hey guys. i've been playing casually for a while, but i'm looking to get a little more involved this year. as a result, i was hoping i could get some opinions on a new strategy that i want to explore.
as we all know, the number of True RB#1s has been dwindling over the past few seasons. for those of us who don't feel comfortable without at least 2 every-down backs, that means we need to either A) have a late pick and go RB-RB in the first two rounds or B) load up on handcuff RBs behind guys who are big injury risks. it seems like there are lots of teams with murky backfield situations (Pittsburgh, Arizona, Tampa Bay, Green Bay, NY Giants, San Francisco, Miami?, Detroit?), so my question is: will any of these teams produce a clear-cut starter?
i'm not trying to figure out which player will become the starter, i'm trying to figure out which SITUATION i should target. for example, i think we can all agree that the Carolina backfield will be split 50-50 between DWilliams and Stewart. it might end up 40-60 or it might end up 60-40, but you know that neither one is going to emerge as the go-to RB in Carolina. (i know that both of these guys are very talented, and capable of being decent fantasy backs even if they only get half the carries. at this point, i'm more concerned with finding guys who could be getting a majority of the carries for their team.) on the other hand it sounds like there are two major possibilities in Arizona. some people are saying that Ryan Williams is more talented and will dethrone Beanie Wells, while others say that Wells earned the starting spot with his performance last season and Williams will be relegated to the "relief" role (20-30% of the season carries). regardless, it sounds like grabbing Williams AND Wells is very likely to provide one every-week starter by the time Week 6 rolls around. similar situation in Tampa: some think Martin is going to come in and take over the lead role, while others think Blount will storm back and reclaim the spot within a few weeks. i don't hear many people predicting that Martin and Blount will be sharing carries once we get into October.
obviously, everybody wants to find a 20-touch RB with their late-round picks. that's not new. i'm just wondering if there's any way I can increase my chances by targeting two (or even three) backs from the same team. i'd much rather gamble on Wells and Williams in the 7th/10th than spring for a guy like Shonn Greene in the 5th.
basically, i need help identifying which teams/situations fit this description (like, "i think that there's a 90% chance that either Williams or Wells becomes the main guy in Arizona within the first month of the season" or "i think there's only a 40% chance that any of the Redskins backs--Royster, Helu, or Hightower--becomes the clear-cut RB in Washington"). if you want to be extra helpful, include your predictions for where the eventual "winner" fits on the fantasy spectrum (like, "i think that whoever wins the Cardinals job would probably be mid-level RB#2 in non-PPR and a low-end RB#2 in PPR.")
thanks in advance! and feel free to let me know if you think this strategy is obvious or stupid or already being discussed elsewhere.
as we all know, the number of True RB#1s has been dwindling over the past few seasons. for those of us who don't feel comfortable without at least 2 every-down backs, that means we need to either A) have a late pick and go RB-RB in the first two rounds or B) load up on handcuff RBs behind guys who are big injury risks. it seems like there are lots of teams with murky backfield situations (Pittsburgh, Arizona, Tampa Bay, Green Bay, NY Giants, San Francisco, Miami?, Detroit?), so my question is: will any of these teams produce a clear-cut starter?
i'm not trying to figure out which player will become the starter, i'm trying to figure out which SITUATION i should target. for example, i think we can all agree that the Carolina backfield will be split 50-50 between DWilliams and Stewart. it might end up 40-60 or it might end up 60-40, but you know that neither one is going to emerge as the go-to RB in Carolina. (i know that both of these guys are very talented, and capable of being decent fantasy backs even if they only get half the carries. at this point, i'm more concerned with finding guys who could be getting a majority of the carries for their team.) on the other hand it sounds like there are two major possibilities in Arizona. some people are saying that Ryan Williams is more talented and will dethrone Beanie Wells, while others say that Wells earned the starting spot with his performance last season and Williams will be relegated to the "relief" role (20-30% of the season carries). regardless, it sounds like grabbing Williams AND Wells is very likely to provide one every-week starter by the time Week 6 rolls around. similar situation in Tampa: some think Martin is going to come in and take over the lead role, while others think Blount will storm back and reclaim the spot within a few weeks. i don't hear many people predicting that Martin and Blount will be sharing carries once we get into October.
obviously, everybody wants to find a 20-touch RB with their late-round picks. that's not new. i'm just wondering if there's any way I can increase my chances by targeting two (or even three) backs from the same team. i'd much rather gamble on Wells and Williams in the 7th/10th than spring for a guy like Shonn Greene in the 5th.
basically, i need help identifying which teams/situations fit this description (like, "i think that there's a 90% chance that either Williams or Wells becomes the main guy in Arizona within the first month of the season" or "i think there's only a 40% chance that any of the Redskins backs--Royster, Helu, or Hightower--becomes the clear-cut RB in Washington"). if you want to be extra helpful, include your predictions for where the eventual "winner" fits on the fantasy spectrum (like, "i think that whoever wins the Cardinals job would probably be mid-level RB#2 in non-PPR and a low-end RB#2 in PPR.")
thanks in advance! and feel free to let me know if you think this strategy is obvious or stupid or already being discussed elsewhere.
