What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is it crazy to think RB with the 1, 2, or 3 pick this year in non-ppr? (1 Viewer)

R

rickyg

Footballguy
You've got Bowen, Beckham and Julio.  The big three.  In ppr I totally get it.  They should go first before any RBS.  

But non-ppr?  Is it crazy to choose Todd gurley over one of them?

 
AP and Sanders were absolute beasts for there entire careers on awful NFL teams. This is Gurley. There is no reason not to take Gurley that early. However those top 3 WRs score a ton of points from yards and TDs.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Not crazy to me.
Click to expand...
That's how I see it and that's my plan Steel.  But anyone ive said this to thinks I'm nuts.  I have the 3rd pick and I know it will be a choice be Julio and any of the RBS for me.  I know Julio is a lock for 1500 yds and 8 tds barring injury and his upside is 2000 yds and 15 tds.   That would be an amazing season for any WR or Rb.  I think gurley's upside is similar and in non-ppr those 100 receptions for Julio mean nothing.  

Also, WR is so deep this year.  In my mocks I'm still able to get some really interesting high upside Wrs in the 7th and 8th rounds.  

 
rickyg said:
Also, WR is so deep this year.  In my mocks I'm still able to get some really interesting high upside Wrs in the 7th and 8th rounds.  
Click to expand...
Yes to this. But it can work the opposite too, there are some interesting RBs there as well.

 
Gurley > Julio IMO for non PPR. If I'm at 1.03 and that's my choice I'm taking Gurley and not looking back.

 
I think with so many people obsessed with the zero RB strategy (which was "upside down" drafting before it became the norm), the pendulum has swung so far that loading up on RBs early isn't a bad strategy. I'm strongly considering it. I look at the WRs in rounds 3-5 and I see some great options. I look at the RBs there and I get a little chill when thinking about relying on them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not nuts. Your starting line-up requirements are more important than your scoring format tbh. 

 
I have the #2 pick in a 12-team non-ppr, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1TE league and I'm leaning towards taking Gurley as well.  I really like the WR's available at the 2/3 turn, the RB's there not so much.

 
greedygoat said:
I have the #2 pick in a 12-team non-ppr, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1TE league and I'm leaning towards taking Gurley as well.  I really like the WR's available at the 2/3 turn, the RB's there not so much.
Click to expand...
See I think in that format, you should go WR. You have 2 RB slots to fill and 3 WR slots. That means in theory you need 2 RBs in the top 24 and 3 WRs in the top 36. Let's say you take Gurley and he is very disappointing and is worse than RB24. He is really only a bye week, injury replacement level player. If you take OBJ and he is between WR25 and 36,  it is also very disappointing but he is still a weekly start. It's more of a cushion against poor performance. Your lineup is 22%RB and 33% WR. If you take the average scoring for RB1-24 and compare it to WR1-36 and then weight it for the fact that can only start 2 RBs vs 3 WRs, you will see that WR is the more valuable position. Over the last 5 years, the averages for WRs has been rising and RBs has been falling. Add in that fantasy usable RBs get hurt a a higher rate and I think it is a no-brainer to take a WR there. 

 
rickyg said:
in non-ppr those 100 receptions for Julio mean nothing.  

Also, WR is so deep this year.  In my mocks I'm still able to get some really interesting high upside Wrs in the 7th and 8th rounds.  
Click to expand...
First of all its not crazy. The question is if it is smart? Does drafting 3 RB with your first 3 picks give you the best chance to win your league? 

I think it depends on who those RB are and how well they perform this year as well. There are a lot of picks before the 3rd round, maybe the RB you want there is gone by then.

As far as the reception numbers meaning nothing in standard, I have to disagree there, as the more receptions, the more yards, as well as more opportunities to score TD. Higher volume receptions leads to greater consistency on a weekly basis as well compared to a more boom bust WR getting less volume. These things do matter as far as what to expect from the WRs over the year and on a per game basis.

There is more depth at WR. This is true. There are fewer RB who can be real difference makers for your team. Much higher scarcity at the RB position. I think this is the best argument for drafting RB high, because there are fewer good RB than WR. The longer you wait to draft RB, the weaker the available RB pool will be by the time you do.

Average draft position.

I count 40 WR and 39 RB being drafted in the top 100 picks (round 7-8 for most leagues).

The pool of viable WR is 200 deep or more. You don't want too many RB outside the top 50 imo.

I was reading a nice article about this a month or so back (maybe longer) and the success rate of those later RB picks is much lower than the later WR picks.

 
Biabreakable said:
First of all its not crazy. The question is if it is smart? Does drafting 3 RB with your first 3 picks give you the best chance to win your league? 

I think it depends on who those RB are and how well they perform this year as well. There are a lot of picks before the 3rd round, maybe the RB you want there is gone by then.

As far as the reception numbers meaning nothing in standard, I have to disagree there, as the more receptions, the more yards, as well as more opportunities to score TD. Higher volume receptions leads to greater consistency on a weekly basis as well compared to a more boom bust WR getting less volume. These things do matter as far as what to expect from the WRs over the year and on a per game basis.

There is more depth at WR. This is true. There are fewer RB who can be real difference makers for your team. Much higher scarcity at the RB position. I think this is the best argument for drafting RB high, because there are fewer good RB than WR. The longer you wait to draft RB, the weaker the available RB pool will be by the time you do.

Average draft position.

I count 40 WR and 39 RB being drafted in the top 100 picks (round 7-8 for most leagues).

The pool of viable WR is 200 deep or more. You don't want too many RB outside the top 50 imo.

I was reading a nice article about this a month or so back (maybe longer) and the success rate of those later RB picks is much lower than the later WR picks.
Click to expand...
Good posting. Another way or saying the same thing is that I've noticed in mocks that if I pick a WR in the first round (especially with a Top 5 pick), by the time it comes back to me late in the second I really don't like my RB1 options. Whereas if I take a RB in the first, I still like the WRs that are available in the next round.

 
Yeah I can see that.

I have been seeing folks drafting a lot of WR early and often, so if I am picking near the top of the round, I want to get in front of that by drafting WR, because I can.

A lot of the RB I like are going later on in the draft. So despite my acknowledgement of the odds becoming worse to land a successful RB the longer you wait, there are guys I would draft ahead of RB being taken in the 3rd and 4th round that I can get rounds later.

If I am drafting later in the round then I might take one of the top RB if they are the best player on the board. I think this hurts you a bit at WR 2 however because of the longer wait in the 3rd round.

 
Just throwing this out there:

If we look at the top 25 RBs for the final 5 games of the year in standard, 16 of the top 25 RBs were drafted outside of the first 6 rounds on average. I would venture to say of those 15, at least 10 were likely available on waivers in most leagues at various points in the year. For WRs, it was 7. Of the 7, 3-4 were likely available on waivers at various points. 

I know last year was an especially brutal year for RBs, but I also know that the hit rate on late round RBs has been increasing over the last few years. 

 
Ilov80s said:
Just throwing this out there:

If we look at the top 25 RBs for the final 5 games of the year in standard, 16 of the top 25 RBs were drafted outside of the first 6 rounds on average. I would venture to say of those 15, at least 10 were likely available on waivers in most leagues at various points in the year. For WRs, it was 7. Of the 7, 3-4 were likely available on waivers at various points. 

I know last year was an especially brutal year for RBs, but I also know that the hit rate on late round RBs has been increasing over the last few years. 
Click to expand...
I did this analysis for the prior two years ahead of the 2015 drafts, and (small sample size alert) the results were consistent: about 1/2 of the RBs and 1/3 of the WRs who finish inside the top 24 (1s and 2s in a standard 12-teamer) weren't drafted as such. So that would certainly seem to argue for going WR up top and RB later on (at least if you abide by the credo "you can't win your draft in the first 2 rounds, but you can lose it there").

Of course, the kicker here is that season-long RB underperformance is almost certainly more attributable to games missed than to general suckitude, whereas with WRs it's more the reverse. If I know my 1st-round RB is out, I can swap in a bench guy or a WW special, while if my 1st-round WR puts up 2/17/0, there's ####-all I can do about it. Does that make up for the gap between a 50% and a 33% failure rate? Probably not. But it's something else to think about.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s said:
Just throwing this out there:

If we look at the top 25 RBs for the final 5 games of the year in standard, 16 of the top 25 RBs were drafted outside of the first 6 rounds on average. I would venture to say of those 15, at least 10 were likely available on waivers in most leagues at various points in the year. For WRs, it was 7. Of the 7, 3-4 were likely available on waivers at various points. 

I know last year was an especially brutal year for RBs, but I also know that the hit rate on late round RBs has been increasing over the last few years. 
Click to expand...
This is an interesting way of looking at this that I hadn't thought about before.  I did some more digging to get some perspective on what this is showing.

All numbers are from last year only, ADP is from Fantasy Football Calculator.

RB's, # of top 25 guys non-ppr
First 6 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, one was drafted in rounds > than 11 and three were undrafted.

Last 5 games (12-16)
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 14.  of those 14, zero were drafted in rounds > 11 and 5 were undrafted.

12 RB's were on the top 25 list for both the first 6 and last 5 games.  Four of which were drafted in rounds 7 or later (9,9,11,8).  The list of guys was surprising and you can get a bunch of the in later rounds this year.  Freeman, Forte, Charles, Martin, Peterson, Gore, Hill, Woodhead, L. Murray, D. Johnson, Crowell.

WR's, # of top 25 guys non-ppr
First 6 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, Six were drafted in round 11 or greater and three were undrafted.

Last 5 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, Six were drafted in round 11 or greater and five were undrafted.

12 WR's were on the top 25 list for both the first 6 and last 5 games.  Only one of which was drafted in rounds 7 or later (7).

I didn't expect the WR's to score more than the RB's in the both time frames looked at.  In early games WR outscored RB's 1725 to 1675 and in late games 1635 to 1410.

 
abbottjamesr said:
This is an interesting way of looking at this that I hadn't thought about before.  I did some more digging to get some perspective on what this is showing.

All numbers are from last year only, ADP is from Fantasy Football Calculator.

RB's, # of top 25 guys non-ppr
First 6 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, one was drafted in rounds > than 11 and three were undrafted.

Last 5 games (12-16)
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 14.  of those 14, zero were drafted in rounds > 11 and 5 were undrafted.

12 RB's were on the top 25 list for both the first 6 and last 5 games.  Four of which were drafted in rounds 7 or later (9,9,11,8).  The list of guys was surprising and you can get a bunch of the in later rounds this year.  Freeman, Forte, Charles, Martin, Peterson, Gore, Hill, Woodhead, L. Murray, D. Johnson, Crowell.

WR's, # of top 25 guys non-ppr
First 6 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, Six were drafted in round 11 or greater and three were undrafted.

Last 5 games
Drafted in Rounds >6 - 9.  Of those 9, Six were drafted in round 11 or greater and five were undrafted.

12 WR's were on the top 25 list for both the first 6 and last 5 games.  Only one of which was drafted in rounds 7 or later (7).

I didn't expect the WR's to score more than the RB's in the both time frames looked at.  In early games WR outscored RB's 1725 to 1675 and in late games 1635 to 1410.
Click to expand...
Interesting. What's your take way on that?

 
Not crazy at all.  Points are points and elite players are elite players.  You can argue that taking Gurley makes a ton of sense given the rarity of true do-everything RBs anymore.

 
Ilov80s said:
Interesting. What's your take way on that?
Click to expand...
What I am taking away from that is that BPA is the best strategy.  RB's and WR's aren't that different in scoring or where the talent could come from.  Playing the WW well both early and late in the season is a major key to winning your league.  As there were 6 RB/WR's in the early games that were undrafted and 10 in the late games.

If you are playing a best ball, draft and forget league it looks like the top WR's might be more consistent than the top RB's and the WR heavy start may be the best bet.   

Another interesting note about WR's from last year.  There were 9 drafted in the first 2 rounds.  8 of 9 were top 25 in points in the first 6 games and 6 of 9 were top 25 in the last 5 games.  There are 12 WR's with first or second round ADP this year.  I wonder if we will have a similar success rate. 

 
Ilov80s said:
See I think in that format, you should go WR. You have 2 RB slots to fill and 3 WR slots. That means in theory you need 2 RBs in the top 24 and 3 WRs in the top 36. Let's say you take Gurley and he is very disappointing and is worse than RB24. He is really only a bye week, injury replacement level player. If you take OBJ and he is between WR25 and 36,  it is also very disappointing but he is still a weekly start. It's more of a cushion against poor performance. Your lineup is 22%RB and 33% WR. If you take the average scoring for RB1-24 and compare it to WR1-36 and then weight it for the fact that can only start 2 RBs vs 3 WRs, you will see that WR is the more valuable position. Over the last 5 years, the averages for WRs has been rising and RBs has been falling. Add in that fantasy usable RBs get hurt a a higher rate and I think it is a no-brainer to take a WR there. 
Click to expand...
When I load my scoring system into the VBD app it tells me to take one of the top 3 WR's at 1.02. 

When I load my scoring system into the DD app it has Gurley as the #1 pick overall followed by the top 3 WR's.

I feel like I will have more flexibility later in the draft by taking Gurley, but I will probably change my mind a dozen or more times between now and my draft.

 
greedygoat said:
When I load my scoring system into the VBD app it tells me to take one of the top 3 WR's at 1.02. 

When I load my scoring system into the DD app it has Gurley as the #1 pick overall followed by the top 3 WR's.

I feel like I will have more flexibility later in the draft by taking Gurley, but I will probably change my mind a dozen or more times between now and my draft.
Click to expand...
I think we can all relate to that

 
My best mocks so far at the 3 spot have been where I take gurley at 3.  On the way back around I take the highest ranking wr on my board.  Usually that's a mike Evans, alshon, or cooks. 

I take Hyde in the 3rd 5 picks later but also available are Ingram, Anderson and lacy.  I just prefer Hyde this year.  In the 4th I take a solid wr2 like decker.  Then in the 5th I usually am taking rothlisberger or Brees whichever is available.   6th I take best of what's available be Rb and wr. Or if fleener is out there I take him.  Then I spend the next 5-6 rounds shoring up Rb and WR. 

Been loving the way my mocks look this way.  

 
I'm having this same dilemma at 1.03 in  0.5 PPR. We run RB, WR, WR, TE, FLEX, FLEX. Would it be crazy to snag Gurley?

 
Squintz82 said:
I expected that answer. But I have this gut feeling that combining Gurley with someone like Mike Evans / Keenan Allen / D. Thomas is a better core than a combination of Julio with McCoy / Lacy / CJA.
Click to expand...
Why are you drafting a RB so early in that format anyway? If you can start 4WRs and 1 RB then the RB position isn't much more valuable than a TE or QB. If you can start Julio, Alshon and Demaryius, you are in great shape. I would follow that up with about 2-3 more WR before I worry about TE or RB. All you need to do is come up with 1 RB.

Just to give you an idea in this format for ppg:

RB1: 18.7   WR1: 19.4     RB6:15.2  WR6: 16.5     RB12: 13.4  WR12: 14.4     RB18: 11.9  WR18: 13.3    RB 24: 10.8   WR24: 12.4 

Wide receivers are going to score more in that format so the ideal lineup is going to be 4 WRs. If your first 4 picks are something like Julio, Alshon, DT and Decker, you are going to have a powerful starting lineup. Demaryius was the lowest scoring player of those 4 last year on a ppg basis and if he was a RB, he would have been RB12. Based on last year you would have 4 of the top 31 non QB/K/D players. 

 
It's not crazy, but it's not necessarily smart either. Also, if Bell's suspension appeal on Thursday overturns his suspension, I'd have him #2 overall.

Gurley is on a crap team and has been injured fairly often. I'd take Julio over him, but take him at #4 (assuming Bell is suspended for 2+ games).

 
Ilov80s said:
Why are you drafting a RB so early in that format anyway? If you can start 4WRs and 1 RB then the RB position isn't much more valuable than a TE or QB. If you can start Julio, Alshon and Demaryius, you are in great shape. I would follow that up with about 2-3 more WR before I worry about TE or RB. All you need to do is come up with 1 RB.

Just to give you an idea in this format for ppg:

RB1: 18.7   WR1: 19.4     RB6:15.2  WR6: 16.5     RB12: 13.4  WR12: 14.4     RB18: 11.9  WR18: 13.3    RB 24: 10.8   WR24: 12.4 

Wide receivers are going to score more in that format so the ideal lineup is going to be 4 WRs. If your first 4 picks are something like Julio, Alshon, DT and Decker, you are going to have a powerful starting lineup. Demaryius was the lowest scoring player of those 4 last year on a ppg basis and if he was a RB, he would have been RB12. Based on last year you would have 4 of the top 31 non QB/K/D players. 
Click to expand...
Great analysis, thanks.

 
At #4 pick I too would take Gurley even if Beckham or Jones also fell. Then coming back I would definitely take the next best WR. Robinson could fall as he's not quite a big time household name and plays on a kinda of crappy team. It would be Robinson, followed by Jeffery, Marshall, or Nelson. I like Marshall after Robinson. Then with the next pick it's either one of the next RB's: Martin, Lacy, Ingram, McCoy or a WR: Evans, Cooper, Allen, Cooks, Hilton. Tough call, but out of this group I'd go Martin first then Evans, Hilton, Allen.

 
I dunno, maybe this is just a function of drafting in a bigger league (14-16 teams), but I still can't come up with a compelling reason not to take Peterson with the first pick. He's a stone-cold lock to put up 1,200/10; I don't think there are any other RBs you can say that about. And if I pair him with a Cooks or Evans as my WR1, I like that combo much better than Brown and, say, Carlos Hyde or Latavius. The fact that there are so many question marks around RBs is exactly why I want to make sure I get the guy who puts up the same numbers every single year (and who obviously has the upside to do a lot more).

 
My league has a bunch of dinosaur owners that go RB-RB if possible. Hell, Eddie Lacy was #1 last year and Brown went 7th.

I'm guessing Gurley, Johnson, Zeke, AP all go top 5. I don't have my draft slot yet, but I'm looking at 7-8 being a great landing spot to still get either OBJ or Julio. 

 
Ilov80s said:
Why are you drafting a RB so early in that format anyway? If you can start 4WRs and 1 RB then the RB position isn't much more valuable than a TE or QB. If you can start Julio, Alshon and Demaryius, you are in great shape. I would follow that up with about 2-3 more WR before I worry about TE or RB. All you need to do is come up with 1 RB.

Just to give you an idea in this format for ppg:

RB1: 18.7   WR1: 19.4     RB6:15.2  WR6: 16.5     RB12: 13.4  WR12: 14.4     RB18: 11.9  WR18: 13.3    RB 24: 10.8   WR24: 12.4 

Wide receivers are going to score more in that format so the ideal lineup is going to be 4 WRs. If your first 4 picks are something like Julio, Alshon, DT and Decker, you are going to have a powerful starting lineup. Demaryius was the lowest scoring player of those 4 last year on a ppg basis and if he was a RB, he would have been RB12. Based on last year you would have 4 of the top 31 non QB/K/D players. 
Click to expand...
Are you saying it's better to go WR heavy in NON-ppr?

 
Magic_Man said:
Are you saying it's better to go WR heavy in NON-ppr?
Click to expand...
That was for his specific 0.5 PPR which also only required 1 RB in a starting lineup. In a standard league with more traditional lineups I still prefer a WR heavy approach due to injury rates and turnover at RB position, but I can't so definitively say it's better. 

 
Ilov80s said:
That was for his specific 0.5 PPR which also only required 1 RB in a starting lineup. In a standard league with more traditional lineups I still prefer a WR heavy approach due to injury rates and turnover at RB position, but I can't so definitively say it's better. 
Click to expand...
I play PPR and I am having a hard time deciding if I want to go WR-RB, WR-WR or RB-WR tonight (Redraft. Start 2 WR, 2 Rb & 1 flex)

 
Ilov80s said:
I would go WR heavy early based on injury rates and WRs scoring more. 
Click to expand...
I ended up doing that. I had the #3 pick & wanted Julio, but he went #2. I took OBJ & followed that up with Keenan Allen. McCoy is my RB1 & DWill my Rb2 for the 1st 4 weeks. Gonna try to make a trade for a RB. Otherwise, the later fliers I drafted have to end up with 1 gem. I also snagged Jarvis Landry for my flex.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Magic_Man said:
I ended up doing that. I had the #3 pick & wanted Julio, but he went #2. I took OBJ & followed that up with Keenan Allen. McCoy is my RB1 & DWill my Rb2 for the 1st 4 weeks. Gonna try to make a trade for a RB. Otherwise, the later fliers I drafted have to end up with 1 gem. I also snagged Jarvis Landry for my flex.
Click to expand...
OBJ, Allen, McCoy and Jarvis are a very good first 4 for a PPR draft IMO. You are in good shape. Just out of curiosity, what WRs did you pass on to take McCoy?

 
Magic_Man said:
It was tough, but I can't start 4 WR so that was my deciding factor.
Click to expand...
I'm shocked Evans was available in the late 3rd. Is that a 10 or 12 teamer? OBJ, KA and ME is like a holy triumvirate of PPR upside. Crazy they were available to you.

 
zftcg said:
I dunno, maybe this is just a function of drafting in a bigger league (14-16 teams), but I still can't come up with a compelling reason not to take Peterson with the first pick. He's a stone-cold lock to put up 1,200/10; I don't think there are any other RBs you can say that about. And if I pair him with a Cooks or Evans as my WR1, I like that combo much better than Brown and, say, Carlos Hyde or Latavius. The fact that there are so many question marks around RBs is exactly why I want to make sure I get the guy who puts up the same numbers every single year (and who obviously has the upside to do a lot more).
Click to expand...
But what if you draft him, and this is the year the wheels come off. Even if he continues to be ADP for the next few years, I'll still be afraid to ever draft him. 

 
Ilov80s said:
That was for his specific 0.5 PPR which also only required 1 RB in a starting lineup. In a standard league with more traditional lineups I still prefer a WR heavy approach due to injury rates and turnover at RB position, but I can't so definitively say it's better. 
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

 
Super King said:
But what if you draft him, and this is the year the wheels come off. Even if he continues to be ADP for the next few years, I'll still be afraid to ever draft him. 
Click to expand...
Look, there's risk with any player. Brown wasn't as dominant with Ben out last year; what happens if Ben misses even more time? I still think Peterson is just about the safest thing in fantasy.

More importantly, though, my point was that stability at WR is more evenly distributed. Yes, Brown is a lock for huge numbers, but the WRs you could get at the end of the second are pretty solid, too. But the RBs you could get there are huge question marks.

I guess that's the rationale behind Zero RB. Just take lots of WRs early and hope you can hit on a few later round RBs. But if I feel like I can get a reliable RB in the first, I definitely want to take advantage of it.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Non-PPR Superflex (or 2QB) draft results and strategy
Replies
1
Views
1K
Goooals
G
Judge Smails
Really struggling ranking the RB's after the big 3
Replies
13
Views
725
SeniorVBDStudent
SeniorVBDStudent
G
Superflex Non-PPR leagues
Replies
3
Views
590
Gally
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top