Do You Draft Need or Value in Rookie Drafts? (1 Viewer)

[Banemorth]

This isn't an AC thread. Not looking for advise as I already know what I'm going to do but I'm curious as to exactly what most of the SP would do in this situation.

Through some nice trading I've acquired picks 1.02, 1.03, 1.04, 1.06, 1.08, 1.12, and 2.03 in an upcoming 12 team rookie draft.

I have two solid QB's (Stafford and Cutler) and start QB/3WR/2RB/FLEX/TE/DEF/K but my RB's and WR's are a WASTELAND now. Assume this is a standard scoring PPR league.

So let's say this is how the draft plays out...

1.01 - Trent

1.02 - Blackmon

1.03 - Doug Martin

1.04 - David Wilson

1.05 - Andrew Luck

1.06 - Floyd

1.07 - Miller

1.08 - ???

So in this scenario RGIII has fallen to 1.08. I don't NEED RGIII I need WR's/RB's. In this position do you draft NEED (Taking Wright, Hill or Jeffrey) or do you draft VALUE and take RGIII?

 

[Wadsworth]

This isn't an AC thread. Not looking for advise as I already know what I'm going to do but I'm curious as to exactly what most of the SP would do in this situation.Through some nice trading I've acquired picks 1.02, 1.03, 1.04, 1.06, 1.08, 1.12, and 2.03 in an upcoming 12 team rookie draft.I have two solid QB's (Stafford and Cutler) and start QB/3WR/2RB/FLEX/TE/DEF/K but my RB's and WR's are a WASTELAND now. Assume this is a standard scoring PPR league.So let's say this is how the draft plays out...1.01 - Trent1.02 - Blackmon1.03 - Doug Martin1.04 - David Wilson1.05 - Andrew Luck1.06 - Floyd1.07 - Miller1.08 - ???So in this scenario RGIII has fallen to 1.08. I don't NEED RGIII I need WR's/RB's. In this position do you draft NEED (Taking Wright, Hill or Jeffrey) or do you draft VALUE and take RGIII?

I trade for need and draft for value.

 

[Warhogs]

My view in rookie drafts is that it is important for me to hit on as many guys as I can in a rookie draft so I draft to try to hit and will then trade to fill needs. If I think RGIII has a 40% chance of being a hit and Wright has a 15% chance then I take RGIII.

If I think there chances are pretty close I will then factor in need.

 

[mlball77]

A lot of variables factor in, imo. It's not just how likely they are to "hit," but also how big of a hit they can be. Player X might have a hit rate of 40% with an upside grade of a B+ while Player Y has a hit rate of 25% and an upside grade of an A. -For me, the A grade upside helps close some of the hit rate % gap between Players X and Y.

Also, posiitonal needs can be factored in, but I find that the most succesful teams seem to typically draft BPA in most cases. They might not need a TE, but if a highly rated one slides way too far, they take him; for example. -As one poster said, drafting based on talent and trading based on need seems like a sound approach. -Admittedly, I have a tough time throwing my team needs out the window during the draft and sticking with BPA. It's not easy for me, but I do think it is one of the better approaches.

Another thing to factor in, is positional value in your particular league. All leagues are different based on scoring, roster requirements, etc.; but even perception factors in, as this impacts trade value. If a given position is over valued or under valued in your league, you need to be aware of such and at least keep this in mind while drafting, imo.

 

[Warhogs]

A lot of variables factor in, imo. It's not just how likely they are to "hit," but also how big of a hit they can be. Player X might have a hit rate of 40% with an upside grade of a B+ while Player Y has a hit rate of 25% and an upside grade of an A. -For me, the A grade upside helps close some of the hit rate % gap between Players X and Y. Also, posiitonal needs can be factored in, but I find that the most succesful teams seem to typically draft BPA in most cases. They might not need a TE, but if a highly rated one slides way too far, they take him; for example. -As one poster said, drafting based on talent and trading based on need seems like a sound approach. -Admittedly, I have a tough time throwing my team needs out the window during the draft and sticking with BPA. It's not easy for me, but I do think it is one of the better approaches.Another thing to factor in, is positional value in your particular league. All leagues are different based on scoring, roster requirements, etc.; but even perception factors in, as this impacts trade value. If a given position is over valued or under valued in your league, you need to be aware of such and at least keep this in mind while drafting, imo.

This probably details my thinking more than what I had stated. In the end, the teams that win at fantasy football usually have several elite players. Good players are easy to find. When I said hit I meant become elite players not just solid starters.

 

[mlball77]

A lot of variables factor in, imo. It's not just how likely they are to "hit," but also how big of a hit they can be. Player X might have a hit rate of 40% with an upside grade of a B+ while Player Y has a hit rate of 25% and an upside grade of an A. -For me, the A grade upside helps close some of the hit rate % gap between Players X and Y. Also, posiitonal needs can be factored in, but I find that the most succesful teams seem to typically draft BPA in most cases. They might not need a TE, but if a highly rated one slides way too far, they take him; for example. -As one poster said, drafting based on talent and trading based on need seems like a sound approach. -Admittedly, I have a tough time throwing my team needs out the window during the draft and sticking with BPA. It's not easy for me, but I do think it is one of the better approaches.Another thing to factor in, is positional value in your particular league. All leagues are different based on scoring, roster requirements, etc.; but even perception factors in, as this impacts trade value. If a given position is over valued or under valued in your league, you need to be aware of such and at least keep this in mind while drafting, imo.

This probably details my thinking more than what I had stated. In the end, the teams that win at fantasy football usually have several elite players. Good players are easy to find. When I said hit I meant become elite players not just solid starters.

Ok, cool. Sounds like we're on the same page.

 

[pyite76]

I'd take Kendall Wright and be excited to have him.

 

[jurb26]

I try to draft value at all times. Need may serve as a tie-breaker but that is all.

Why are you not trying to trade the 1.02 or 1.03 pick to the highest bidder. You have a ton of leverage to a team in dire need of a QB. Hell, with the value of Luck and RG3, you could probably trade both picks for an AJ Green caliber WR.

 

[mlball77]

Banemorth, with your specific example, can you look at trading 1.08 to a team that might have major interest in RGIII? Maybe acquire a better WR option that way...

ETA: Just saw Jurb suggesting a trade as well. You really might get someone to overpay.

 

[ZWK]

Draft for value, trade to fill needs.

There's a pretty steep dropoff in value in the first round of a rookie draft, so if you pass on a player because he's not at a position of need you might end up with a guy who's only 3/4 as valuable (3/4 as likely to become elite, or has 3/4 the expected career VBD).

If I were in your position now, I'd be working the trade lines. See what you can get for your picks. See what you could get for RGIII after your draft (or if he's available when you're on the clock at 1.08). See what you could get for Luck. See what you could get for Stafford.

And if you can't make a deal now, I'd still strongly consider drafting Luck in the top 4 and/or Griffin later. They have a better shot at panning out than the other players that you could take there, and if you can't get good value for them in a trade now then you can wait till someone is willing to make a good offer and trade then.

 

[scothawk]

As the years go by I am leaning more and more towards BPA.

Your case is a little exreme given the amount of first round picks you have though!

As an aside, never draft a player assuming you can trade him for what you really want.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=635382&st=0&p=14156559&hl=rookie%20draft%20strategy&fromsearch=1entry14156559

Some additional reading on this topic

 

[Shutout]

BPA. always. Even if that meant taking Luck AND RGIII and forgoing WR or RB. At some point, the other shoes falls: NEED. SOmeone is going to look at your team with those 4 QBS sitting on it and fix all your needs.

 

[lbouchard]

Draft value always. Also, I would strongly recommend taking Lamar Miller over David Wilson.

 

[Nagle2998]

Everyone is different but IMO if I dont love a rookie at that pick I try to get a pick next plus something. Of course I look for the worse team in the league because you expect a higher pick. IMo in this draft there are 4 guys I really love so at my pick 7 if one of them isnt there I will move the pick I wont just grab someone to do it.

 

[Zimm]

Everyone is different but IMO if I dont love a rookie at that pick I try to get a pick next plus something. Of course I look for the worse team in the league because you expect a higher pick. IMo in this draft there are 4 guys I really love so at my pick 7 if one of them isnt there I will move the pick I wont just grab someone to do it.

You sure do love those draft picks for the following year don't you haha.

 

[coolnerd]

As the years go by I am leaning more and more towards BPA.

Your case is a little exreme given the amount of first round picks you have though!

As an aside, never draft a player assuming you can trade him for what you really want.

This seems to vary from league to league for me. In lesser activity legues, I almost have to lean need because the trades are not there. In those with bunches of wheeler dealers, I can barely hold off dudes that I actually want for the multitude offers.

 

[Banemorth]

As the years go by I am leaning more and more towards BPA.

Your case is a little exreme given the amount of first round picks you have though!

As an aside, never draft a player assuming you can trade him for what you really want.

This seems to vary from league to league for me. In lesser activity legues, I almost have to lean need because the trades are not there. In those with bunches of wheeler dealers, I can barely hold off dudes that I actually want for the multitude offers.

This is my position. I'm currently offering the pick to teams that I deem QB needy. I'm not getting much action though. Only offer I've had is from a guy who really need RB's who I obviously would rather not trade the pick to. If Griffin is there at 1.08 though and I can't move the pick I'll have to take him.

 

[thriftyrocker]

There's 2 things about this specific situation

1) RG3 is a tier or two above all the WR and RB available. You can favor need within tiers (Martin over Floyd) but not between tiers (Pead over Floyd).

2) You still have picks 1.12 and 2.3 to take WR or RB or trade for undervalued vets. The tougher question is what to do if you don't have the extra picks.

 

[Steed]

NEED is a terrible talent evaluator and an even worse decision maker.

 

[Sabertooth]

You can lock down your needs before the draft. You cannot lock down "value." NFL talent evaluators cannot lock down "value." Tom Brady is the poster child for this. When they drafted him, nobody said it was a "value" pick. We often kid ourselves into thinking we know how good a player will be by projecting them off youtube highlights and Russ Lande. But we don't know ####. It is shown year after year.

So draft for need. Because you might just get a player that can help you. Say you need a good RB. You draft a RB and he may or may not be a good RB in the NFL. You draft a wideout, he definitely will not be a good RB in the NFL.

 

[Banemorth]

You can lock down your needs before the draft. You cannot lock down "value." NFL talent evaluators cannot lock down "value." Tom Brady is the poster child for this. When they drafted him, nobody said it was a "value" pick. We often kid ourselves into thinking we know how good a player will be by projecting them off youtube highlights and Russ Lande. But we don't know ####. It is shown year after year.

So draft for need. Because you might just get a player that can help you. Say you need a good RB. You draft a RB and he may or may not be a good RB in the NFL. You draft a wideout, he definitely will not be a good RB in the NFL.

That was uncharacteristically deep for a SP post. I really like that.

 

[Shanahanigans]

Depends on the players involved but in general I roll with the best player available.

 

[johnadams]

I don't have any hard and fast rules, but in general, I draft need balanced by value. Problem is, I always need another stud RB, so I tend to overdraft RBs. Granted, if there is a steep drop between the best available WR and RB, I'll take the WR. As for QB, I don't usually draft them, unless I'm getting exceptional value or I have a very deep need. I don't bother with TEs at all, though I'm rethinking that right now.

 

[GreatLakesMike]

Draft Best Player available in any type of draft. All things being even, sure, draft by need.

 

[Donsmith753]

BPA,

I'm sitting at 1.03 in a 16 team .5 PPR and I'm taking RG3.

I already have Rodgers although this maybe isn't a great example as my WRs are strong too. Point being I'm taking the guy I think will be most valuable going forward. In a 16 teamer that's the elite QB.

 

[Zimm]

I always draft value over need no matter what because i end up making 10-15 trades during the season anyway.

 

[Shutout]

You can lock down your needs before the draft. You cannot lock down "value." NFL talent evaluators cannot lock down "value." Tom Brady is the poster child for this. When they drafted him, nobody said it was a "value" pick. We often kid ourselves into thinking we know how good a player will be by projecting them off youtube highlights and Russ Lande. But we don't know ####. It is shown year after year. So draft for need. Because you might just get a player that can help you. Say you need a good RB. You draft a RB and he may or may not be a good RB in the NFL. You draft a wideout, he definitely will not be a good RB in the NFL.

WOW. I am going to completely reverse/revamp my thoughts on this. I always say BPA (said it just above actually), but I am really thinking about this and Every year, I take the BPA (my opinion of who that is) and because I am an active trader, I usually end up with what I NEED, regardless. So if I have two QBS and draft another, its just a matter of time before one of them becomes a WR or whatever. But when looking at it the way you put it, I can truly see it having legs as long as you go with it along with this caveat: There ARE some guys that are obvious exceptions. We may not know if DeSean Jackson was going to pan out and Knowshonn Moreno wasn't, but we ALL KNEW Calvin, Fitz, and some guys are going to.

 

[DexterDew]

question to all those that say draft value over need: would any of you seriously consider drafting Luck and RG3?

personally, i've thought about it in one league (12 teamer), but will likely shop the pick or take a "need"

 

[eaglesfan7]

Bpa always. Drafting for needs rarely works out because the drop off in value can be huge. I've learned over the years to draft bpa by drafting for needs and those players not panning out.

 

[Sabertooth]

You can lock down your needs before the draft. You cannot lock down "value." NFL talent evaluators cannot lock down "value." Tom Brady is the poster child for this. When they drafted him, nobody said it was a "value" pick. We often kid ourselves into thinking we know how good a player will be by projecting them off youtube highlights and Russ Lande. But we don't know ####. It is shown year after year. So draft for need. Because you might just get a player that can help you. Say you need a good RB. You draft a RB and he may or may not be a good RB in the NFL. You draft a wideout, he definitely will not be a good RB in the NFL.

WOW. I am going to completely reverse/revamp my thoughts on this. I always say BPA (said it just above actually), but I am really thinking about this and Every year, I take the BPA (my opinion of who that is) and because I am an active trader, I usually end up with what I NEED, regardless. So if I have two QBS and draft another, its just a matter of time before one of them becomes a WR or whatever. But when looking at it the way you put it, I can truly see it having legs as long as you go with it along with this caveat: There ARE some guys that are obvious exceptions. We may not know if DeSean Jackson was going to pan out and Knowshonn Moreno wasn't, but we ALL KNEW Calvin, Fitz, and some guys are going to.

There are a few. I think Luck and Richardson are the guys this year. That's why I package Flynn, 5, and 7 for the Number 1 pick this year. This being a 2QB league where I have a loaded team. And I think I'm still going Richardson.

 

[Sabertooth]

Bpa always. Drafting for needs rarely works out because the drop off in value can be huge. I've learned over the years to draft bpa by drafting for needs and those players not panning out.

How do you determine value so accurately when even scouts miss the boat all half the time? I want your newsletter.

 

[eaglesfan7]

Bpa always. Drafting for needs rarely works out because the drop off in value can be huge. I've learned over the years to draft bpa by drafting for needs and those players not panning out.

How do you determine value so accurately when even scouts miss the boat all half the time? I want your newsletter.

Just as scouts do you follow game tape and scouting reports and do as much research as possible. No one ever gets them all right but that's another reason you draft based on who you 'think' is the bpa. Getting it right less than half the time is just another reason to draft bpa. Even drafting by needs means you're still going to draft the bpa at that position so you're still likely to get it wrong more than half the time and you risk even more by passing on a player who could possess much more talent and be less of a risk.

 

[ZWK]

Bpa always. Drafting for needs rarely works out because the drop off in value can be huge. I've learned over the years to draft bpa by drafting for needs and those players not panning out.

How do you determine value so accurately when even scouts miss the boat all half the time? I want your newsletter.

If you draft a RB based on need, how do you decide which RB to take? Somehow you manage to estimate the value of each of the RBs in order to make your best guess about who is the best running back available.To go BPA, you do the same thing but include the players at the other positions too.

 

[Sabertooth]

Bpa always. Drafting for needs rarely works out because the drop off in value can be huge. I've learned over the years to draft bpa by drafting for needs and those players not panning out.

How do you determine value so accurately when even scouts miss the boat all half the time? I want your newsletter.

If you draft a RB based on need, how do you decide which RB to take? Somehow you manage to estimate the value of each of the RBs in order to make your best guess about who is the best running back available.To go BPA, you do the same thing but include the players at the other positions too.

I meant positionally go by need. Obviously you have to rank the players in order of preference within their positions. But as far as draft order, going with what you need (unless you need multiple players then you have to rank the positions by importance) is a better way to fill your team out. Of course trades work for this too and drafting BPPA (Best Perceived Player Available) might net you more. For instance if you need a TE badly, drafting Richardson and trading him for Graham would be better.

 

[Crazy Tony]

Take TALENT

And I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks.

Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.

Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever.

There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available.

Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want.

You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??

TRY THIS

1. Trent Richardson #1 RB

2. Luck #1 QB

3. RG3 #2 QB

4. BLACKMON... #1WR

5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?

6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....

7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken

8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT

9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery

10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery

11.

12. Take a RB.

RD2.

1

2

3. RB

In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3.

THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky.

The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs.

If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked.

I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.

Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc.

I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

 

[Touchdown There]

This isn't an AC thread. Not looking for advise as I already know what I'm going to do but I'm curious as to exactly what most of the SP would do in this situation.Through some nice trading I've acquired picks 1.02, 1.03, 1.04, 1.06, 1.08, 1.12, and 2.03 in an upcoming 12 team rookie draft.I have two solid QB's (Stafford and Cutler) and start QB/3WR/2RB/FLEX/TE/DEF/K but my RB's and WR's are a WASTELAND now. Assume this is a standard scoring PPR league.So let's say this is how the draft plays out...1.01 - Trent1.02 - Blackmon1.03 - Doug Martin1.04 - David Wilson1.05 - Andrew Luck1.06 - Floyd1.07 - Miller1.08 - ???So in this scenario RGIII has fallen to 1.08. I don't NEED RGIII I need WR's/RB's. In this position do you draft NEED (Taking Wright, Hill or Jeffrey) or do you draft VALUE and take RGIII?

Your 1.04 pick will be very valuable to someone in your league that does not have a QB. I would look to move it closer to your draft.

 

[Banemorth]

Take TALENTAnd I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks. Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever. There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available. Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want. You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??TRY THIS1. Trent Richardson #1 RB2. Luck #1 QB3. RG3 #2 QB4. BLACKMON... #1WR5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery11.12. Take a RB. RD2. 123. RB In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3. THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky. The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs. If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked. I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc. I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

I understand and appreciate what you're saying but if I'm sitting on Stafford, Cutler, Luck, AND RGIII I can only start one. Unless you're saying draft them and trade them.Here's my RB's...Brinkley, Curtis SDC RB Choice, Tashard BUF RBHillis, Peyton KCC RB Jackson, Brandon CLE RB Johnson, Jeremiah DEN RB Jones, Taiwan OAK RB Ridley, Stevan NEP RBSo I'd rather try to get a starting caliber RB than QB's I can sit on. I was offered the 1.01 for my 1.02 and 1.03. I'm trying to get a little extra value though.

 

[Pipes]

Take TALENTAnd I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks. Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever. There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available. Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want. You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??TRY THIS1. Trent Richardson #1 RB2. Luck #1 QB3. RG3 #2 QB4. BLACKMON... #1WR5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery11.12. Take a RB. RD2. 123. RB In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3. THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky. The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs. If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked. I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc. I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

I understand and appreciate what you're saying but if I'm sitting on Stafford, Cutler, Luck, AND RGIII I can only start one. Unless you're saying draft them and trade them.Here's my RB's...Brinkley, Curtis SDC RB Choice, Tashard BUF RBHillis, Peyton KCC RB Jackson, Brandon CLE RB Johnson, Jeremiah DEN RB Jones, Taiwan OAK RB Ridley, Stevan NEP RBSo I'd rather try to get a starting caliber RB than QB's I can sit on. I was offered the 1.01 for my 1.02 and 1.03. I'm trying to get a little extra value though.

With the RB's you have I'd jump all over that trade. Richardson is head and shoulders above any other RB in this draft and from this post you need help there. I like Crazy Tony's thoughts. You'll eventually be able to trade one of those QB's and I don't see a great RB outside of Richardson in this crop.

 

[Touchdown There]

Take TALENTAnd I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks. Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever. There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available. Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want. You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??TRY THIS1. Trent Richardson #1 RB2. Luck #1 QB3. RG3 #2 QB4. BLACKMON... #1WR5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery11.12. Take a RB. RD2. 123. RB In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3. THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky. The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs. If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked. I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc. I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

I understand and appreciate what you're saying but if I'm sitting on Stafford, Cutler, Luck, AND RGIII I can only start one. Unless you're saying draft them and trade them.Here's my RB's...Brinkley, Curtis SDC RB Choice, Tashard BUF RBHillis, Peyton KCC RB Jackson, Brandon CLE RB Johnson, Jeremiah DEN RB Jones, Taiwan OAK RB Ridley, Stevan NEP RBSo I'd rather try to get a starting caliber RB than QB's I can sit on. I was offered the 1.01 for my 1.02 and 1.03. I'm trying to get a little extra value though.

With the RB's you have I'd jump all over that trade. Richardson is head and shoulders above any other RB in this draft and from this post you need help there. I like Crazy Tony's thoughts. You'll eventually be able to trade one of those QB's and I don't see a great RB outside of Richardson in this crop.

What QBs does the team holding the 1.1 have rostered?

 

[POLITE ALL CAPS GUY]

I DRAFT FOR VALUE AND TRADE TO FILL THE NEED FOR THE MOST PART, BUT THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO EVERY SITUATION!

 

[az_prof]

Unless you are in a start 2 QB league, or a 14 team league or larger, there is NO reason to draft ANY QB higher than 1.5 or so.

 

[Tony Soprano]

Take TALENTAnd I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks. Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever. There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available. Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want. You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??TRY THIS1. Trent Richardson #1 RB2. Luck #1 QB3. RG3 #2 QB4. BLACKMON... #1WR5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery11.12. Take a RB. RD2. 123. RB In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3. THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky. The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs. If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked. I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc. I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

Outstanding post. In regards to the 1.01 for the 1.02 and 1.03.... Counter with the 1.02 and a later first rounder.

 

[Touchdown There]

Take TALENTAnd I think your short MOCK Draft is a big mistake the way you're looking at it. You control enough picks to drive talent down to other picks. Generally, I focus on QBs. WRs..then RBs... but top picks are always...take the potentially ELITE players. I missed last year on Cam Newton Just was not sure if he was elite with lack of game footage. I took Greg Little. Whoops. So now I get to Watch NEWTON on some other dude's roster for as long as he plays.Do you want to be the guy with 6 first round picks that didn't take RG3 or LUCK? I don't care if you have 2 QBs. Take. Them. Both. If you're not sure which is better take them both so you have luxury of finding out if one is the best player ever. There's no reason to allow someone at #7 pick to get that high caliber of player. Make them pick between the best #3RB/WR available. Besides, if you take both of them. You can still get the other players you want. You're taking BLACKMON/MARTIN/WILSON/FLOYD and hoping RG3 falls to #8??TRY THIS1. Trent Richardson #1 RB2. Luck #1 QB3. RG3 #2 QB4. BLACKMON... #1WR5. #2 RB probably gets drafted here. Martin/Wilson/Miller?6. #2 RB Martin if still available or #2 WR FLOYD....7. #3 RB Wilson/Miller or #2WR FLoyd taken8. #3 RB or #3 WR You get MILLER or WRIGHT9. #3 QB/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery10. #4Qb/WR/RB Wright/Hill/Jeffery11.12. Take a RB. RD2. 123. RB In this Scenario...you get Blackmon, Martin or FLoyd. Wilson or Miller and Luck and RG3. THINK 2 Years from now with your picks and roster decisions. Don't make short sighted moves sacrifices future wins to 'win now or during bye weeks' where you have to drop a player with upside and plug in a bye week filler that doesn't have long term value. QBs can last 10+ yrs. WRs can produce at top levels for 7-10yrs while RBs are 5yrs and that's lucky. The RBs can be awesome but are more likely to get injured. SO...you draft QB/WR when it makes sense and go steal handcuffs. If I got LUCK/RG3/BLACKMON/FLOYD and 1 of Martin/Wilson/Miller I'd be pretty stoked. I'm active enough to find the sleeper because these shark pool guys point them out.Guys like Hillman, Jewel Hampton etc. I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

Outstanding post. In regards to the 1.01 for the 1.02 and 1.03.... Counter with the 1.02 and a later first rounder.

The guy at the 1.01 probably wants Luck or RG3 anyway. You should be able to pull this off.

 

[Christo]

Unless you are in a start 2 QB league, or a 14 team league or larger, there is NO reason to draft ANY QB higher than 1.5 or so.

Ridiculous. If you have the 1.01 and you think Luck is going to have the best fantasy career out of all players in this draft and you can't move down you draft Luck.

 

[bonesman]

I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

That team in your sig is pretty bad for a 10 teamer. You gonna be adding Richardson to that team or do you have the 2nd or 3rd?

 

[Crazy Tony]

I'm glad I read this and saved you from making a big mistake ;-)

That team in your sig is pretty bad for a 10 teamer. You gonna be adding Richardson to that team or do you have the 2nd or 3rd?

The team in my Signature took 2nd in 2010 and 9th in 2011. It's not super impressive but it's impressive how far it's come from what I inherited. I had to rebuild the team twice. Once to acquire a legit QB to build around and another after that. Still building and filling holes. I missed on some draft picks and some trades didn't work out. Plus we have large rosters where everyone can hoard players. I have the #2 overall pick. I'll be taking LUCK. #2.02 Maybe Tannehill or Pead. #5 pick Hardesty didn't workout...got hurt missed a year. Then last year was in RBBC...now the best RB in the draft was taken. So bummer. I was wrong on McCluster. and overlooked CAM Newton for Greg Little at #6 spot...but so did 5 other people.I trade Lynch/Britt in 2009 for Steve Smith NYG. That was a mistake. I was impatient. I dropped Freeman in 2008 or 2009 because of a bye-week issue and someone else grabbed him. He was hurt. That was impatient, Bad choice. Vick was on FA list, I had Kolb, and chose some other deep sleeper. Vick was grabbed before I could change my mind and Kolb got hurt that week. I still traded Kolb for #6 2011. (Little). Draft picks I got right1.4 Forte2.7 Desean Jackson1.5 McCoy -Traded for Harvin/Gates2.6 Kenny Britt3.5 Josh Freeman 1.5 Hardesty: Wrong since he got hurt. 1.07 traded for 12/13 overall Good. 1.09 McCluster...so far mistake but has helped me rebuild w his WR/RB dual status. 2.02 Gerhart...Whoops. I liked him though. 2.03 Bradford Great Pick2.08 Hernandez Great Pick2.09 E Decker Great Pick3.05 J Ringer. Traded w/ R Jennings for McGahee....McGahee traded for 2.02+...Good pickI picked up LBlount on Waivers this year or previous year prior to TB trade.I didn't really miss on players (Top 5 were taken...BTate,ABenn GTate,#10DThomas, JClausen Jstarks 4.07 J.Ford 5.06, Tebow 5.07)20111.06 LIttle TBD Missed on Newton1.09 DMurray Good choice3.05 V Brown3.06 L Kendrick3.09 G Salas4.02 JuThomasDem.Thomas was on waivers this year but I didn't win it. (Jordy Nelson was taken 5.02 someone also dropped Laurent Robinson)There's tons of talent out there. I've guess right on my fair share. I've traded when i thought it was a good idea. Now, I try to draft and build and creep up. I'm more patient these last few years which really helps. I try to get into CRANK scoring etc. It works for me. Not always but usually.

 

[sspunisher]

Now here's the real question, you got Rodgers as your dynasty QB and RGIII is the best player available at say...1.07. You still go BPA knowing RGIII will be sitting on your bench for the next X years?

Personally, the ONLY way I take RGIII is if I'm in a league where I'm convinced I can trade him. I usually exclude QB's from my BPA strategy b/c most of the time I have a top 5 QB that won't ever see my bench.

 

[Synesthesia]

Now here's the real question, you got Rodgers as your dynasty QB and RGIII is the best player available at say...1.07. You still go BPA knowing RGIII will be sitting on your bench for the next X years? Personally, the ONLY way I take RGIII is if I'm in a league where I'm convinced I can trade him. I usually exclude QB's from my BPA strategy b/c most of the time I have a top 5 QB that won't ever see my bench.

Draft for value, trade for need. If you're in a league that doesn't trade (either it's against the rules, or you just know from history that nobody will trade), then you have to start taking need into consideration when you draft. Otherwise... well, I've got Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, the #4, and the #5, and if Luck/Griffin are both still there, I'm not going to hesitate before taking them back-to-back. But, of course, I know from experience that I can always trade one of my QBs later if I have a need somewhere else.

 

[renesauz]

What's wrong with trying to trade/move around so that the BPA is at your postion of need? Ideally...that's the answer.

I have no problem with going need over (perceived) value, as long as the player selected isn't an obviously inferior prospect. I'm not passing on an NFL draft 2nd round WR to take a 5th round RB even if I'm fat at WR and desperate at RB.

I don't think either extreme (always need or always "value") is the right answer. Every situation is unique, some needs are more desperate than others, some drafts are deeper than others at the need position, some prospects are elite and should always go first regardless of need, and some needs are so desperate only an elite prospect can sway me to go against my need (in SOME leagues...in others, trade partners are easier to find and needs are never so desperate!)

Call it 50-50 need-value.