Dynasty: the current RB pool is ATROCIOUS. (1 Viewer)

[Mistabishi]

I'm thinking that in dynasty leagues that are outdated and requiring 2 or 3 roster spots for RB the smart play is to hoard all the RBs from low interest teams that employ RBBC. Good ones for the future are the Browns and Dolphins. All of their RBs can be had for pennies on the dollar and you use your big moves for quality WRs. A good cheap option for the future may be the Vikings as Line and Gerhart could time share once AP retires or is traded or whatever happens to him. Even if he is there their touches should increase down the line. These are 20+ team league strategies as that's the only dynasties I play. I seem to be in rebuild mode in a lot of leagues and this seems to be an actionable strategy.

 

[Tool]

I'm thinking that in dynasty leagues that are outdated and requiring 2 or 3 roster spots for RB the smart play is to hoard all the RBs from low interest teams that employ RBBC. Good ones for the future are the Browns and Dolphins. All of their RBs can be had for pennies on the dollar and you use your big moves for quality WRs. A good cheap option for the future may be the Vikings as Line and Gerhart could time share once AP retires or is traded or whatever happens to him. Even if he is there their touches should increase down the line. These are 20+ team league strategies as that's the only dynasties I play. I seem to be in rebuild mode in a lot of leagues and this seems to be an actionable strategy.

i'm amazed at how little sense any of that made.

 

[Mistabishi]

I'm thinking that in dynasty leagues that are outdated and requiring 2 or 3 roster spots for RB the smart play is to hoard all the RBs from low interest teams that employ RBBC. Good ones for the future are the Browns and Dolphins. All of their RBs can be had for pennies on the dollar and you use your big moves for quality WRs. A good cheap option for the future may be the Vikings as Line and Gerhart could time share once AP retires or is traded or whatever happens to him. Even if he is there their touches should increase down the line. These are 20+ team league strategies as that's the only dynasties I play. I seem to be in rebuild mode in a lot of leagues and this seems to be an actionable strategy.

i'm amazed at how little sense any of that made.

It's a lot of thoughts into a little space. If rebuilding dynasty RBs you aren't going to be able to trade for one of a handful of studs and your chances of hitting a jackpot in the draft are low. Try cornering some promising backs on a team that is RBBC and starting more than one each week. I should have left out the AP tangent.

 

[johnb]

I think part of the reason the pool looks atrocious is folk's general obsession with age. People with Frank Gore and Reggie Bush on their team are probably doing pretty well right now, but others will point out a team with that pair is old. I understand that from a dynasty value standpoint that the assumption is guys are going to fall off a cliff, but when I start hearing that the new cutoff is 26 and apparently 29 for WR's since I've been told by leaguemates that those guys are old, I kind of chuckle a bit. Are people playing to win (which in general takes top players regardless of age) or have a young roster (wich in general will leave you with a mixed bag of development stages)?

We currently are blessed to be watching a generation of RB's that includes AP, Forte, Lynch, Charles, Rice, MJD, DeWill, Bush, Sproles, Gore, McCoy, Foster, and Johnson all relevant currently or in the past year. Throw in McGahee, SJax, Bradshaw, Spiller, and new hopes like Gio, Lacey, and Bell. Geez, how spoiled are we that we think that group is a tough group to play with? Sure, there is turnover at the position but there always will be. Which is a big reason in my mind that cutting your chances in half by saying guys past 26 don't count is a little silly.

I think the play is to stay flexible, keep an open mind, and use rankings as a guide not a rulebook. If people go just by rankings, they'll never own the Reggie Wayne's and Frank Gore's on their team. Instead they'll constantly be chasing the JStew's and McFadden's of the world watching the previously mentioned fellows they just trade away put up points in someone else's lineup.

I fully understand the pressure to factor in age pretty highly in dynasty rankings, but why is Fred Jackson in the 40's right now? Does anyone think a team doing well with him would trade him for Kendall Hunter at the moment? And that's where I think the idea this is a bad pool is not true. It's only bad if people need to feel secure making their rankings with a bunch of 23 year olds at the top.

 

[coolnerd]

Are people playing to win (which in general takes top players regardless of age) or have a young roster (wich in general will leave you with a mixed bag of development stages)?

In terms of this comment I believe there are a few problems:

1) Players who don't separate the ideas of play value versus trade value. Yes, a young good player is worth more than a old good player, but a good player is always worth more than a bad one.

2) players who are trying build a "dynasty" ...i.e the team that wins the league 3 of 5 years, but ignore building a team that competes week in, week out.

3) Overvaluing the superstar hit from the bottom of the roster (say J. Thomas Denver) , but ignoring their poor overall percentage in finding that guy.