bagger.
The One Play Quiz
This is exactly my point. Every year there are both RBs and WRs who break out, but how easily is it to identify them? I think people often overestimate how easily they can get good consistant WRs late in drafts. Sure they are there, but so are RBs.If a RB in the rough is just as likely to be found as a WR in the rough, then why would you pass up on points in the second round to get a RB over a WR? Because of the reasons I mentioned before. Fear. The perception that there are more WRs who can breakout than RBs that can. It is the inefficiency of the draft rearing its ugly head again.The key to your statement is "easily". Every year there's at least a couple RBs that go very late or undrafted that end up as difference makers. Some last year, depending when you drafted were Mike Anderson, Droughns, Thomas Jones, Parker, Moore, S Davis, and Ricky Williams. All 7 of these ended up in the top 30, some did much better for a few weeks at least.Prove me wrong.This is my favorite fantasy football myth.Any perceived dropoff you think you are getting from a 2nd - 4th round WR is easily made up for by buying solid WRs with upside in later rounds, which you cannot do with RBs easily.
OTOH, Santana, Galloway, Glenn, Housh, Curtis and Jerevicous did this as well.
If you look at the WRs who you would want on your team, the list ends around WR25. Sure there will be a few below that mark who will produce, but you cannot rely on it. If you want to build a team that consistantly scores an amount of points that will win your league, you realize on startling thing (especially in a league that starts 3 WRs):
WRs are frightenly close to RBs in terms of scarcity, and the overwhelming majority of which are drafted by the 7th round. This means that you can't gamble early round picks on players who have similar value to their peers a few rounds later.