I draft on talent, not need in all my dynasty leagues (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

I know I'm giving info to my competitors, but I seem to always draft on talent rather than need in all my dynasty leagues. I can't tell you how many drafts I've seen where guys will take 2nd and 3rd tier RBs over "real" good WR prospects or QB talent in the first 12 picks. Frankly, I think this is a mistake in dynasty leagues, at least with the WRs I do. I don't know the numbers, but on the surface it looks like most of those RBs will never live up to their draft position and remain parked on the bench for most of their career, yet owners still continue to do it. Do you draft on need or talent?

 

[fsufan]

i try to add the best talent through the WW, trades and rookie draft. for the draft I pick the BPA not by my team need.

 

[BeTheMatch]

But because RBs are at such a premium, it's tough to pass on one - even a flier. It's not like WRs are a lock either.

ETA: I did take Calvin Johnson over Marshawn Lynch, though, in my latest rookie draft.

 

[IndyHavoc]

I know I'm giving info to my competitors, but I seem to always draft on talent rather than need in all my dynasty leagues. I can't tell you how many drafts I've seen where guys will take 2nd and 3rd tier RBs over "real" good WR prospects or QB talent in the first 12 picks. Frankly, I think this is a mistake in dynasty leagues, at least with the WRs I do. I don't know the numbers, but on the surface it looks like most of those RBs will never live up to their draft position and remain parked on the bench for most of their career, yet owners still continue to do it. Do you draft on need or talent?

And then you're completely banking on who's evalution of talent? Just your own eye? Scouting service reports? Guys that have actually played in the NFL only? The rub is, "talent" doesn't always pan out either. There's work ethic, attitude, smarts, heart. These are things you just don't know about until these guys have been in the league for at least some amount of time. I agree on putting a good percentage of weighting on percieved talent, but there's just so much more to it. I think in dynasty's I definitely favor the guys that have at least shown that they can play at the NFL level. I rarely find myself valuing the true rookies as much as other owners.../shrug.

 

[JohnnyU]

I know I'm giving info to my competitors, but I seem to always draft on talent rather than need in all my dynasty leagues. I can't tell you how many drafts I've seen where guys will take 2nd and 3rd tier RBs over "real" good WR prospects or QB talent in the first 12 picks. Frankly, I think this is a mistake in dynasty leagues, at least with the WRs I do. I don't know the numbers, but on the surface it looks like most of those RBs will never live up to their draft position and remain parked on the bench for most of their career, yet owners still continue to do it. Do you draft on need or talent?

And then you're completely banking on who's evalution of talent? Just your own eye? Scouting service reports? Guys that have actually played in the NFL only? The rub is, "talent" doesn't always pan out either. There's work ethic, attitude, smarts, heart. These are things you just don't know about until these guys have been in the league for at least some amount of time. I agree on putting a good percentage of weighting on percieved talent, but there's just so much more to it. I think in dynasty's I definitely favor the guys that have at least shown that they can play at the NFL level. I rarely find myself valuing the true rookies as much as other owners.../shrug.

I didn't say it was wrong or right, just that is what I do. I can't help myself. Having said that, I have a few titles

 

[Rovers]

I generally draft to need, unless a player that I have ranked significantly higher at another position falls to me. If I only have 2 viable DL's in a start 3 league, and am pretty much set at other positions, you bet I will draft to need. Having said that, if a player I'm in love with falls, and he is a position player I have an excess of, I will draft him. That gives me some leeway to trade later on and address the need positions. It also allows me to play a flyer on sleepers for the need positions.

RB's will always be over drafted.... in one league I was in bad shape at RB. Chester Taylor and squat. Even though I had a good LB corp, I took Poz at something like 1.10. Later, I went for M Bush, B Leonard and Snelling, trying to catch some lightning in a jar. Poz was a best available pick.... the others were strictly need picks. To commit oneself to one strategy or the other is completely unreasonable. It all depends.....

 

[AussieOyOyOy]

I know I'm giving info to my competitors, but I seem to always draft on talent rather than need in all my dynasty leagues. I can't tell you how many drafts I've seen where guys will take 2nd and 3rd tier RBs over "real" good WR prospects or QB talent in the first 12 picks. Frankly, I think this is a mistake in dynasty leagues, at least with the WRs I do. I don't know the numbers, but on the surface it looks like most of those RBs will never live up to their draft position and remain parked on the bench for most of their career, yet owners still continue to do it. Do you draft on need or talent?

And then you're completely banking on who's evalution of talent? Just your own eye? Scouting service reports? Guys that have actually played in the NFL only? The rub is, "talent" doesn't always pan out either. There's work ethic, attitude, smarts, heart. These are things you just don't know about until these guys have been in the league for at least some amount of time. I agree on putting a good percentage of weighting on percieved talent, but there's just so much more to it. I think in dynasty's I definitely favor the guys that have at least shown that they can play at the NFL level. I rarely find myself valuing the true rookies as much as other owners.../shrug.

"Talent" is in the eye of the beholder. I'm just a lurker for the most part, but I think Bloom and CC pretty much kick the **** out of any of the "talent"-evaluators whose columns you'll read on a major site.If you're basing your decisions on their opinions, that's one thing. But if you're basing your opinions on the 6 or 7 highlights you've seen of a player, then you're just throwing darts like the rest of us.

 

[JohnnyU]

I know I'm giving info to my competitors, but I seem to always draft on talent rather than need in all my dynasty leagues. I can't tell you how many drafts I've seen where guys will take 2nd and 3rd tier RBs over "real" good WR prospects or QB talent in the first 12 picks. Frankly, I think this is a mistake in dynasty leagues, at least with the WRs I do. I don't know the numbers, but on the surface it looks like most of those RBs will never live up to their draft position and remain parked on the bench for most of their career, yet owners still continue to do it. Do you draft on need or talent?

And then you're completely banking on who's evalution of talent? Just your own eye? Scouting service reports? Guys that have actually played in the NFL only? The rub is, "talent" doesn't always pan out either. There's work ethic, attitude, smarts, heart. These are things you just don't know about until these guys have been in the league for at least some amount of time. I agree on putting a good percentage of weighting on percieved talent, but there's just so much more to it. I think in dynasty's I definitely favor the guys that have at least shown that they can play at the NFL level. I rarely find myself valuing the true rookies as much as other owners.../shrug.

"Talent" is in the eye of the beholder. I'm just a lurker for the most part, but I think Bloom and CC pretty much kick the **** out of any of the "talent"-evaluators whose columns you'll read on a major site.

If you're basing your decisions on their opinions, that's one thing. But if you're basing your opinions on the 6 or 7 highlights you've seen of a player, then you're just throwing darts like the rest of us.

That's a given.

 

[JohnnyU]

Example, I in one league I have Rudi Johnson as my RB #1, with Cedric Benson, Dunn, Norwood, and Turner. I also have Hass, Leftwich, and Trent Green at QB. I have the 1.06 pick. One could say that I have a need at RB to select Irons at 1.6 (won't happen) to backup Rudi, and I need a QB (take Russell). All logic says to take Russell, but maybe not. I'm deep at WR with Chad Johnson, Fitz, Terrell Owens, and Mark Clayton. Does this mean I pass on the best WR choice outside of Calvin Johnson? I think not. There is always the trade option, which I'm very good at. However, I also have picks 1.12, 2.02, 2.04, and 2.05, so one could argue that you could get your WR sleeper there and take position of need at 1.06. Having said that, I may just draft out of need......naw, what am I saying?

 

[jurb26]

I'm with ya. Though I like to consider it more of a BPA approach.

 

[dirtyhalos]

i draft on talent, and i always come out needing rbs.......that sucks

 

[coolnerd]

I'm with ya. Though I like to consider it more of a BPA approach.

By definition, BPA includes "need" as you are supposed to draft the clearly best available talent, but in cases where it is close you draft the position of need.http://www.gbnreport.com/drafttheories.htm

 

[jhexel]

As is evident in your latest endeavor...cripes!!!

i draft on talent, and i always come out needing rbs.......that sucks

 

[Lash]

talent wins everytime, even over opportunity

like picking Poz over Willis i would never do

assuming PWill stays in the league for 7-10 years, how many of those years will be in a 3-4?

who knows .. but i do know he is more talented than poz

Buf DC could get fired in offseason and new guy put in a 3-4 and/or SF def coord. could get fired in 2008 and the new guy puts in a 4-3 and you have a 110 solo tackle beast on your hands for 7-10 years

 

[Lash]

I'm with ya. Though I like to consider it more of a BPA approach.

By definition, BPA includes "need" as you are supposed to draft the clearly best available talent, but in cases where it is close you draft the position of need.http://www.gbnreport.com/drafttheories.htm

and this is my thought as far as talent vs need

 

[FreeBaGeL]

If you really picked strictly based on talent you'd probably end up with 0 RBs on your roster.

Seeing as how you have RBs - and Rudi in particular - I'm guessing this refers more to rookie drafts and whatnot rather than you overall philosophy?

 

[gregjcross]

Very interesting discussion. I think *all rookies* are overrated, but I know that if a rookie RB hits, its worth about four players drafted around him. That doesnt make it a good bet but it does make it tempting. In my 12 team dynasty league I took RB K. Irons at 2.2 (ahead of Booker, M.Bush and T.Hunt) and WR Sidney Rice at 3.2. I like both those picks. The rest of my picks were IDPs.I also grabbed K.Irons ahead of Jamarcus Russell, B.Quinn, R. Meacham and D. Bowe; i think that the top WRs are overrated as they wont see enough passes, in Bowe's case, his QB and OLine wont be good enough . I think I may regret not taking Dwayne Jarret though in round three! In reality, Ive had better luck waiting and trading for players just after the rookie draft. Ronnie Brown and Leinart. Whiile i overpaid for them due to common logic, i wont be complaining over the next few years as my Rbs and QBs are pretty good shape. This year i would consider a trade for WR Jarret or WR Jason Hill and possibly Mike Walker. I have Colston and VJAX to go with Sidney Rice so i likely wont be as willing to overpay.

If you really picked strictly based on talent you'd probably end up with 0 RBs on your roster.Seeing as how you have RBs - and Rudi in particular - I'm guessing this refers more to rookie drafts and whatnot rather than you overall philosophy?

 

[Asinine]

Half my league drafts by need, that's why they always draft before me!

In priority order, I use a blend of drafting by value, BPA, and by need. The value part is the trickiest of the 3 in that it requires a lot of research and scouting to forecast the draft, but the reward is in drafting the top players with lower picks and not reaching for lower players with higher picks. Once I've got a solid forecast and know my targets, I move up or down accordingly to maximize the value of my picks.

For example, let's say my pick is 1.10 and I forecast either RB5, QB3, or WR3 to fall to that spot. If none of them are appealing, I look to see if I can move up to grab QB1/2 or WR1/2, and if not, I try to trade down to 1.15 or 1.16 to grab LB1 or DE1. Since we run a live draft, I'll usually make the trade arrangements in advance so I don't get stuck using the pick if the value isn't there, but I'll go BPA if I do have to use it. Value drafting is definitely an art, especially in dynasty, but another owner and myself consistently have the best drafts with this method. After the 3rd round, I find it's not worth the effort, but YMMV.

 

[GregR_2]

Surprised no one else has said this in 17 posts, but I draft the player with the most value for my team. That includes my team need, the player talent, the player's opportunity during the life of his contract, and the value of the position within my league. The latter of which is as heavily dependent on the league's spending on vets at that position since rookie salaries are derived from the league averages. The way the RB salaries are, I hope to never take one in the 1st round, talent or no, because they aren't worth the cost unless you are sure they will start and not be in a RBBC.

 

[SSOG]

Screw dynasty leagues, I draft based on talent over need even in redraft. I've been blessed enough to always be in leagues with owners who are active in the trade market, and I always feel like I'd rather take a player with more value down the road than a player that might help my roster more initially, on the assumption that I can always trade the higher-value player for the "need" player and change a few weeks into the season. It's served me rather well so far.

 

[redman]

But because RBs are at such a premium, it's tough to pass on one - even a flier. It's not like WRs are a lock either.

ETA: I did take Calvin Johnson over Marshawn Lynch, though, in my latest rookie draft.

I think it's safe to say that CJ is not your average WR prospect.

 

[redman]

I don't have a rigid set of rules for drafting, but I know that I want to come out of the (re)draft with 1) as talented of a team as I can have, and 2) a complete starting lineup. There are also certain players who we all know should be "hand-cuffed" to their backups.

With dynasty teams I can take more of a BPA approach as the function of time enables me to fill any lineup gaps that may appear.

 

[Pipes]

So who's better talent wise....RB #25 (whoever that may be) or WR #15 (whoever that may be)? Evaluating talent, like other posters have said, is pretty subjective. If its cut & dry like the Calvin Johnson scenario I'll always go with talent. However typically it's not. Unless it's very early in the 1st round there are about a half dozen or so guys that are about the same talent wise at every draft spot so how else do you rank them without drafting for positions of need?

 

[Bri]

Initial dynasty, I go in drafting with the idea of coming away with 1 QB, 1 K, 1 D, 1 TE and 10(?) RBs and 10(?) WRs or however the roster limit works itself out.

I often see QBs or TEs left around too long so I'll grab em' and stockpile if need be BUT my thinking is we truly have no clue which backup RB or young WR will pan out (esp before the NFL draft type dynasty drafts) so I'll grab a bunch each year and hopefully add a backup to my squad with already good starters. Depth at those positions seems to be best on Sunday and as trade bait so I like to cater to that.

I think the best dynasty teams are built thru the draft and trades not just one way or the other and (again) I think this gives me the best chance to do that.

 

[BeTheMatch]

But because RBs are at such a premium, it's tough to pass on one - even a flier. It's not like WRs are a lock either.

ETA: I did take Calvin Johnson over Marshawn Lynch, though, in my latest rookie draft.

I think it's safe to say that CJ is not your average WR prospect.

That was my point. That was the only reason I took a WR in that spot with a RB like Lynch on the board.

 

[PantherPower]

I think you HAVE to draft first on talent/upside, then focus on need. Of course RBs are given special consideration because they are fewer starting RBs than WRs. I have had many rookie drafts where I ended up taking a position I was already strong in, because the players available were much more talented there than a position I had a "need." Perfect example is in one of my dynasty teams, I went into the rookie draft with Boldin, Evans, Santana Moss, Marshall at WR. I consider that a pretty strong group. But as it turns out, I drafted Calvin at 1.2 (too good to pass on) and then Rice fell to 2.3 (had to take him there) and then Ginn fell to 2.10 (again HAD to take him there) Now the way I see it, I can always trade to improve a position I'm weaker, and am better off doing that than reaching for another position that I felt didn't have the talent or upside these 3 WRs did.

 

[BeTheMatch]

I think the BPA philosophy is the best way to go if at all possible in the first round of rookie drafts, but once we get out of the first round, I tend to go more toward need. For instance, there were a lot of good WR prospects I liked (like Steve Smith, Jason Hill, etc.) in the second round, but Kenny Irons was sitting there and I'm a Rudi Johnson owner, so at that point, I felt I needed to take Irons. And I did.

 

[Donnybrook]

So who's better talent wise....RB #25 (whoever that may be) or WR #15 (whoever that may be)? Evaluating talent, like other posters have said, is pretty subjective. If its cut & dry like the Calvin Johnson scenario I'll always go with talent. However typically it's not. Unless it's very early in the 1st round there are about a half dozen or so guys that are about the same talent wise at every draft spot so how else do you rank them without drafting for positions of need?

Agreed. Johnny do you base talent on college play and stats? NFL draft poistion? Combine numbers? Lance Briggs is talented football player yet you couldn't predict that from his draft position or his pro day.

 

[Super King]

I generally draft to need, unless a player that I have ranked significantly higher at another position falls to me. If I only have 2 viable DL's in a start 3 league, and am pretty much set at other positions, you bet I will draft to need. Having said that, if a player I'm in love with falls, and he is a position player I have an excess of, I will draft him. That gives me some leeway to trade later on and address the need positions. It also allows me to play a flyer on sleepers for the need positions. RB's will always be over drafted.... in one league I was in bad shape at RB. Chester Taylor and squat. Even though I had a good LB corp, I took Poz at something like 1.10. Later, I went for M Bush, B Leonard and Snelling, trying to catch some lightning in a jar. Poz was a best available pick.... the others were strictly need picks. To commit oneself to one strategy or the other is completely unreasonable. It all depends.....