success this year, but part of me is thinking going WR-WR next year. We'll see lots of time to figure it out.

 

[Kuz]

As more and more teams are going by the wayside as we get deeper and deeper into the playoffs, I'm curious to know if anybody will be changing their normal draft strategies going forward? For you Stud RB guys, any thoughts to building a team with Stud WRs or BPA? Or how about those teams that went WR-WR, did it work out, do it again?Curious to hear how the Shark Pool will react to the 2009 season going forward.I, for one, have not made up my mind, but I'm leaning on trying a new strategy next year. Usually I'm a Stud RB guy and I had some good success this year, but part of me is thinking going WR-WR next year. We'll see lots of time to figure it out.

Hard to say exactly what I'll do come next year but having a team with Cutler/Garrard may have be trying to grab a top 5 QB much earlier next year. I got killed this year having that QB combo..

 

[Instinctive]

1. Definitely pick a guy who is going to get the ball in as many ways as possible as a RB. AD, CJ4.24, Rice, SJax were on many of my teams and they didn't let me down like other first round RBs.

2. Make sure you come out of round 3 with a stud RB, stud WR, and then the BPA of one of those two positions

3. QB by end of the 5th. Guys there this season were Rivers (every once a while) Schaub and McNabb. All good solid selections...Rodgers was available in 4th sometimes.

4. Whatever you don' get 2/3 studs in 1st 3 rounds...I try to take 2-3 in 4th through 7th rounds, to maximize hit chances on guys like Rice, Benson, etc...

5. I didn't draft a TE, waited til a guy needed a WR, and traded Housh to him for Gates...or grabbed Davis off waivers. First time I tried it, and it worked out GREAT. May have to try again

 

[Menace]

took a QB early this year (Rodgers) and it has really helped. I am probably gonna do the same next year.

 

[CentralPA]

The only strategy I am changing in my 3 keeper PPR league is who I am keeping. I am going to keep Drew Brees, Randy Moss, and MJD. As much of a taboo it is to keep Brees they are straight up the best three players that are on my roster right now and Brees has outscored both Moss and Jones-Drew. I am going to aim for a RB in the 1st and WR WR after that but if a stud TE is there in the third I will grab him most likely.

 

[1rebmun]

Waited late and took Garrad as qb, next year will look for a top 5 qb in round 2

Our league is TE heavy (3 points per catch). and took whitten in 2nd round, will wait till 4th round next year for te as there are more equal te's now

Will look to take RB, QB, Wr, TE in that order next year

 

[TWP]

This year I really tried to adjust my strategy to where I saw value. I even traded away picks in rounds 3 and 4 for more picks in rounds 5 through 7 and ended up drafting guys like Schaub, Rice and Benson there which made up for picking guys like FWP and Royal in those same rounds. Next year I'll also try to keep a flexible mind going into my early research and adapt my draft strategy accordingly.

 

[Phurfur]

Nope, VBD!

 

[moleculo]

a couple of notes:

Look at projections from multiple sites. Particular projecting sites tend to make calls on particular players before their role is settled - that's appropriate for them to do. But, if they are wrong, you just drafted the wrong guy. If you can combine projections from several sites and they all have different calls on who wins positional battles, the net result is that the guys in question will all be downgraded, which is probably appropriate given the uncertainty as to who starts. The case in point for me this year was Dominick Hixon - some projections I was using called for Hixon to emerge as the guy to replace Plaxico, and I saw no compelling reason to not believe them. so, I ended up drafting Hixon much earlier than I should have, given the uncertainty as to how that would all shake out.
My definition of "stud" is someone you don't ever have to think about match-ups when starting. This year, with all of the RBBC going around, it was obvious to me in the pre-season that there would be 3 or 4 stud RB's, 5 or 6 stud WR's, 4 or 5 stud TE's, and 3 stud QB's - 13 stud players that were worth taking in the first round (5 stud TE's means you can wait on them - it's not like the days when it was Gonzo/Gates and that's it). The prudent thing would be to load up on as many stud players as possible. In the early rounds, that probably means forgoing RB/RB and depending on where you draft, get a WR/QB in the first two rounds. Going RB/RB, therefore, means that you will not have two studs after the first round (unless you were fortunate enough to get CJohnson in the 2nd). That also means you get a TE in rounds 4 or 5, so after 5 rounds you are likely to have 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, and that's OK.
A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.
be liberal projecting downgrades for aging RB's or RB's on bad teams. I badly overestimated how much LJ and LT has left.
Figure out a better way to forecast who will be taken before my next pick.outside of that, i need to do a better job with in-season WW, especially in blind bidding format.

 

[Restricted]

2. Make sure you come out of round 3 with a stud RB, stud WR, and then the BPA of one of those two positions

Solid.

 

[gonzobill5]

I look back over my preseason rankings and it pisses me off how many near misses I had.

Next year I think I'll spend less time trying to predict each individual player and more time trying to predict how teams will end up. Then I'll avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs early on.

I play in three leagues and these are my worst picks:

-Calvin Johnson in the 2nd

-Darren McFadden in the 3rd/4th (drafted him in two leagues)

-Braylon Edwards in the 5th.

-Greg Olsen in the 7th/8th (i have the pleasure of owning him in all 3 leagues)

All three are on teams that I should have known would be terrible. It seems so obvious now.

-I had Calvin Johnson rated a bit better than Andre Johnson, but I was much more certain that Houston will be competitive.

-I had Darren McFadden and Ray Rice in the same tier - but knew the Ravens are a well run organization.

-I had Braylon Edwards on par with Vincent Jackson - but knew the browns were a mess and had crap at QB.

-Had Dallas Clark rated the same as Olsen, and he was still available in at least one when I picked, but I was infatuated with Olsen. Hopefully I won't do that again.

In all three situations I took the guy I thought had the most "upside." Clearly I'm terrible at determining that, whatever it is. In hindsight it looks like I am terribly biased toward where they were drafted in the NFL draft.

Next year I'll do what I can to get good players on good offenses early.

 

[Restricted]

One thing I am REALLY going to try to do is to stay away from players on teams that I think are going to be bad. Of course, I always draft VB but if there is a choice of almost equal, I want to go with the player on the team that I think is better.

 

[Avery]

A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.

After being burned by the QBBC theory over the past few years (always scrambling trying to find a better guy on the wire, through trade or just agonizing over who to start) I went with established players at the position this year. Keeper/dynasty formats only so I had to make some moves to get them but went with Rivers and McNabb (picked up Kolb for backup here) and couldn't be happier.

There seems to have been a prevailing theory in the Shark Pool amongst posters (which reflects the opinion by many staff members in the articles) that you could just go out and get a couple of mid tier QBs later that will perform as well as a top tier QB when you start the right guy. Even if that is so, the articles look at past stats and prove the theory by assuming that the right guy was started every week... a poor assumption.

 

[TWP]

A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.

After being burned by the QBBC theory over the past few years (always scrambling trying to find a better guy on the wire, through trade or just agonizing over who to start) I went with established players at the position this year. Keeper/dynasty formats only so I had to make some moves to get them but went with Rivers and McNabb (picked up Kolb for backup here) and couldn't be happier.

There seems to have been a prevailing theory in the Shark Pool amongst posters (which reflects the opinion by many staff members in the articles) that you could just go out and get a couple of mid tier QBs later that will perform as well as a top tier QB when you start the right guy. Even if that is so, the articles look at past stats and prove the theory by assuming that the right guy was started every week... a poor assumption.

I'm not sure that the strong push is for QBBC. There is some of that, for sure, but I think the stronger view (at least in my opinion) is that you can get someone who will be a decent #1 in the mid-rounds. Guys like Garrard, Palmer, Schaub, Big Ben, McNabb, etc. might be available in the 7th or 8th. If you get one of them and then pick a reasonable backup you're probably going to be doing better than picking up a Warner/Rodgers/Brady whomever in the second round and then relying on a 7th round RB.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

MEPA. Most explosive player available. No matter position.

This year's Chris Johnson is last year's Deangelo Williams. I won't be going into any draft with positions in mind for the 1st 3 rounds. You take the best possible guys and let the chips fall.

For every lucky SOB that got Chris Johnson this year, there's a sorry SOB that had Matt Forte. And we may be saying the exact opposite in 2010.

 

[moleculo]

A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.

After being burned by the QBBC theory over the past few years (always scrambling trying to find a better guy on the wire, through trade or just agonizing over who to start) I went with established players at the position this year. Keeper/dynasty formats only so I had to make some moves to get them but went with Rivers and McNabb (picked up Kolb for backup here) and couldn't be happier.

There seems to have been a prevailing theory in the Shark Pool amongst posters (which reflects the opinion by many staff members in the articles) that you could just go out and get a couple of mid tier QBs later that will perform as well as a top tier QB when you start the right guy. Even if that is so, the articles look at past stats and prove the theory by assuming that the right guy was started every week... a poor assumption.

I'm not sure that the strong push is for QBBC. There is some of that, for sure, but I think the stronger view (at least in my opinion) is that you can get someone who will be a decent #1 in the mid-rounds. Guys like Garrard, Palmer, Schaub, Big Ben, McNabb, etc. might be available in the 7th or 8th. If you get one of them and then pick a reasonable backup you're probably going to be doing better than picking up a Warner/Rodgers/Brady whomever in the second round and then relying on a 7th round RB.

It depends on which one you pick - McNabb or Shaub, probably worked out ok. if you took Palmer or Garrard, you might be disappointed with the "mid-level QB strategy". It can be tough to tell in preseason the difference between the two. IMO, the certainty in production of a PManning/Brees/Brady certainly justifies an early selection.

 

[Chaka]

No, I still plan on drafting a championship caliber team.

 

[Cunk]

I'm going to draft about 3 defenses and draft them much earlier than in the past. Having a solid D is very underrated and it cost me my season. A decent defense without question made me go from 6-7-1 to at the very worst 9-5. I drafted the Titans but they blew the first half of the year.

 

[Futz]

I will no longer pass on known quantities I.E. Fitzgerald,AJ,SJax,Brees, for "potential stud RBs" I.E. Slaton/Fortes of the world.

I still think that the RB position is the most important FF position but there are so few of the "stud" exclusive backs that stabbing at that potential in the 1st round is a waste.

Unless you are picking in the first few picks, take the known quantities over the unknown.

 

[Wadsworth]

A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.

After being burned by the QBBC theory over the past few years (always scrambling trying to find a better guy on the wire, through trade or just agonizing over who to start) I went with established players at the position this year. Keeper/dynasty formats only so I had to make some moves to get them but went with Rivers and McNabb (picked up Kolb for backup here) and couldn't be happier.

There seems to have been a prevailing theory in the Shark Pool amongst posters (which reflects the opinion by many staff members in the articles) that you could just go out and get a couple of mid tier QBs later that will perform as well as a top tier QB when you start the right guy. Even if that is so, the articles look at past stats and prove the theory by assuming that the right guy was started every week... a poor assumption.

I'm not sure that the strong push is for QBBC. There is some of that, for sure, but I think the stronger view (at least in my opinion) is that you can get someone who will be a decent #1 in the mid-rounds. Guys like Garrard, Palmer, Schaub, Big Ben, McNabb, etc. might be available in the 7th or 8th. If you get one of them and then pick a reasonable backup you're probably going to be doing better than picking up a Warner/Rodgers/Brady whomever in the second round and then relying on a 7th round RB.

I think some people that are trying the QBBC approach are waiting too long to make their move at QB. It all depends on how your draft flows our course, but even if you are trying to wait on QBs if the QBs you are targeting start to go you have to be ready to move in the middle rounds. Also, going QBBC does not mean you can't trade for a top 5 QB later. I've had great success with waiting on QBs and going QBBC(or sometimes it's not a committee as one of the QBs becomes a top tier starter on his own). But like anything else it's not perfect and you have to be flexible.

 

[Magnum]

MEPA. Most explosive player available. No matter position.This year's Chris Johnson is last year's Deangelo Williams. I won't be going into any draft with positions in mind for the 1st 3 rounds. You take the best possible guys and let the chips fall. For every lucky SOB that got Chris Johnson this year, there's a sorry SOB that had Matt Forte. And we may be saying the exact opposite in 2010.

Actually, LAST YEARS Chris Johnson helped me be the "lucky SOB" that won my league. I'll be drafting VBD, but.........if fairly equal value is on the board...........I'll be taking a stud WR and/or stud QB combo. Outside of CJ and AP...it just seems easier to find RB's that can step in and do a sufficient job week to week.

 

[TWP]

It depends on which one you pick - McNabb or Shaub, probably worked out ok. if you took Palmer or Garrard, you might be disappointed with the "mid-level QB strategy". It can be tough to tell in preseason the difference between the two. IMO, the certainty in production of a PManning/Brees/Brady certainly justifies an early selection.

I agree. But if you're looking at McNabb, Schaub, Big Ben, etc. there are a number of guys available in the late rounds that will work out fine. And if you miss and end up with Pennington or Hass or Flacco then you only wasted a 7th round pick and you can probably pick up a Favre or Smith or Campbell as a backup and be okay. Whereas if you took Warner in the 2nd round, you're missing out on Chris Johnson or Andre Johnson or Randy Moss or whomever and not doing much better at QB.

 

[Coin Flip]

VBD would work well if there was a guarantee on the VBD list. You can still miss here if your rankings are not accurate. Also you have to add a little NEED in the VBD idea. You dont need Manning, Rodgers and Schaub all on the same roster.

 

[TWP]

A Stud QB is most definately better than platooning QB's. Whenever I've tried to platoon QB's and play match-ups, I inevitably pick the wrong guy.

After being burned by the QBBC theory over the past few years (always scrambling trying to find a better guy on the wire, through trade or just agonizing over who to start) I went with established players at the position this year. Keeper/dynasty formats only so I had to make some moves to get them but went with Rivers and McNabb (picked up Kolb for backup here) and couldn't be happier.

There seems to have been a prevailing theory in the Shark Pool amongst posters (which reflects the opinion by many staff members in the articles) that you could just go out and get a couple of mid tier QBs later that will perform as well as a top tier QB when you start the right guy. Even if that is so, the articles look at past stats and prove the theory by assuming that the right guy was started every week... a poor assumption.

I'm not sure that the strong push is for QBBC. There is some of that, for sure, but I think the stronger view (at least in my opinion) is that you can get someone who will be a decent #1 in the mid-rounds. Guys like Garrard, Palmer, Schaub, Big Ben, McNabb, etc. might be available in the 7th or 8th. If you get one of them and then pick a reasonable backup you're probably going to be doing better than picking up a Warner/Rodgers/Brady whomever in the second round and then relying on a 7th round RB.

I think some people that are trying the QBBC approach are waiting too long to make their move at QB. It all depends on how your draft flows our course, but even if you are trying to wait on QBs if the QBs you are targeting start to go you have to be ready to move in the middle rounds. Also, going QBBC does not mean you can't trade for a top 5 QB later. I've had great success with waiting on QBs and going QBBC(or sometimes it's not a committee as one of the QBs becomes a top tier starter on his own). But like anything else it's not perfect and you have to be flexible.

Yes. In one league with 6pt passing TDs and big bonuses for 300yd games, I ended up getting Brady in the second round. Dunno how that happened, but obviously had to deviate from the gameplan in that case. I agree with you, too, that people might be waiting too long. Even though I totally bought into Dodd's argument about waiting to get a QB, I thought he was taking it too much to the extreme with waiting for the 10th round to pick Garrard or whatever and felt much more comfortable waiting until only the 7th round and targeting Schaub or Big Ben.

 

[Black]

I had the worst draft in my 2-person keeper, PPR than I've had in years. I let the draft 'come to me', and those value picks fell apart like a plastic 'hecho in China' gumball-machine toy. Also, I was not that happy with Roddy as my keeper (for a 5th round pick). Only good thing I did this year was avoid 'fantasy wastelands' like BUF, SEA, WAS, OAK.

Next year:

1) only keep players in exchange for 10th round or later

2) no more pure values picks..."oooh here's Reggie Bush in the 8th"...screw that. I will go back to targeting the guys I want, 1 round early.

3) if two guys are in same tier, go with guy on projected better offense. No more Bowe over Welker crap.

4) no RBs older than 30, no guys coming back off major injury.

5) pick WRs based on targets/projected targets.

6) Don't draft any Eagles, unless Vick and McNabb are gone and Kolb is all that is left.

7) Stick to plan of not drafting guys off Fantasy wastelands...bad teams that did not get better in the offseason.

8) going to forget the 'need a stud TE' rule, and just go with a couple of guys with alot of targets the previous year. Witten fell a little short of that 120 catch year with TO gone.

This WAS going to be my draft plan this year, and I didn't stick to it...will prob go back to it.

(NOTE: PPR league, 2-person keeper, so CJ, MJD, ADP, RRice will all be gone...)

1st Round: unless there is an SJax or Gore (all around back) present, will go stud WR.

2nd Round: stud WR or QB.

3rd Round: stud WR or QB.

4th-8th: RBs that catch passes

two 'good' TEs around round 10, another 'good' QB with upside.

upside rookies/WRs after round 11

last two rounds DST/K

 

[Clev4ever]

I went into this season looking to draft 2 of the top 8 WRs from 2008 in the 1st 3 rounds of my redraft. I waited until RD 8 to draft a QB whuch was Eli & again in RD 11 or 12 when I drafted Hass. My 1st 5 picks in a 10 ten team league at the #5 slot of a snake draft were Forte, Moss, Jennings Jacobs & Pierre Thomas. I would have to say it paid off because I traded Jacobs for Ronnie Brown. I also made trades to bring in Rodgers, AP & DeSean Jackson while giving up Hass, Forte & Dallas Clark, all whom I drafted. I had traded for Tom Brady before dealing him to get Rodgers & AP.

I usually have an idea but wait to see where I'm drafting then try to find what postion maybe tough to have 2 good guys like a WR position & draft accordingly. This was the 1st year I went with 2 WRs in my 1st 3 picks and I finished with the best record and was 30pts shy of the highest scoring team.

But it is always good to know your league members and what they like and don't like. Sometimes guys will draft because the player is on their cheat sheet as the best player available. Sometimes guys will stay away from players because they are fans of other teams or draft their favorute players off their favorite team rather they are quality players or not. I try to stay away from Steelers as I'm a Browns fan but I also stay away from Browns players unless they get hot, alaa 2007 DA & BE.

 

[bushdocda]

Just more players to not draft ever again.

 

[jagbag]

I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds. The NFL is a passing league and quality receivers

can be found in later rounds, not so for the RB's IMO.

 

[Ariakis]

I will be more willing to take a QB in the first 3 rounds over another position if there isn't a clear steal at RB/WR left on the board. That said, my best team I ended up with Royal and Anthony Gonzalez in the 3rd and 4th rounds but quickly cashed in on MSW and Austin to build an elite roster (14 team keep one format). Had I taken Rodgers over Royal though my team would have been that much better.

Two seasons ago it seemed that I could never get WR's and that RB's grew on trees. This year a new solid WR emerged each week while QB and RB were scarse early but getting easier to find really late. Next year I'd be concerned I overcompensate away thinking productive WR's grow on trees again.

 

[Buckna]

I will not take the first TE off the board no matter how much value I think he represents.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

 

[TWP]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

 

[Instinctive]

Just more players to not draft ever again.

This is terrible. What happened last season to all the people who took Ryan Grant in the 2nd round? They let him fall to me in the third because they'd "never draft him again." It costs you big time when you pull that kind of stuff, and the best thing to do is learn from mistakes...did I take him too high? Did I know he'd have a rookie QB? Did I know he was in a timeshare? Did I know he only produce dbecaus eof massive opportunity that may disappear?Then you can not repeat thos emistakes. Don't put names on the players until the last possible minute.

I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds. The NFL is a passing league and quality receiverscan be found in later rounds, not so for the RB's IMO.

I love this...kind of. If I'm in the 9-12 range and none of the RBs jump out at me, I'm going for Fitz/AJ/Wayne/combination. If I'm early, then at the 2/3 turn I'm looking for Wayne/Colston...so on and so on. I'm not ignoring a stud because I think I can get an ok fill-in later. BPA early, try to come out of the third round with a Stud at RB and WR, adn then the BPA RB or WR. (not necessarily in that order...)

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

I hate people who make those unhelpful..."well you're all dumb" comments. I know I'm not dumb...I seem to keep winning. Why don't you say why you think I'm wrong so I can see your point of view, and maybe that changes my perspective a bit and helps me out more? And I reply and it helps you out more? Isn't that what this whole foum is for?

 

[FantasyTrader]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

1. Definitely2. 2. Make sure you3. 3. QB by round4. will look for a top 5 qb in round 25. Will look to take RB, QB, Wr, TE in that order next year6. avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs7. I will no longer8. only keep players9. no more pure values picks10. no RBs older than 30, no guys coming back off major injury.11. Don't draft any Eagles12. going to forget the 'need a stud TE' rule13. I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds14. I will not takeI was talking about all of the above. Saying you absolutely won't do this or that eliminates options. And options are always a good thing.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I hate people who make those unhelpful..."well you're all dumb" comments. I know I'm not dumb...I seem to keep winning. Why don't you say why you think I'm wrong so I can see your point of view, and maybe that changes my perspective a bit and helps me out more? And I reply and it helps you out more? Isn't that what this whole foum is for?

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to come off snarky or imply you were dumb. Please accept my apology.

 

[kerpow]

My problem is that the main league I play in, almost all the guys take a QB early. 12 team league, 8 QBs gone by the end of the 3rd round. In previous years this has worked in my favour as I've been able to capitalise on a good RB2 or WR1 in the 2nd and 3rd round and pick up an average QB as late as the 6th round but this year it really bit me. Cutler and Gerrard were so inconsistent, I was practically flipping a coin.

Its too early to say what I'll do next year but I will different strategies some thought.

 

[TWP]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

1. Definitely2. 2. Make sure you3. 3. QB by round4. will look for a top 5 qb in round 25. Will look to take RB, QB, Wr, TE in that order next year6. avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs7. I will no longer8. only keep players9. no more pure values picks10. no RBs older than 30, no guys coming back off major injury.11. Don't draft any Eagles12. going to forget the 'need a stud TE' rule13. I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds14. I will not takeI was talking about all of the above. Saying you absolutely won't do this or that eliminates options. And options are always a good thing.

I had a feeling this is what you were alluding to. In general I agree (but I took a lot of these posts as venting more than as serious strategy posts). But I also think that if you read some of these posts generously they can be quite helpful. For example, instead of "Avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs" the poster probably meant something more like "Keep in mind that total team offensive production can have a big impact on even the most talented individual offensive player". That's actually pretty good advice, IMO.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

1. Definitely2. 2. Make sure you3. 3. QB by round4. will look for a top 5 qb in round 25. Will look to take RB, QB, Wr, TE in that order next year6. avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs7. I will no longer8. only keep players9. no more pure values picks10. no RBs older than 30, no guys coming back off major injury.11. Don't draft any Eagles12. going to forget the 'need a stud TE' rule13. I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds14. I will not takeI was talking about all of the above. Saying you absolutely won't do this or that eliminates options. And options are always a good thing.

I had a feeling this is what you were alluding to. In general I agree (but I took a lot of these posts as venting more than as serious strategy posts). But I also think that if you read some of these posts generously they can be quite helpful. For example, instead of "Avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs" the poster probably meant something more like "Keep in mind that total team offensive production can have a big impact on even the most talented individual offensive player". That's actually pretty good advice, IMO.

mmmm...maybe. I probably took it all too literally.

 

[Sarnoff]

One thing I am REALLY going to try to do is to stay away from players on teams that I think are going to be bad. Of course, I always draft VB but if there is a choice of almost equal, I want to go with the player on the team that I think is better.

After watching a season of Hard Knocks, I was pretty sure the Bengals would be awful. Yet when it came time for the sixth round and I still hadn't drafted an RB1, Cedric Benson was just sitting there, so I held my nose and picked him up.

 

[gonzobill5]

One thing I am REALLY going to try to do is to stay away from players on teams that I think are going to be bad. Of course, I always draft VB but if there is a choice of almost equal, I want to go with the player on the team that I think is better.

After watching a season of Hard Knocks, I was pretty sure the Bengals would be awful. Yet when it came time for the sixth round and I still hadn't drafted an RB1, Cedric Benson was just sitting there, so I held my nose and picked him up.

I see what you mean, but in the sixth round, a team's starting RB is rare so it doesn't matter what their team is like - you just are looking for a guy who gets touches. Imagine spending a pick in the 2nd - 4th on a guy like Calvin Johnson, Kevin Smith, Dwayne Bowe, Darren McFadden, or Braylon Edwards. Steven Jackson has been the one true exception this year.

 

[moleculo]

One thing I am REALLY going to try to do is to stay away from players on teams that I think are going to be bad. Of course, I always draft VB but if there is a choice of almost equal, I want to go with the player on the team that I think is better.

After watching a season of Hard Knocks, I was pretty sure the Bengals would be awful. Yet when it came time for the sixth round and I still hadn't drafted an RB1, Cedric Benson was just sitting there, so I held my nose and picked him up.

I see what you mean, but in the sixth round, a team's starting RB is rare so it doesn't matter what their team is like - you just are looking for a guy who gets touches. Imagine spending a pick in the 2nd - 4th on a guy like Calvin Johnson, Kevin Smith, Dwayne Bowe, Darren McFadden, or Braylon Edwards. Steven Jackson has been the one true exception this year.

last year, Detroit was worse than they were this year. CJohnson was WR3, and Kevin Smith was RB20 (as a rookie). KC was also worse, and Bowe was WR18. The Browns were pretty bad, and Braylon was WR33. This is normal variation - some guys will do better than we projected, others will do worse. Try not to make broad generalizations. Furthermore, if you could have predicted that CJohnson & McFadden would get hurt or Bowe would be suspended, you should be doing more important things than fantasy football. These things are more or less likely to happen to anyone in the league; because they happened to play on poor teams is coincidental. It should also be noted that any set of projections worth it's salt will take a perceived team ineptitude into account already; no need to discount further. The only thing you should do is adjust if you feel that a particular team will do better or worse than the projector apparently did, but that's a tough thing to figure out.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

The thing to remember is that you won't live or die by your draft. Your team is not set in stone. You can get the players you want. You have to be aggressive and not worry about perceived values.

I drafted team that I thought would be good. But I found out quickly that the good players were just on a hot streak. So I dealt a lot of them. Ended up with just 4 of my original drafted players going into the playoffs. I have worked to chisel out my ideal playoff lineup.

One thing I strongly agree with is in the accumulation of strong defenses. They are cheap and overlooked. New Orleans, and Philadelphia have taken me very far. One drafted in the 10th round, and the other plucked for free off the WW.

 

[TWP]

It should also be noted that any set of projections worth it's salt will take a perceived team ineptitude into account already; no need to discount further. The only thing you should do is adjust if you feel that a particular team will do better or worse than the projector apparently did, but that's a tough thing to figure out.

I think this is what people are really saying. That projectors, in general, don't give enough weight to the true crapiness of bad teams. SJax is probably the one example of a guy who is just SO good that he can overcome his offense's lack of TDs. But a lot of other people, that were discounted for being on a poor offense, are probably being hurt even more than anticipated by their offenses terribleness (and some injuries to QBs and/or O-linemen).

 

[moleculo]

It should also be noted that any set of projections worth it's salt will take a perceived team ineptitude into account already; no need to discount further. The only thing you should do is adjust if you feel that a particular team will do better or worse than the projector apparently did, but that's a tough thing to figure out.

I think this is what people are really saying. That projectors, in general, don't give enough weight to the true crapiness of bad teams. SJax is probably the one example of a guy who is just SO good that he can overcome his offense's lack of TDs. But a lot of other people, that were discounted for being on a poor offense, are probably being hurt even more than anticipated by their offenses terribleness (and some injuries to QBs and/or O-linemen).

well, that sort of begs the question - what makes a bad team bad, and is it possible to accurately gauge how bad a team will be?

 

[TWP]

I think DET, KC, OAK, and CLE were pretty easily predicted to not score a lot of offensive TDs this year... That's going to hurt their offensive player's fantasy values. Sure, this was taken into account by predictors. But looking at those teams (those are just the ones mentioned above) and their players' fantasy performances this year, I think the argument could be made that those players should have been discounted more. And I can't think of too many counter-examples (except for SJax as mentioned).

 

[Freakin'Farmer]

I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds. The NFL is a passing league and quality receiverscan be found in later rounds, not so for the RB's IMO.

I went WR-WR (Fitz and Wayne)in a PPR and while I made the playoffs I lost this past week. How many WRs out did those two this past week? I actually think I'll probably go VBD but will not go WR-WR.

 

[Freakin'Farmer]

The thing to remember is that you won't live or die by your draft. Your team is not set in stone. You can get the players you want. You have to be aggressive and not worry about perceived values.I drafted team that I thought would be good. But I found out quickly that the good players were just on a hot streak. So I dealt a lot of them. Ended up with just 4 of my original drafted players going into the playoffs. I have worked to chisel out my ideal playoff lineup.One thing I strongly agree with is in the accumulation of strong defenses. They are cheap and overlooked. New Orleans, and Philadelphia have taken me very far. One drafted in the 10th round, and the other plucked for free off the WW.

I picked up Denver and San Fran in the first couple of weeks off of waivers in a league where all 12 teams must carry 2 defenses. I now have Denver at home vs Oak this week and if I win I have SF vs Det in week 16. No need to take a defense early.

 

[1rebmun]

Lot of people learning bad habits in this thread.

Why dont you say what you think the bad habits are and why? Then instead of learning bad habits, the lots of people can be learning to avoid the bad habits (or maybe even discussing why they aren't bad habits)?

1. Definitely2. 2. Make sure you3. 3. QB by round4. will look for a top 5 qb in round 25. Will look to take RB, QB, Wr, TE in that order next year6. avoid teams I think are going to suck at all costs7. I will no longer8. only keep players9. no more pure values picks10. no RBs older than 30, no guys coming back off major injury.11. Don't draft any Eagles12. going to forget the 'need a stud TE' rule13. I WILL NOT go WR, WR in the first two rounds14. I will not takeI was talking about all of the above. Saying you absolutely won't do this or that eliminates options. And options are always a good thing.

I was number 4 and 5, and think I said Will look to take and look for...meaning I always leave my options open depending on how the draft is going, and were I am picking from.My league is high scoring, and every year the draft seems to be different in who/when players are being taken.QB and TE bruned me this year, and unless our scoring changes, as of now QB will move up on my list.

 

[Rovers]

I have one league that scores 6 for passing TD's, all the others are 4 points. Since I'll be picking around 9 or later (out of 12) no way I don't take the best QB left on the board in the 1st or 2nd rounds. After that, it will be WR or RB, depending on who is left on the board. In the 4 point/TD leagues, I won't go QB in the 1st, but I won't be afraid to take a QB after that next year.

I usually go RB heavy early, but won't next year with such a late pick. I'll likelt take more RB's with upside in the mid rounds. Players like T Jones, R Rice, R Williams fell this year. So did Grant. I'll plan to stock up on them in the mid rounds.

There are fewer and fewer "feature RB" teams in the NFL. Time to adjust. I'm sure CJ, ADP and Rice will go 1-2-3. After that, there are quite a few question marks.

I will think long and hard about drafting 2 RB's from the same team next year too. I was starting both Rice and MaGahee early this year, and it was golden. If the NFL goes RBBC, maybe I should too.

 

[Rounders]

I have one league that scores 6 for passing TD's, all the others are 4 points. Since I'll be picking around 9 or later (out of 12) no way I don't take the best QB left on the board in the 1st or 2nd rounds. After that, it will be WR or RB, depending on who is left on the board. In the 4 point/TD leagues, I won't go QB in the 1st, but I won't be afraid to take a QB after that next year.

I usually go RB heavy early, but won't next year with such a late pick. I'll likelt take more RB's with upside in the mid rounds. Players like T Jones, R Rice, R Williams fell this year. So did Grant. I'll plan to stock up on them in the mid rounds.

There are fewer and fewer "feature RB" teams in the NFL. Time to adjust. I'm sure CJ, ADP and Rice will go 1-2-3. After that, there are quite a few question marks.

I will think long and hard about drafting 2 RB's from the same team next year too. I was starting both Rice and MaGahee early this year, and it was golden. If the NFL goes RBBC, maybe I should too.

Excellent point. I would expect the the top RBs next year will be CJ, ADp, Rice, & MJD. Then a lot of committee runners. What I'm starting to think is you go two ways with strategy next year1) If you have top 5 pick, grab a workhorse RB, then fill in with BPA for rounds 2-4 regardless of position.

2) Load up on WRs late in the first round/early second round and then go heavy on RBs in mid rounds.

I think with the landscape of the NFL changing, FF is changing too....just got to figure out how to stay ahead of the curve.