Looking back and ahead at drafting (1 Viewer)

[Doctor Detroit]

For posters who play in multiple leagues this year I'm writing this for you to consider now and next year as I think we often don't look back at how we drafted and learn from it.

With the current state of the NFL and the shift toward RBBC not looking like it will end but in fact grow in popularity, drafters are faced with some tough decisions. Should I get RB A or RB B? Should I get them both? I have never been a fan of getting two backs from one team who truly operate in the RBBC because I think you are unlikely to use both in the same week and will inevitably pull your hair out trying to decide who to play each week.

So I think it is advisable to select one or the other in systems like in Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, New England, Indy, and of course Denver. I think N.O is an exception to the rule because Deuce was not going to get a heavy workload this year anyway and Reggie Bush is a hybrid player who is going to get his touches between the 20s every game.

The draft theory:

I drafted Tatum Bell in the 5th round of my first draft this year which took place in July. After the Mike Bell news hit I was a bit upset but decided to try and hedge my bet. I had three more drafts in August and told myself that I would add Mike Bell if he was available in the 8th round or after. I got him in the 9th in my first redraft. I then also added him in a dynasty league as he has a great upside in the 8th.

What I think is the best is to first identify which of the two RBs in a system has the most upside. In Denver's case I think that Mike Bell with his size and vision has a bigger upside than Tatum. Thus I would target Mike in Dynasty leagues and Tatum in redrafts if I had to do it over again. If we were talking Carolina backs I'd try and get DeAngelo Williams in a dynasty and Foster in a redraft if it was possible.

Why hedge?

Well it comes down to common sense. Looking at the first two weeks look at the Denver backs:

Week one:

Mike Bell: 10 carries 58 yards rushing, 4 catches for 30 yards receiving and a TD. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 15 carries 103 yards and a fumble. 15 total touches

Week two:

Mike Bell 13 carries 44 yards rushing, 1 catch for 12 yards. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 16 carries 69 yards rushing, 2 catches for 7 yards. 18 total touches

So basically neither is a great #2 RB option but both have value where you play more than one RB. If things stay constant both players will get between 14 and 20 touches a game and in the Denver offense that means a safe play in a flex if you don't have a better option (especially in non PPR leagues) and once the Denver offense starts hitting on all cylinders a good likelihood of some nice performances.

Why would you draft them both? I wouldn't. Again they are the same player from week to week unless one of them gets injured but in Denver that just means Cobbs will replace the injured guy.

In Carolina if one of the guys goes down then the other will be getting 90 percent of the touches. Same in Chicago, in Indy, and in Dallas. But wasting higher middle round selections on two guys from the same team to me is extremely counterproductive. Instead if you draft Thomas Jones in your first draft, target Cedric Benson in your second. What happens is especially with injury one of your teams will be getting a #2 RB you can play each week while the other team just loses a guy who is your 3rd or 4th RB. Overall you as a fantasy player come out on top. Do that with two teams by taking Foster in the 4th and Mike Bell in the 8th then turning around and getting and Tatum Bell in the 6th and Deangelo Williams in the 7th in league two. Then you have your #3 and #4 RBs on both teams and a pretty good chance of having one of those guys separate themselves from the rest. In both cases if you already took RBs in rounds one and two/three then you have four RBs and good Flex and bye week options on both teams. But even better you have a big upside hedge if say Foster goes down and you have DeAngelo who now becomes a must start every week.

I think it's important to let all those players fall to you and not get overzealous trying to target a hedge bet player. But the thing is that an RBBC presents an opportunity for great value in the middle rounds. If one of those RBS go down or one of those RBs ends up being the guy who is getting 70 percent of the touches or all the goaline touches you get #2 RB numbers out of essentially a #3 RB. If you have a flex position in your league in particular this could put you over the top. Now your other team might lose its FLEX guy or a main backup but we are talking ADPs in the 5th, 6th, and 7th round area. You should already have two primary backs by then and most likely a WR or two. Every year since I've been playing fantasy football a #2 WR ends up being had in the 12th round or even as a free agent. You don't see very many RBs who can be your #2 guy being picked up as a free agent. Statistically speaking the chance you take by hedging is more likely to work out by the numbers and thus a good gamble to make IMO.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Yipes.

 

[Tick]

There should be a forum dedicated to strategy posts.

I do a similar thing in rookie drafts... nobody was sure which would be better, DeAngelo Williams or Laurence Maroney. I had the third pick in one league and the second in another. Williams was the guy available at third, so I took him. Knowing I had already picked Williams and that I didn't have a real preference for either player, I took Maroney with the second pick.

I've also tried to spread out competing players like you mention among my dynasty leagues - Gado in one league, Green/Herron in another, Davenport/Herron in a third is an example. Toefield in one, Greg Jones in another. Devery Henderson in one, Marques Colston in another.

When I have a strong opinion, though, I don't hedge - Gore but no Barlow, Blaylock but no Houston, and some where I've made the wrong call as well.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

There should be a forum dedicated to strategy posts.

I do a similar thing in rookie drafts... nobody was sure which would be better, DeAngelo Williams or Laurence Maroney. I had the third pick in one league and the second in another. Williams was the guy available at third, so I took him. Knowing I had already picked Williams and that I didn't have a real preference for either player, I took Maroney with the second pick.

I've also tried to spread out competing players like you mention among my dynasty leagues - Gado in one league, Green/Herron in another, Davenport/Herron in a third is an example. Toefield in one, Greg Jones in another. Devery Henderson in one, Marques Colston in another.

When I have a strong opinion, though, I don't hedge - Gore but no Barlow, Blaylock but no Houston, and some where I've made the wrong call as well.

I think that is something I failed to really address. I feel the same way. Although I do think you can do it if you get guys to fall so far that taking a chance on them is worth it. Take Michael Clayton. Ok Galloway is the guy in Tampa and they have looked terrible but getting Clayton in the 11th round of your second draft after already taking Galloway in the first and not securing him in the second. If you were high on Chris Simms as I was (still am going forward) then taking a chance with Clayton seems worth it especially if Galloway who has a history of injuries and is getting long in the tooth has problems. And yes guys in questionable situations who are competing for a spot it's good to spread the wealth. I've been burned in the past by taking the same guy in these situations in three leagues instead of taking one in two and one in one. There are always going to be hits and misses at WR and if you are guessing that a certain team will be depending on big production from their #2 WR and still haven't determined who that's gonna be, then taking a chance on both of them in different leagues insures you get those points. That's of course until the #4 guy ends up being the #2 guy and he gets picked up off the waiver wire one pick before you.

I try to keep these things in my mind all year. Otherwise I just make the same mistakes over and over again. That's why I wrote this up.

 

[Liquid Tension]

For posters who play in multiple leagues this year I'm writing this for you to consider now and next year as I think we often don't look back at how we drafted and learn from it.

With the current state of the NFL and the shift toward RBBC not looking like it will end but in fact grow in popularity, drafters are faced with some tough decisions. Should I get RB A or RB B? Should I get them both? I have never been a fan of getting two backs from one team who truly operate in the RBBC because I think you are unlikely to use both in the same week and will inevitably pull your hair out trying to decide who to play each week.

So I think it is advisable to select one or the other in systems like in Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, New England, Indy, and of course Denver. I think N.O is an exception to the rule because Deuce was not going to get a heavy workload this year anyway and Reggie Bush is a hybrid player who is going to get his touches between the 20s every game.

The draft theory:

I drafted Tatum Bell in the 5th round of my first draft this year which took place in July. After the Mike Bell news hit I was a bit upset but decided to try and hedge my bet. I had three more drafts in August and told myself that I would add Mike Bell if he was available in the 8th round or after. I got him in the 9th in my first redraft. I then also added him in a dynasty league as he has a great upside in the 8th.

What I think is the best is to first identify which of the two RBs in a system has the most upside. In Denver's case I think that Mike Bell with his size and vision has a bigger upside than Tatum. Thus I would target Mike in Dynasty leagues and Tatum in redrafts if I had to do it over again. If we were talking Carolina backs I'd try and get DeAngelo Williams in a dynasty and Foster in a redraft if it was possible.

Why hedge?

Well it comes down to common sense. Looking at the first two weeks look at the Denver backs:

Week one:

Mike Bell: 10 carries 58 yards rushing, 4 catches for 30 yards receiving and a TD. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 15 carries 103 yards and a fumble. 15 total touches

Week two:

Mike Bell 13 carries 44 yards rushing, 1 catch for 12 yards. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 16 carries 69 yards rushing, 2 catches for 7 yards. 18 total touches

So basically neither is a great #2 RB option but both have value where you play more than one RB. If things stay constant both players will get between 14 and 20 touches a game and in the Denver offense that means a safe play in a flex if you don't have a better option (especially in non PPR leagues) and once the Denver offense starts hitting on all cylinders a good likelihood of some nice performances.

Why would you draft them both? I wouldn't. Again they are the same player from week to week unless one of them gets injured but in Denver that just means Cobbs will replace the injured guy.

In Carolina if one of the guys goes down then the other will be getting 90 percent of the touches. Same in Chicago, in Indy, and in Dallas. But wasting higher middle round selections on two guys from the same team to me is extremely counterproductive. Instead if you draft Thomas Jones in your first draft, target Cedric Benson in your second. What happens is especially with injury one of your teams will be getting a #2 RB you can play each week while the other team just loses a guy who is your 3rd or 4th RB. Overall you as a fantasy player come out on top. Do that with two teams by taking Foster in the 4th and Mike Bell in the 8th then turning around and getting and Tatum Bell in the 6th and Deangelo Williams in the 7th in league two. Then you have your #3 and #4 RBs on both teams and a pretty good chance of having one of those guys separate themselves from the rest. In both cases if you already took RBs in rounds one and two/three then you have four RBs and good Flex and bye week options on both teams. But even better you have a big upside hedge if say Foster goes down and you have DeAngelo who now becomes a must start every week.

I think it's important to let all those players fall to you and not get overzealous trying to target a hedge bet player. But the thing is that an RBBC presents an opportunity for great value in the middle rounds. If one of those RBS go down or one of those RBs ends up being the guy who is getting 70 percent of the touches or all the goaline touches you get #2 RB numbers out of essentially a #3 RB. If you have a flex position in your league in particular this could put you over the top. Now your other team might lose its FLEX guy or a main backup but we are talking ADPs in the 5th, 6th, and 7th round area. You should already have two primary backs by then and most likely a WR or two. Every year since I've been playing fantasy football a #2 WR ends up being had in the 12th round or even as a free agent. You don't see very many RBs who can be your #2 guy being picked up as a free agent. Statistically speaking the chance you take by hedging is more likely to work out by the numbers and thus a good gamble to make IMO.

Your thought process is sound, however, I don't like the hedge strategy for a few reasons:1) I have enough confidence in my ability to pick the right guy that I go with who I think is best

2) For rooting interests, I like to root for the same guys if I can so I try and get the same players if all else is equal. You know the story when you are playing your guy and the team you are playing in another league has the same guy...it leads to a very annoying day of watching football

3) When you hedge, by nature, you are sacrificing one for another. Your thought it that it puts one of your teams into the playoffs, but my thought is that it takes one of your teams out of the playoffs and that is just not acceptable. While the upside is probably a little greater than the downside, if neither guy gets injured you have two mediocre teams.

So what did I do? My take is to avoid those situations as much as possible. While that may seem obvious, teams panic in drafts and patience is rewarded. I would always go after the better talent in a dynasty league. I also think the no two situations are alike. t the start of the year I "knew" that TJ would be the guy in Chicago if healthy. I also felt that Foster would be in a legit RBBC with Williams by the middle of the year. i felt the same way about Maroney and Dillon. BTW, I think that Benson will carve into TJ's carries towards the end of the year, but TJ will still get a larger share. Tennessee I stayed away like the plague. Same for Denver and Houston. I targeted Jamal Lewis because if healthy he was the guy. I felt the same about Ahman Green, but didn't like their OL and he was always picked before I was comfortable. I drafted Reggie Bush in my dynasty league (it is actually a 9 man keeper league) with the 1st pick (I traded for it). He is actually doing better than I thought, but I think the future is his and that is why I took him. Deuce is as good as any short yardage runner and I would expect him to grab 90% of the goal carries

Don't know what else to say?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

For posters who play in multiple leagues this year I'm writing this for you to consider now and next year as I think we often don't look back at how we drafted and learn from it.

With the current state of the NFL and the shift toward RBBC not looking like it will end but in fact grow in popularity, drafters are faced with some tough decisions. Should I get RB A or RB B? Should I get them both? I have never been a fan of getting two backs from one team who truly operate in the RBBC because I think you are unlikely to use both in the same week and will inevitably pull your hair out trying to decide who to play each week.

So I think it is advisable to select one or the other in systems like in Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, New England, Indy, and of course Denver. I think N.O is an exception to the rule because Deuce was not going to get a heavy workload this year anyway and Reggie Bush is a hybrid player who is going to get his touches between the 20s every game.

The draft theory:

I drafted Tatum Bell in the 5th round of my first draft this year which took place in July. After the Mike Bell news hit I was a bit upset but decided to try and hedge my bet. I had three more drafts in August and told myself that I would add Mike Bell if he was available in the 8th round or after. I got him in the 9th in my first redraft. I then also added him in a dynasty league as he has a great upside in the 8th.

What I think is the best is to first identify which of the two RBs in a system has the most upside. In Denver's case I think that Mike Bell with his size and vision has a bigger upside than Tatum. Thus I would target Mike in Dynasty leagues and Tatum in redrafts if I had to do it over again. If we were talking Carolina backs I'd try and get DeAngelo Williams in a dynasty and Foster in a redraft if it was possible.

Why hedge?

Well it comes down to common sense. Looking at the first two weeks look at the Denver backs:

Week one:

Mike Bell: 10 carries 58 yards rushing, 4 catches for 30 yards receiving and a TD. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 15 carries 103 yards and a fumble. 15 total touches

Week two:

Mike Bell 13 carries 44 yards rushing, 1 catch for 12 yards. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 16 carries 69 yards rushing, 2 catches for 7 yards. 18 total touches

So basically neither is a great #2 RB option but both have value where you play more than one RB. If things stay constant both players will get between 14 and 20 touches a game and in the Denver offense that means a safe play in a flex if you don't have a better option (especially in non PPR leagues) and once the Denver offense starts hitting on all cylinders a good likelihood of some nice performances.

Why would you draft them both? I wouldn't. Again they are the same player from week to week unless one of them gets injured but in Denver that just means Cobbs will replace the injured guy.

In Carolina if one of the guys goes down then the other will be getting 90 percent of the touches. Same in Chicago, in Indy, and in Dallas. But wasting higher middle round selections on two guys from the same team to me is extremely counterproductive. Instead if you draft Thomas Jones in your first draft, target Cedric Benson in your second. What happens is especially with injury one of your teams will be getting a #2 RB you can play each week while the other team just loses a guy who is your 3rd or 4th RB. Overall you as a fantasy player come out on top. Do that with two teams by taking Foster in the 4th and Mike Bell in the 8th then turning around and getting and Tatum Bell in the 6th and Deangelo Williams in the 7th in league two. Then you have your #3 and #4 RBs on both teams and a pretty good chance of having one of those guys separate themselves from the rest. In both cases if you already took RBs in rounds one and two/three then you have four RBs and good Flex and bye week options on both teams. But even better you have a big upside hedge if say Foster goes down and you have DeAngelo who now becomes a must start every week.

I think it's important to let all those players fall to you and not get overzealous trying to target a hedge bet player. But the thing is that an RBBC presents an opportunity for great value in the middle rounds. If one of those RBS go down or one of those RBs ends up being the guy who is getting 70 percent of the touches or all the goaline touches you get #2 RB numbers out of essentially a #3 RB. If you have a flex position in your league in particular this could put you over the top. Now your other team might lose its FLEX guy or a main backup but we are talking ADPs in the 5th, 6th, and 7th round area. You should already have two primary backs by then and most likely a WR or two. Every year since I've been playing fantasy football a #2 WR ends up being had in the 12th round or even as a free agent. You don't see very many RBs who can be your #2 guy being picked up as a free agent. Statistically speaking the chance you take by hedging is more likely to work out by the numbers and thus a good gamble to make IMO.

Your thought process is sound, however, I don't like the hedge strategy for a few reasons:1) I have enough confidence in my ability to pick the right guy that I go with who I think is best

I do also but we are talking middle round picks here. I think a lot of people have good skill in the game but I've seen the best players make what they think are great picks that work out badly. If you select Mike Bell or Tatum Bell only and they crap out, you end up with nothing across the board.

2) For rooting interests, I like to root for the same guys if I can so I try and get the same players if all else is equal. You know the story when you are playing your guy and the team you are playing in another league has the same guy...it leads to a very annoying day of watching football

This plays no part in my decision making. That's a strange way to do things to me but if it keeps your heart rate a little lower then cool. Personally I only follow two leagues during the games. The other two I just check after the fact. Too many guys and scenarios involved.

3) When you hedge, by nature, you are sacrificing one for another. Your thought it that it puts one of your teams into the playoffs, but my thought is that it takes one of your teams out of the playoffs and that is just not acceptable. While the upside is probably a little greater than the downside, if neither guy gets injured you have two mediocre teams.

No I didn't say it would put one of your teams in the playoffs. These are #3 or #4 RBs when you draft them. What I'm saying is that if something happens with one of them that it could put you over the top. You go from getting 11 out of the flex to getting 18. Otherwise in these RBBC you are getting a relatively average return but that's ok because you drafted them as your #3 RB anyway.

So what did I do? My take is to avoid those situations as much as possible. While that may seem obvious, teams panic in drafts and patience is rewarded. I would always go after the better talent in a dynasty league. I also think the no two situations are alike. t the start of the year I "knew" that TJ would be the guy in Chicago if healthy. I also felt that Foster would be in a legit RBBC with Williams by the middle of the year. i felt the same way about Maroney and Dillon. BTW, I think that Benson will carve into TJ's carries towards the end of the year, but TJ will still get a larger share. Tennessee I stayed away like the plague. Same for Denver and Houston. I targeted Jamal Lewis because if healthy he was the guy. I felt the same about Ahman Green, but didn't like their OL and he was always picked before I was comfortable. I drafted Reggie Bush in my dynasty league (it is actually a 9 man keeper league) with the 1st pick (I traded for it). He is actually doing better than I thought, but I think the future is his and that is why I took him. Deuce is as good as any short yardage runner and I would expect him to grab 90% of the goal carries

I think a lot of people avoid and that is exactly why you can usually get RBBC guys later. I'd rather take a shot at a RBBC guy like Bell then draft a #3 WR of any kind. WR is a deep spot and as this year shows (Crotchery, Colston, Toomer, Reggie Williams) there are a ton of good WRs you can get in the last two rounds or on the wire. Good input though. I think you are the type that thinks over these things as well and seem to be confident in your ability to draft guys that will be solid all year. Confidence is usually important in this game, especially if that confidence is based on research and analysis of all variables of a given league.

 

[Liquid Tension]

For posters who play in multiple leagues this year I'm writing this for you to consider now and next year as I think we often don't look back at how we drafted and learn from it.

With the current state of the NFL and the shift toward RBBC not looking like it will end but in fact grow in popularity, drafters are faced with some tough decisions. Should I get RB A or RB B? Should I get them both? I have never been a fan of getting two backs from one team who truly operate in the RBBC because I think you are unlikely to use both in the same week and will inevitably pull your hair out trying to decide who to play each week.

So I think it is advisable to select one or the other in systems like in Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, New England, Indy, and of course Denver. I think N.O is an exception to the rule because Deuce was not going to get a heavy workload this year anyway and Reggie Bush is a hybrid player who is going to get his touches between the 20s every game.

The draft theory:

I drafted Tatum Bell in the 5th round of my first draft this year which took place in July. After the Mike Bell news hit I was a bit upset but decided to try and hedge my bet. I had three more drafts in August and told myself that I would add Mike Bell if he was available in the 8th round or after. I got him in the 9th in my first redraft. I then also added him in a dynasty league as he has a great upside in the 8th.

What I think is the best is to first identify which of the two RBs in a system has the most upside. In Denver's case I think that Mike Bell with his size and vision has a bigger upside than Tatum. Thus I would target Mike in Dynasty leagues and Tatum in redrafts if I had to do it over again. If we were talking Carolina backs I'd try and get DeAngelo Williams in a dynasty and Foster in a redraft if it was possible.

Why hedge?

Well it comes down to common sense. Looking at the first two weeks look at the Denver backs:

Week one:

Mike Bell: 10 carries 58 yards rushing, 4 catches for 30 yards receiving and a TD. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 15 carries 103 yards and a fumble. 15 total touches

Week two:

Mike Bell 13 carries 44 yards rushing, 1 catch for 12 yards. 14 total touches

Tatum Bell: 16 carries 69 yards rushing, 2 catches for 7 yards. 18 total touches

So basically neither is a great #2 RB option but both have value where you play more than one RB. If things stay constant both players will get between 14 and 20 touches a game and in the Denver offense that means a safe play in a flex if you don't have a better option (especially in non PPR leagues) and once the Denver offense starts hitting on all cylinders a good likelihood of some nice performances.

Why would you draft them both? I wouldn't. Again they are the same player from week to week unless one of them gets injured but in Denver that just means Cobbs will replace the injured guy.

In Carolina if one of the guys goes down then the other will be getting 90 percent of the touches. Same in Chicago, in Indy, and in Dallas. But wasting higher middle round selections on two guys from the same team to me is extremely counterproductive. Instead if you draft Thomas Jones in your first draft, target Cedric Benson in your second. What happens is especially with injury one of your teams will be getting a #2 RB you can play each week while the other team just loses a guy who is your 3rd or 4th RB. Overall you as a fantasy player come out on top. Do that with two teams by taking Foster in the 4th and Mike Bell in the 8th then turning around and getting and Tatum Bell in the 6th and Deangelo Williams in the 7th in league two. Then you have your #3 and #4 RBs on both teams and a pretty good chance of having one of those guys separate themselves from the rest. In both cases if you already took RBs in rounds one and two/three then you have four RBs and good Flex and bye week options on both teams. But even better you have a big upside hedge if say Foster goes down and you have DeAngelo who now becomes a must start every week.

I think it's important to let all those players fall to you and not get overzealous trying to target a hedge bet player. But the thing is that an RBBC presents an opportunity for great value in the middle rounds. If one of those RBS go down or one of those RBs ends up being the guy who is getting 70 percent of the touches or all the goaline touches you get #2 RB numbers out of essentially a #3 RB. If you have a flex position in your league in particular this could put you over the top. Now your other team might lose its FLEX guy or a main backup but we are talking ADPs in the 5th, 6th, and 7th round area. You should already have two primary backs by then and most likely a WR or two. Every year since I've been playing fantasy football a #2 WR ends up being had in the 12th round or even as a free agent. You don't see very many RBs who can be your #2 guy being picked up as a free agent. Statistically speaking the chance you take by hedging is more likely to work out by the numbers and thus a good gamble to make IMO.

Your thought process is sound, however, I don't like the hedge strategy for a few reasons:1) I have enough confidence in my ability to pick the right guy that I go with who I think is best

I do also but we are talking middle round picks here. I think a lot of people have good skill in the game but I've seen the best players make what they think are great picks that work out badly. If you select Mike Bell or Tatum Bell only and they crap out, you end up with nothing across the board.

2) For rooting interests, I like to root for the same guys if I can so I try and get the same players if all else is equal. You know the story when you are playing your guy and the team you are playing in another league has the same guy...it leads to a very annoying day of watching football

This plays no part in my decision making. That's a strange way to do things to me but if it keeps your heart rate a little lower then cool. Personally I only follow two leagues during the games. The other two I just check after the fact. Too many guys and scenarios involved.

3) When you hedge, by nature, you are sacrificing one for another. Your thought it that it puts one of your teams into the playoffs, but my thought is that it takes one of your teams out of the playoffs and that is just not acceptable. While the upside is probably a little greater than the downside, if neither guy gets injured you have two mediocre teams.

No I didn't say it would put one of your teams in the playoffs. These are #3 or #4 RBs when you draft them. What I'm saying is that if something happens with one of them that it could put you over the top. You go from getting 11 out of the flex to getting 18. Otherwise in these RBBC you are getting a relatively average return but that's ok because you drafted them as your #3 RB anyway.

So what did I do? My take is to avoid those situations as much as possible. While that may seem obvious, teams panic in drafts and patience is rewarded. I would always go after the better talent in a dynasty league. I also think the no two situations are alike. t the start of the year I "knew" that TJ would be the guy in Chicago if healthy. I also felt that Foster would be in a legit RBBC with Williams by the middle of the year. i felt the same way about Maroney and Dillon. BTW, I think that Benson will carve into TJ's carries towards the end of the year, but TJ will still get a larger share. Tennessee I stayed away like the plague. Same for Denver and Houston. I targeted Jamal Lewis because if healthy he was the guy. I felt the same about Ahman Green, but didn't like their OL and he was always picked before I was comfortable. I drafted Reggie Bush in my dynasty league (it is actually a 9 man keeper league) with the 1st pick (I traded for it). He is actually doing better than I thought, but I think the future is his and that is why I took him. Deuce is as good as any short yardage runner and I would expect him to grab 90% of the goal carries

I think a lot of people avoid and that is exactly why you can usually get RBBC guys later. I'd rather take a shot at a RBBC guy like Bell then draft a #3 WR of any kind. WR is a deep spot and as this year shows (Crotchery, Colston, Toomer, Reggie Williams) there are a ton of good WRs you can get in the last two rounds or on the wire. Good input though. I think you are the type that thinks over these things as well and seem to be confident in your ability to draft guys that will be solid all year. Confidence is usually important in this game, especially if that confidence is based on research and analysis of all variables of a given league.

You stated that if you only take one of Mike Bell or Tatum Bell and they crap out you are left with nothing. I would say that you may make a good pick with your other pick so that is not necessarily true, and if they stay healthy and they are truly equal, then you are stuck with two non starters. The Tatum Bell situation was pretty clear to me and that was Tatum Bell has more talent so you draft him (IF YOU HAD TO DRAFT ONE OF THEM). I think the Denver situation was a little more obvious, but the situations like NE and Carolina were less clear to me so I stayed away from them. If I had an early dynasty league pick I would pick Maroney or D. Williams before I took the starter. Enjoy

 

[Scrap Iron]

I think an RBBC guy can offer great value provided you don't draft him as one of your starters. At worst, you get a serviceable bye-week replacement. At best, he seizes the job and becomes a a legit RB2 or even an RB1. Maroney, for instance was often drafted in the 9th round or later. Minimal risk and huge upside taking a RBBC player in the mid/late rounds.