First Round Rookie Draft Pick Tiers (1 Viewer)

[Max Power]

Want to get a feel on owners thoughts on this pre draft. I think this will help owners trying to trade for picks as the players values are likely to change post draft. As I see it...

Tier 1

1.01 aka Richardson

Tier 2

1.02

1.03

1.04

(Luck, RG3, Blackmon)

Tier 3

1.05 (RB that lands in the best starting situation)

Tier 4

1.06

1.07

1.08

(Floyd and RBs)

Tier 5

1.09

1.10

1.11

1.12

(The best of the rest to round out the first)

I don't see tier 5 as being much better than the early part of round 2 at this point.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

For me, Doug Martin is already in Tier 3 and has a chance to move up to 2 if on the right team.

And, as you had stated, the other RBs have a chance to move into Tier 3 as well.

 

[MAC_32]

Richardson

---

Blackmon

RG3

Luck

Martin

Miller

---

Floyd

Wright

(big drop off)

If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

 

[Max Power]

For me, Doug Martin is already in Tier 3 and has a chance to move up to 2 if on the right team. And, as you had stated, the other RBs have a chance to move into Tier 3 as well.

What makes Martin better than Wilson or Miller?

 

[Max Power]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

 

[MAC_32]

For me, Doug Martin is already in Tier 3 and has a chance to move up to 2 if on the right team. And, as you had stated, the other RBs have a chance to move into Tier 3 as well.

What makes Martin better than Wilson or Miller?

Miller has more upside, but his lack of experience in the passing game keeps him a notch below Martin in my book. There just aren't any weaknesses in Martin's game. Wilson's a hell of an athlete, but his play on the field is very inconsistent. I'm not comfortable with him if my team needs a starter.

 

[MAC_32]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

Allen is the only one I'd feel comfortable being in the same conversation as this top 5. There's a mess at RB, but one or two will probably emerge. A lot of upside, but a lot of question marks within them. I like Woods too, but can't see me ranking him any higher than Floyd and Wright. Barkley isn't as strong as RG3 or Luck, he was the clear #3 QB imho before he went back to school.So, as long as I don't think I'll have a top 3 pick I'd make the move. If you make the playoffs this season you clearly win the deal. This is the best fantasy draft class since 2008 imho.

 

[plastik]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

There are more RBs to consider than just Lattimore... Christine Michael, Montee Ball, maybe Dyer and Eddie Lacy.

 

[nickdib]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

Allen is the only one I'd feel comfortable being in the same conversation as this top 5. There's a mess at RB, but one or two will probably emerge. A lot of upside, but a lot of question marks within them. I like Woods too, but can't see me ranking him any higher than Floyd and Wright. Barkley isn't as strong as RG3 or Luck, he was the clear #3 QB imho before he went back to school.So, as long as I don't think I'll have a top 3 pick I'd make the move. If you make the playoffs this season you clearly win the deal. This is the best fantasy draft class since 2008 imho.

What about montee ball next year? When people thought he was coming out this year I remember he was ranked pretty high

 

[BigSteelThrill]

For me, Doug Martin is already in Tier 3 and has a chance to move up to 2 if on the right team. And, as you had stated, the other RBs have a chance to move into Tier 3 as well.

What makes Martin better than Wilson or Miller?

Just love his combination of thickness, strength and elite on the field shake-and-bake. But I can certainly see why people like the others even more so, they may tend to value other skills sets (like pure speed) more.

 

[Max Power]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

Allen is the only one I'd feel comfortable being in the same conversation as this top 5. There's a mess at RB, but one or two will probably emerge. A lot of upside, but a lot of question marks within them. I like Woods too, but can't see me ranking him any higher than Floyd and Wright. Barkley isn't as strong as RG3 or Luck, he was the clear #3 QB imho before he went back to school.So, as long as I don't think I'll have a top 3 pick I'd make the move. If you make the playoffs this season you clearly win the deal. This is the best fantasy draft class since 2008 imho.

Thanks man, this is really good posting. Most people dont want to make such a firm prediction this far in advance. Even if its wrong, at least its something. I think Barkley is going to be the first player off the board next year. He should be ranked with Luck and RG3 in the rankings this season. In the conversation, but fine if you rank him 3. Call me crazy, but I think Lattimer can be the next back of his generation. Allen already has his own thread here and seems to be the best WR in 2013 already. So yeah, top3 is going be a great group. outside of that is a question as always.

 

[Max Power]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

Allen is the only one I'd feel comfortable being in the same conversation as this top 5. There's a mess at RB, but one or two will probably emerge. A lot of upside, but a lot of question marks within them. I like Woods too, but can't see me ranking him any higher than Floyd and Wright. Barkley isn't as strong as RG3 or Luck, he was the clear #3 QB imho before he went back to school.So, as long as I don't think I'll have a top 3 pick I'd make the move. If you make the playoffs this season you clearly win the deal. This is the best fantasy draft class since 2008 imho.

What about montee ball next year? When people thought he was coming out this year I remember he was ranked pretty high

I was high on Ball, but he got a third round grade by the draft board. I dont see how he can improve on his 2011 season to really increase that stock. He might be a solid player in the NFL, but is Ball in 2013 worth something you can roster in the first half of the draft this season?

 

[Kleck]

Richardson

Martin

Floyd

Blackmon

RG3

Luck

Wright

Miller

Wilson

Polk

 

[Max Power]

RichardsonMartinFloydBlackmonRG3LuckWrightMillerWilsonPolk

Luck and RG3 after the second tier WRs and RB? I think I'd rather take my chance on the QBs of the generation...

 

[loose circuits]

RichardsonMartinFloydBlackmonRG3LuckWrightMillerWilsonPolk

agree with your tiers...Surprised that people don't like the tier after that either. Some make up of:HillJefferyTurbinPierceRandleCrinerL. JamesTannehillbetween those 8 guys, a few of them are gonna end up in juicy situations and make that 1.11 and 1.12 pick very attractive...I also don't think you can go wrong in the 2nd round of this draft. There are a few others I'd throw into that tier as well, but I don't want to tip off my leaguemates who read about everything I write because I believe belong on usually mentioned with those guys

 

[plastik]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

There are more RBs to consider than just Lattimore... Christine Michael, Montee Ball, maybe Dyer and Eddie Lacy.

...and Knile Davis. I think it could be a very good RB class next year.

 

[MAC_32]

Richardson---BlackmonRG3LuckMartinMiller---FloydWright(big drop off)If you're on the back end of round 1 and all of these guys are gone by your pick I'd recommend trying to trade your #1 and #3 for a future #1. But if you're sitting on the back end of round #1, to avoid this, I'd offer your #1 and future #1 to move up before the draft.

I agree with moving an extra pick along with a late first to move up. What I question is how the 2013 draft is going to shake out. Seems like early reports have 2-3 quality QB, 1-3 WRs, and 1 RB (assuming Lattimer recovers). So bottom line... if you think you'll be good in 2013, move that pick for a mid 2012?

Allen is the only one I'd feel comfortable being in the same conversation as this top 5. There's a mess at RB, but one or two will probably emerge. A lot of upside, but a lot of question marks within them. I like Woods too, but can't see me ranking him any higher than Floyd and Wright. Barkley isn't as strong as RG3 or Luck, he was the clear #3 QB imho before he went back to school.So, as long as I don't think I'll have a top 3 pick I'd make the move. If you make the playoffs this season you clearly win the deal. This is the best fantasy draft class since 2008 imho.

What about montee ball next year? When people thought he was coming out this year I remember he was ranked pretty high

Good player, really like him, but he's not in the same class as the top 8 this year.

 

[MAC_32]

RichardsonMartinFloydBlackmonRG3LuckWrightMillerWilsonPolk

agree with your tiers...Surprised that people don't like the tier after that either. Some make up of:HillJefferyTurbinPierceRandleCrinerL. JamesTannehillbetween those 8 guys, a few of them are gonna end up in juicy situations and make that 1.11 and 1.12 pick very attractive...I also don't think you can go wrong in the 2nd round of this draft. There are a few others I'd throw into that tier as well, but I don't want to tip off my leaguemates who read about everything I write because I believe belong on usually mentioned with those guys

I like the end of round 2 more than the end of round 1/beginning of round 2. Guys like Hill, Jeffrey, Wilson, Randle, etc. will go end of round 1/early round 2 and I would rather have Pierce, Criner, or James in round 2. Maybe even Tannehill too, we'll see where he goes.

 

[Hoosier16]

I think you can eliminate tier 3 and move that RB up into tier 2. I'd prefer that RB over the QBs and I think there are others who view QBs the same way.

 

[BigTex]

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

I think you can eliminate tier 3 and move that RB up into tier 2. I'd prefer that RB over the QBs and I think there are others who view QBs the same way.

It has been an interesting phenomenon watching perceived QB values rise recently. In 14+ team leagues QBs carry a premium, but not so much in 10-12 team leagues. Sure the league is more of a passing league, but a rising tide lifts all boats. There are still only a few QBs that are above all the rest, then there is a very deep 2nd tier. The chances that Luck and RGIII become elite is <50%, IMO, and even less likely inside of 3 years. Good QBs aren't that difficult to acquire. I just don't see why the rookie QBs are carrying the premium that they are.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I think you can eliminate tier 3 and move that RB up into tier 2. I'd prefer that RB over the QBs and I think there are others who view QBs the same way.

It has been an interesting phenomenon watching perceived QB values rise recently. In 14+ team leagues QBs carry a premium, but not so much in 10-12 team leagues. Sure the league is more of a passing league, but a rising tide lifts all boats. There are still only a few QBs that are above all the rest, then there is a very deep 2nd tier. The chances that Luck and RGIII become elite is <50%, IMO, and even less likely inside of 3 years. Good QBs aren't that difficult to acquire. I just don't see why the rookie QBs are carrying the premium that they are.

Agreed.I think the thing that people aren't getting is that unless you play in a very large league or a 2 QB league the rookie QBs essentially HAVE to become the next Aaron Rodgers to be worth a pick that high. Not only that, but they have to do what the elite QBs did this year repeatedly, not just once.Everyone says that Luck is the next Peyton Manning. If Andrew Luck puts up Peyton Manning's typical yearly stats then he's a bust as a high rookie pick. Peyton was such a great FF commodity because he was throwing for 4000/28 when not many others were. Now everyone is doing it. If Luck throws for 4000/28 every year then he's a bust from an FF standpoint because in a 12 team one QB league, everyone has a starting QB that does that. Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, Big Ben, etc all do that and you can acquire them for a song.For rookie QBs there is no room for error if you draft them high. They're either an elite top 2 player or they're a bust. If they're just "good" and not elite, they're a bust. Meanwhile, merely "good" running backs and WRs still hold plenty of value. Beanie Wells has been a very average running back but he's still a solid RB2 for fantasy purposes. Joe Flacco has been an above average QB but he has almost no value for fantasy purposes. If you draft Luck/RG3 in the top 3 of a standard format league then you're banking on them becoming the next Rodgers/Newton with nothing to fall back on, and that's quite the risk.

 

[DoubleG]

I think you can eliminate tier 3 and move that RB up into tier 2. I'd prefer that RB over the QBs and I think there are others who view QBs the same way.

It has been an interesting phenomenon watching perceived QB values rise recently. In 14+ team leagues QBs carry a premium, but not so much in 10-12 team leagues. Sure the league is more of a passing league, but a rising tide lifts all boats. There are still only a few QBs that are above all the rest, then there is a very deep 2nd tier. The chances that Luck and RGIII become elite is <50%, IMO, and even less likely inside of 3 years. Good QBs aren't that difficult to acquire. I just don't see why the rookie QBs are carrying the premium that they are.

Agreed.I think the thing that people aren't getting is that unless you play in a very large league or a 2 QB league the rookie QBs essentially HAVE to become the next Aaron Rodgers to be worth a pick that high. Not only that, but they have to do what the elite QBs did this year repeatedly, not just once.Everyone says that Luck is the next Peyton Manning. If Andrew Luck puts up Peyton Manning's typical yearly stats then he's a bust as a high rookie pick. Peyton was such a great FF commodity because he was throwing for 4000/28 when not many others were. Now everyone is doing it. If Luck throws for 4000/28 every year then he's a bust from an FF standpoint because in a 12 team one QB league, everyone has a starting QB that does that. Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, Big Ben, etc all do that and you can acquire them for a song.For rookie QBs there is no room for error if you draft them high. They're either an elite top 2 player or they're a bust. If they're just "good" and not elite, they're a bust. Meanwhile, merely "good" running backs and WRs still hold plenty of value. Beanie Wells has been a very average running back but he's still a solid RB2 for fantasy purposes. Joe Flacco has been an above average QB but he has almost no value for fantasy purposes. If you draft Luck/RG3 in the top 3 of a standard format league then you're banking on them becoming the next Rodgers/Newton with nothing to fall back on, and that's quite the risk.

 

[loose circuits]

if that's the case, you guys should appreciate the fact that the QB's are going high. Leaves you with something at your pick...

 

[MAC_32]

Many people focus on the fantasy starters and to that point, yes, there are 12-15 solid starting options week-to-week. However, what if something happens to your starter? I think right now there is a steep drop off from the top half to the bottom half of QB's. I think in dynasty's you must have two quality options. If you don't one significant injury and you're screwed.

In the end, pick elite prospects then pick good prospects. Picking good prospects at premium positions before elite prospects at less valuable positions is how you end up with a roster full of Knownshon Moreno's, Donald Brown's, and CJ Spiller's instead of Cam Newton's, Percy Harvin's, and Demaryius Thomas.

I won't speak for others, but the only QB's I've targeted in rookie drafts have been Rodgers, Cutler, Big Ben, Bradford, and now these 2. I liked Ryan, but didn't like his situation (oops) and I was wrong about Stafford and Cam (so far). I didn't start playing in dyno's until the mid 2000's so that's as far back as I can go, but from my experience if you feel real good about a QB then go get him. If you end up with too many, just wait for a team without a quality backup to have their starter get injured/start sucking and trade your #2 or #3 for their future #1 pick or another starter.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Many people focus on the fantasy starters and to that point, yes, there are 12-15 solid starting options week-to-week. However, what if something happens to your starter? I think right now there is a steep drop off from the top half to the bottom half of QB's. I think in dynasty's you must have two quality options. If you don't one significant injury and you're screwed. In the end, pick elite prospects then pick good prospects. Picking good prospects at premium positions before elite prospects at less valuable positions is how you end up with a roster full of Knownshon Moreno's, Donald Brown's, and CJ Spiller's instead of Cam Newton's, Percy Harvin's, and Demaryius Thomas.I won't speak for others, but the only QB's I've targeted in rookie drafts have been Rodgers, Cutler, Big Ben, Bradford, and now these 2. I liked Ryan, but didn't like his situation (oops) and I was wrong about Stafford and Cam (so far). I didn't start playing in dyno's until the mid 2000's so that's as far back as I can go, but from my experience if you feel real good about a QB then go get him. If you end up with too many, just wait for a team without a quality backup to have their starter get injured/start sucking and trade your #2 or #3 for their future #1 pick or another starter.

I understand the argument you are making, but it was usually the case that you could draft those QBs in the late 1st or into the 2nd. Using a top 3 pick on one? I just don't see it. I like the argument a lot more when we are talking about RBs and WRs; you don't take the 3rd tier RB in a seemingly good situation over a stronger RB in a seemingly bad situation. I think positional scarcity matters when we are talking about QBs vs RBs, though.I have rarely had issues covering for a QB injury. I started Shaun Hill while Stafford was out in 2010, and Kitna in another league when Romo was out that year, and was fine in both cases. I also have no problem going QBBC if need be. Unless I have tremendous depth, I am not trading a RB/WR in a league that I start 2+ of each for a non-elite QB... and it is incredibly rare for a team to have more than one elite QB to trade. Sure, they may have a Big Ben or Cutler, but those guys are not worth a RB2, imo. I just don't think it is that easy to flip a #6-15 QB for a starter. A team that is willing to trade a future first for one of those QBs is a contender right now, so you are looking at a late 1st... which in most years isn't that big a deal.Personally, I would not take a QB this year until 1.05 or 1.06 at the earliest. Too each his own, of course.

 

[Warhogs]

My view is that there are a few elite players at QB, RB and WR. But on all my dynasty squads I have decent starters at every position. I want to spend my early draft picks on the guys I feel have the best chance to join that elite group and not play it safe with the idea that position scarcity makes this RB more valuable.

I will consider position though when I have multiple players that I feel have about the same chance of being elite. So for example if I feel that in this years class that Richardson and Luck both have a 25% chance of being elite and RGIII, Miller and Blackmon have a 10% chance of being elite.

I will rank them:

Richardson

Luck

Miller

Blackmon

RGIII

I want to draft the guys I feel have the best chance of being a true elite player.

 

[MAC_32]

Many people focus on the fantasy starters and to that point, yes, there are 12-15 solid starting options week-to-week. However, what if something happens to your starter? I think right now there is a steep drop off from the top half to the bottom half of QB's. I think in dynasty's you must have two quality options. If you don't one significant injury and you're screwed. In the end, pick elite prospects then pick good prospects. Picking good prospects at premium positions before elite prospects at less valuable positions is how you end up with a roster full of Knownshon Moreno's, Donald Brown's, and CJ Spiller's instead of Cam Newton's, Percy Harvin's, and Demaryius Thomas.I won't speak for others, but the only QB's I've targeted in rookie drafts have been Rodgers, Cutler, Big Ben, Bradford, and now these 2. I liked Ryan, but didn't like his situation (oops) and I was wrong about Stafford and Cam (so far). I didn't start playing in dyno's until the mid 2000's so that's as far back as I can go, but from my experience if you feel real good about a QB then go get him. If you end up with too many, just wait for a team without a quality backup to have their starter get injured/start sucking and trade your #2 or #3 for their future #1 pick or another starter.

I understand the argument you are making, but it was usually the case that you could draft those QBs in the late 1st or into the 2nd. Using a top 3 pick on one? I just don't see it.

Who have been top 3 picks in recent years? I'm not saying to pass on potentially great RB's and WR's, but RB's and WR's of recent years? Yes, I would. I'm sure I am a broken record at this point, but I really, really like this class. Team needs will dictate who I draft in the 2-7 range because I think all of them are going to be somewhere between good and great. In the end, I'm probably going with Martin and Miller before the QB's and Blackmon (unless they go to iffy situations) because I think they're good enough and that's where my needs are on my dyno rosters but had this been 2009, 2010, or 2011 I'm looking at RG3 or Luck. The only backs in those classes I thought were good enough were Best and LeShoure with Ingram and Mathews a step down. I probably would've taken Best, but the others given their talent and situation? I'm taking the QB's. This also explains why I kept trading my #1's in recent years to stock pile #1's this year.

 

[MAC_32]

My view is that there are a few elite players at QB, RB and WR. But on all my dynasty squads I have decent starters at every position. I want to spend my early draft picks on the guys I feel have the best chance to join that elite group and not play it safe with the idea that position scarcity makes this RB more valuable. I will consider position though when I have multiple players that I feel have about the same chance of being elite. So for example if I feel that in this years class that Richardson and Luck both have a 25% chance of being elite and RGIII, Miller and Blackmon have a 10% chance of being elite.I will rank them:RichardsonLuckMillerBlackmonRGIIII want to draft the guys I feel have the best chance of being a true elite player.

 

[Synesthesia]

I think you can eliminate tier 3 and move that RB up into tier 2. I'd prefer that RB over the QBs and I think there are others who view QBs the same way.

It has been an interesting phenomenon watching perceived QB values rise recently. In 14+ team leagues QBs carry a premium, but not so much in 10-12 team leagues. Sure the league is more of a passing league, but a rising tide lifts all boats. There are still only a few QBs that are above all the rest, then there is a very deep 2nd tier. The chances that Luck and RGIII become elite is <50%, IMO, and even less likely inside of 3 years. Good QBs aren't that difficult to acquire. I just don't see why the rookie QBs are carrying the premium that they are.

Agreed.I think the thing that people aren't getting is that unless you play in a very large league or a 2 QB league the rookie QBs essentially HAVE to become the next Aaron Rodgers to be worth a pick that high. Not only that, but they have to do what the elite QBs did this year repeatedly, not just once.Everyone says that Luck is the next Peyton Manning. If Andrew Luck puts up Peyton Manning's typical yearly stats then he's a bust as a high rookie pick. Peyton was such a great FF commodity because he was throwing for 4000/28 when not many others were. Now everyone is doing it. If Luck throws for 4000/28 every year then he's a bust from an FF standpoint because in a 12 team one QB league, everyone has a starting QB that does that. Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, Big Ben, etc all do that and you can acquire them for a song.For rookie QBs there is no room for error if you draft them high. They're either an elite top 2 player or they're a bust. If they're just "good" and not elite, they're a bust. Meanwhile, merely "good" running backs and WRs still hold plenty of value. Beanie Wells has been a very average running back but he's still a solid RB2 for fantasy purposes. Joe Flacco has been an above average QB but he has almost no value for fantasy purposes. If you draft Luck/RG3 in the top 3 of a standard format league then you're banking on them becoming the next Rodgers/Newton with nothing to fall back on, and that's quite the risk.

Lots of weird lines of reasoning going on here.First off, you can't conflate "the next Peyton Manning" with "the next Peyton Manning's career average stat line". The latter gets you a guy who is a quality fantasy starter, but not a true stud. The former gets you the greatest QB in the history of fantasy football. As Lott said, a rising tide lifts all boats- including the studs. Top 5 QBs post better numbers today than they did 10 years ago, so it's an inescapable conclusion that if Luck is a top 5 QB, he'll be posting better numbers than his predecessors from 10 years ago. Second off, you're assuming that this year was a trend, not an aberration. I have yet to be convinced that 5000 is the new 4000 when it comes to passing. There have been huge positional spikes before, and they usually settle back down again the next season. Witness the 2005 season. Or, hell, look back to 1995. Isaac Bruce posted the 2nd most receiving yards in history (a mark that stands to this day) and didn't even make the pro bowl because his 119/1781/13 got upstaged by Rice's 1850 yards, moore's 123 receptions, Irvin's 1600 yards, and Carter's 17 scores. And that was just the NFC! Tell me, did that usher in a new offensive environment where any first round receiver who didn't go for 1500 yards was somehow a bust?Third off, if you spend the 3rd pick on a rookie and he becomes "just" the next Ben Roethlisberger, he was miles from being a bust. Go back and look at previous drafts. How many of them produce 5 first rounders with better fantasy careers than Ben Roethlisberger, Eli, Rivers, Romo, etc? The pick wasn't a home run, sure, but it's not like draft results are binary "bust"/"home run" outcomes. Fourth off, roster spots have value, too. If I can spend 1 roster spot and receive 10 years of starting QB production, that gives me 2 or 3 more roster spots to devote to prospects and flyers. With as much homework as we do around here, those spots are almost certain to pay dividends. Having a reliable (if unspectacular) starting QB increases your odds of landing the next Miles Austin, or the next Victor Cruz, or the next Antonio Brown, or even just the next Tim Hightower or Peyton Hillis.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Second off, you're assuming that this year was a trend, not an aberration. I have yet to be convinced that 5000 is the new 4000 when it comes to passing. There have been huge positional spikes before, and they usually settle back down again the next season. Witness the 2005 season. Or, hell, look back to 1995. Isaac Bruce posted the 2nd most receiving yards in history (a mark that stands to this day) and didn't even make the pro bowl because his 119/1781/13 got upstaged by Rice's 1850 yards, moore's 123 receptions, Irvin's 1600 yards, and Carter's 17 scores. And that was just the NFC! Tell me, did that usher in a new offensive environment where any first round receiver who didn't go for 1500 yards was somehow a bust?

This makes the argument against taking a QB early stronger, not weaker. People are drafting Luck/RG3 thinking they're the next 5000/40 guy. If that's not going to be a regular thing, it's even less likely they'll be the next one.The issue with taking a QB early is not that 5000 is the new 4000, it's that 4000 is the new 3000, and that is certainly not an aberration. Even back in 2009 there were 10 QBs that threw for 4000 yards. If there's not a 5000/40 tier for Luck/RG3 to join (or eclipse) than they're lumped in with an even bigger pack.

First off, you can't conflate "the next Peyton Manning" with "the next Peyton Manning's career average stat line". The latter gets you a guy who is a quality fantasy starter, but not a true stud. The former gets you the greatest QB in the history of fantasy football. As Lott said, a rising tide lifts all boats- including the studs. Top 5 QBs post better numbers today than they did 10 years ago, so it's an inescapable conclusion that if Luck is a top 5 QB, he'll be posting better numbers than his predecessors from 10 years ago.

Just semantics here. Regardless, since we've established that 4000/30 is nothing special any more (much more than a 1 year trend) to be the next guy who rises above his peers like Peyton he's going to have to be exactly that 5000/40 guy that you said wasn't going to become the norm, AND all those other 5000/40 guys are going to have to regress as you predicted.That's basically the basis for my argument. Luck will have to be 5000/40 guy to really be the next Peyton and that just seems like a heck of an outlier to bank on, and the alternative (another "good" QB) is much worse than a merely "good" running back or wide receiver. The #10 running back right now based on ADP is Matt Forte. As a merely "good" running back he's an elite fantasy player. The #10 QB has almost no value as a fantasy player.

Third off, if you spend the 3rd pick on a rookie and he becomes "just" the next Ben Roethlisberger, he was miles from being a bust. Go back and look at previous drafts. How many of them produce 5 first rounders with better fantasy careers than Ben Roethlisberger, Eli, Rivers, Romo, etc? The pick wasn't a home run, sure, but it's not like draft results are binary "bust"/"home run" outcomes.

This is kind of a continuation of my last sentence. We can argue the semantics of the word "bust" all day but the bottom line is that if you pick a RB at that spot and get a guy who's "only" the #10 running back then you got a really good fantasy player. If you got a guy who's "only" the #10 QB then you got someone who has very little value.How many people are you going to find that are willing to swap the 1.03 pick right now for a "good" QB like Big Ben? No one. Yet all of them would happily toss that pick aside and pitch some stuff in on top of it in order to get a "good" running back like Forte.

Fourth off, roster spots have value, too. If I can spend 1 roster spot and receive 10 years of starting QB production, that gives me 2 or 3 more roster spots to devote to prospects and flyers. With as much homework as we do around here, those spots are almost certain to pay dividends. Having a reliable (if unspectacular) starting QB increases your odds of landing the next Miles Austin, or the next Victor Cruz, or the next Antonio Brown, or even just the next Tim Hightower or Peyton Hillis.

Not sure I'm following you here. It's not like Big Ben owners are going to be content to sit on one of the worst starting FF QBs in their league and just be happy with that. They're likely devoting a lot more effort and roster space to finding a better QB. Besides, if that's your goal then you can get a player like that easily enough. You can acquire Matt Ryan or Eli Manning or Joe Flacco for very cheap and they'll be a solid starting QB for the next 10 years. Getting out of your early draft pick what you could've gotten for some borderline throwaway stuff is not exactly a good thing.

 

[Max Power]

You guys are actually making a case for Griffin as a top 3 pick. He brings the rushing yards and TDs along with the passing game. Would you spend the 1.03 pick on the next Mike Vick? I sure as heck would.

My problem with these second tier RBs is that they are so hit or miss. What % of second or third round backs have panned out over the past 10 years? Remember guys like Chris Henry, Kenny Irons, Garrett Wolfe, Tony Hunt, JJ Arrington, Eric Shelton and so on... For Every MJD, Forte, Rice, and Frank Gore, you get about 3-4 of these guys.

Seems the smart play is to take an elite Rushing QB over a non-elite running back.

 

[loose circuits]

You guys are actually making a case for Griffin as a top 3 pick. He brings the rushing yards and TDs along with the passing game. Would you spend the 1.03 pick on the next Mike Vick? I sure as heck would. My problem with these second tier RBs is that they are so hit or miss. What % of second or third round backs have panned out over the past 10 years? Remember guys like Chris Henry, Kenny Irons, Garrett Wolfe, Tony Hunt, JJ Arrington, Eric Shelton and so on... For Every MJD, Forte, Rice, and Frank Gore, you get about 3-4 of these guys. Seems the smart play is to take an elite Rushing QB over a non-elite running back.

those RB's you mentioned all had glaring weaknesses that were not corrected through coaching. Martin is close to complete while Wilson and Miller have weaknesses which should be correctable

 

[RavenLunatic]

This is a great dialogue.

I have the 1.01 in a league where I recently took over a team and will draft Trent Richardson. I think what happens to all of us is that the QB is such an important position in the NFL (and in FF for the elites) that you don't want to miss on the next Manning or Brady or Rodgers. Part of me would hope to sell my #1 for a package that nets me a nice starter and the chance to draft Luck or RG3 later...but at that point it would be a luxury. Even though I have the choice at 1.01, I can't see using it on a QB. For some reason there are alot of dynasty rankings promoting Luck as #1 even though nearly every poster in the boards have TR as the 99% consensus 1.01.

I think Newton turned into fantasy gold last year but I would still rather have a top 5 RB than him. I fear he is going to have a sophmore slump. Not an awful season, but outside of the top 5. Kinda like how Vick was the consensus #1 for many going into last year. I know it was just the Pro Bowl but Newton looked awful in that game...and I am not sure why? It takes a drop off in rushing TDs and miss a game or three from a rib injury and people will be hurting.

 

[Inspiration]

You guys are actually making a case for Griffin as a top 3 pick. He brings the rushing yards and TDs along with the passing game. Would you spend the 1.03 pick on the next Mike Vick? I sure as heck would.

Consider me skeptical that Griffin will provide any significant value through his rushing ability. He doesn't have near the quickness or elusiveness of Michael Vick nor does he have the size and tackle-breaking ability of Cam Newton or Tim Tebow. Maybe he can put a few hundred yards in his first few seasons, but I'd expect his rushing numbers to diminish quickly as he establishes himself as a passer.

 

[Synesthesia]

Second off, you're assuming that this year was a trend, not an aberration. I have yet to be convinced that 5000 is the new 4000 when it comes to passing. There have been huge positional spikes before, and they usually settle back down again the next season. Witness the 2005 season. Or, hell, look back to 1995. Isaac Bruce posted the 2nd most receiving yards in history (a mark that stands to this day) and didn't even make the pro bowl because his 119/1781/13 got upstaged by Rice's 1850 yards, moore's 123 receptions, Irvin's 1600 yards, and Carter's 17 scores. And that was just the NFC! Tell me, did that usher in a new offensive environment where any first round receiver who didn't go for 1500 yards was somehow a bust?

This makes the argument against taking a QB early stronger, not weaker. People are drafting Luck/RG3 thinking they're the next 5000/40 guy. If that's not going to be a regular thing, it's even less likely they'll be the next one.The issue with taking a QB early is not that 5000 is the new 4000, it's that 4000 is the new 3000, and that is certainly not an aberration. Even back in 2009 there were 10 QBs that threw for 4000 yards. If there's not a 5000/40 tier for Luck/RG3 to join (or eclipse) than they're lumped in with an even bigger pack.

So your contention is that top QBs have gotten less valuable as the mid-tier QBs have caught up? That's an interesting claim. Unfortunately, looking through the historical vbd trends, I don't see any meaningful trends in that direction. I see a lot of season-to-season variability, but it looks more like noise than trend to me.

First off, you can't conflate "the next Peyton Manning" with "the next Peyton Manning's career average stat line". The latter gets you a guy who is a quality fantasy starter, but not a true stud. The former gets you the greatest QB in the history of fantasy football. As Lott said, a rising tide lifts all boats- including the studs. Top 5 QBs post better numbers today than they did 10 years ago, so it's an inescapable conclusion that if Luck is a top 5 QB, he'll be posting better numbers than his predecessors from 10 years ago.

Just semantics here. Regardless, since we've established that 4000/30 is nothing special any more (much more than a 1 year trend) to be the next guy who rises above his peers like Peyton he's going to have to be exactly that 5000/40 guy that you said wasn't going to become the norm, AND all those other 5000/40 guys are going to have to regress as you predicted.That's basically the basis for my argument. Luck will have to be 5000/40 guy to really be the next Peyton and that just seems like a heck of an outlier to bank on, and the alternative (another "good" QB) is much worse than a merely "good" running back or wide receiver. The #10 running back right now based on ADP is Matt Forte. As a merely "good" running back he's an elite fantasy player. The #10 QB has almost no value as a fantasy player.

Luck and Griffin have wheels. You don't have to throw for 5000 when you have legs. Donovan McNabb led the league in points per game more times than Peyton Manning did. Ditto that for Daunte Culpepper and Steve Young. Jeff Garcia matched Peyton for the feat. Also, comparing qb10 to rb10 is moving the goalposts. If people thought Luck was going to be qb10, they wouldn't be taking him early. If people thought Martin or Miller would be rb10, they'd be going 2nd overall. You're jousting with a straw man.

Fourth off, roster spots have value, too. If I can spend 1 roster spot and receive 10 years of starting QB production, that gives me 2 or 3 more roster spots to devote to prospects and flyers. With as much homework as we do around here, those spots are almost certain to pay dividends. Having a reliable (if unspectacular) starting QB increases your odds of landing the next Miles Austin, or the next Victor Cruz, or the next Antonio Brown, or even just the next Tim Hightower or Peyton Hillis.

Not sure I'm following you here. It's not like Big Ben owners are going to be content to sit on one of the worst starting FF QBs in their league and just be happy with that. They're likely devoting a lot more effort and roster space to finding a better QB. Besides, if that's your goal then you can get a player like that easily enough. You can acquire Matt Ryan or Eli Manning or Joe Flacco for very cheap and they'll be a solid starting QB for the next 10 years. Getting out of your early draft pick what you could've gotten for some borderline throwaway stuff is not exactly a good thing.

I think that Ben owners are looking a little more frantically than Rodgers or Newton owners, and a lot less frantically than Flacco, Fitzpatrick, Orton, or Hasselbeck owners. It's easy to say that you can get a reasonable facsimile of Roethlisberger for relatively little in terms of picks and prospects... But you're overlooking the fact that that will be a recurring cost every year, and that it will also cost roster spots. Roeth isn't as good as Rodgers- this is hardly breaking news- but he's hardly a negligible asset.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

My view is that there are a few elite players at QB, RB and WR. But on all my dynasty squads I have decent starters at every position. I want to spend my early draft picks on the guys I feel have the best chance to join that elite group and not play it safe with the idea that position scarcity makes this RB more valuable. I will consider position though when I have multiple players that I feel have about the same chance of being elite. So for example if I feel that in this years class that Richardson and Luck both have a 25% chance of being elite and RGIII, Miller and Blackmon have a 10% chance of being elite.I will rank them:RichardsonLuckMillerBlackmonRGIIII want to draft the guys I feel have the best chance of being a true elite player.

Free Bagel touched on this, but you have to factor in the floor of a player as well as the potential for being elite.If Luck is not elite, he is merely startable. Luck as QB8 is just "okay". Luck as QB 15 is, relatively speaking, a bust.A RB as RB8 is excellent. A RB as RB15 is still a valuable starter. A RB as RB24 is still decent. This is where positional scarcity matters and why you can't trade a non-top ten QB for squat, but a Beanie Wells still has pretty good value.To touch on another poster's comment regarding the value of roster spots: you will usually know much sooner if a RB is going to work out or not. A QB usually takes 2-3 years to get a read on, so the QB is likely to take up a roster spot longer before being cut. The RB is more likely to be useful (due to positional scarcity) and more likely to either have it or not sooner, so you can cut bait sooner if need be.Look at Eli Manning. He was generally viewed as potentially elite when he was drafted in 2004. He is just now getting to a point where he is considered a top 10 fantasy QB.Matt Ryan is another pretty good example. He was drafted #3 overall in the NFL draft. He showed great promise as a rookie, took a bit of a step back as a sophomore, was pretty decent in year three, and just passed 4000 yards for the first time in year four.Aaron Rodgers was brought up as a first round rookie draft pick... it took four years before he finally got a chance, and that year he was just good. That is an awful long time to sit on a guy before reaping any benefit, and he had little or no trade value until he finally got on the field. Philip Rivers: 3 years to become the starter, 5 years to become fantasy relevant.Drew Brees: not fantasy relevant until year 6.Big Ben: year 4 before relevance, and just solid since then.I know not all these guys started out as elite prospects, but some were and the others are or have been considered elite. I think it illustrates just how likely it is that you will have to wait several years before the potentially elite QB pays off, IF he pays off. There aren't a lot of QBs that make the jump early on.To be clear, I don't advocate taking a scrub RB that landed in a good spot over a Luck or RGII... but this draft has good quality RBs/WRs, so I just don't see taking the QBs top 3.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Also, comparing qb10 to rb10 is moving the goalposts. If people thought Luck was going to be qb10, they wouldn't be taking him early. If people thought Martin or Miller would be rb10, they'd be going 2nd overall. You're jousting with a straw man.

I don't think this is a straw man at all, nor moving the goalposts. There are 32 starting NFL QBs, but only 12 fantasy starters in a typical fantasy league. There are 32ish starting RBs, but 24-36 RB starting spots in a typical fantasy league. This positional scarcity is what makes the RB more likely to be useful for fantasy that the QB. A "pretty good" fantasy RB is still a fantasy RB2... a "pretty good" fantasy QB isn't necessarily even a starter.

 

[loose circuits]

Also, comparing qb10 to rb10 is moving the goalposts. If people thought Luck was going to be qb10, they wouldn't be taking him early. If people thought Martin or Miller would be rb10, they'd be going 2nd overall. You're jousting with a straw man.

I don't think this is a straw man at all, nor moving the goalposts. There are 32 starting NFL QBs, but only 12 fantasy starters in a typical fantasy league. There are 32ish starting RBs, but 24-36 RB starting spots in a typical fantasy league. This positional scarcity is what makes the RB more likely to be useful for fantasy that the QB. A "pretty good" fantasy RB is still a fantasy RB2... a "pretty good" fantasy QB isn't necessarily even a starter.

With the day and age of RBBC there are more than 32 capable rb's that can produce for fantasy especially in ppr

 

[JohnnyU]

For me, Doug Martin is already in Tier 3 and has a chance to move up to 2 if on the right team.

And, as you had stated, the other RBs have a chance to move into Tier 3 as well.

What makes Martin better than Wilson or Miller?

Just love his combination of thickness, strength and elite on the field shake-and-bake. But I can certainly see why people like the others even more so, they may tend to value other skills sets (like pure speed) more.

Glen Doughty = the original shake n' bake, but he was a WR.

 

[Shutout]

This is a really good read.

I tend to agree on the side that argues against taking Luck or RG III so high. Max Powers said above that RBs are so hit and miss but its true re: QBs too. I heard a stat the other day that said that for every 2-3 QBs taken in the first round, one is usually a bust. That is not completely transferrable in fantasy but this year it might be.

Overall, I think this has a lot to do with what is called the "recency effect". People are so caught up with the recent QB explosion and the success of Newton last year that the QBs values are inflated. But having either of these rookies match Cam (or for Cam, himself, to continue this type of FF production) is far less likely than likely. And although the rules of the NFL seem to point towards these types of offensive numbers, we all know it will swing. As a matter of fact, i listened to an interview with a coach the other day that says he expects alot of teams to target this draft and look for the type of players that will start to swing this. He said defensive coordinators are tired of all this spread stuff, etc anc that there will be particular new efforts at drafting certain defensive players and even some on offense. A lot of detail in the interview, but long story short; looking at bigger RBs that are more like we saw back in the day and run stuffing MLBers.

Someone made a good point about roster spots. In dynasty, that is HUGE. When you can lock down a position long term, you can really take chances on diamonds in the rough. Holding young QBs is a test in patience. Im sure people who held Rodgers or Romo or even Eli, to a degree, often had some tough choices to make. I know that I held Flynn for two years and more than once felt hamstringed.

In general, I seem to end up better off when I draft BPA, regardless of team need. It may be coincidence but it seems like when I draft on need, I end up needing longer than when I just take a really good player.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

How would this debate be affected if we look at 14 or 16 team leagues? My league has 45 man rosters and some teams are starting Andy Dalton, Josh Freeman types. Would it make more sense it deep leagues to take Luck or RGIII with a high pick if you are sitting on an aging veteran or a lower level starter? I'm relatively new to dynasty but I have to think that if you are in position to get one of these guys you do it because who knows when the next time you will be able to. Plus in my experience it is very difficult to aquire a starting QB in leagues this deep.

 

[J-Dawg]

Trent Richardson

Andrew Luck

Robert Griffin III

Justin Blackmon

Michael Floyd

Doug Martin

Lamar Miller

Kendall Wright

David Wilson

Rueben Randle

Robert Turbin

Chris Polk

Stephen Hill

Coby Fleener

Alshon Jeffery

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

How would this debate be affected if we look at 14 or 16 team leagues? My league has 45 man rosters and some teams are starting Andy Dalton, Josh Freeman types. Would it make more sense it deep leagues to take Luck or RGIII with a high pick if you are sitting on an aging veteran or a lower level starter? I'm relatively new to dynasty but I have to think that if you are in position to get one of these guys you do it because who knows when the next time you will be able to. Plus in my experience it is very difficult to aquire a starting QB in leagues this deep.

Larger leagues and start 2 QB leagues are a whole other animal. Value over replacement gets a little more pronounced, and positional scarcity changes a bit. Also, it is more typical to only require 1 starting RB in larger leagues, which lowers relative value of RBs.

 

[duaneok66]

really need to wait three weeks to see who goes where.

 

[BigTex]

really need to wait three weeks to see who goes where.

Why?

 

[duaneok66]

opportunity will affect draft position.

 

[Max Power]

opportunity will affect draft position.

True, but its easier to trade up now and be in position to get the guy I want than try to trade for a guy after an owner drafts him.

 

[Max Power]

I tend to agree on the side that argues against taking Luck or RG III so high. Max Powers said above that RBs are so hit and miss but its true re: QBs too. I heard a stat the other day that said that for every 2-3 QBs taken in the first round, one is usually a bust. That is not completely transferrable in fantasy but this year it might be.

I get that, but from everything I've read, Luck and RG3 aren't your typical first round QBs. Luck is projected as the best prospect since Peyton and RG3 has an amazing skill set which put him neck and neck with Luck. They seem like the safer pick with just as much, if not more upside than Martin or Miller.

 

[duaneok66]

opportunity will affect draft position.

True, but its easier to trade up now and be in position to get the guy I want than try to trade for a guy after an owner drafts him.

good points - there are pros and cons either way.