Most undervalued position in FF (1 Viewer)

[-OZ-]

From SSOG's post, and as a general discussion.

Granted, a lot of this is league specific, so either answer for your league, or your perception overall.

I'm not sure how many leagues use a head coach, 2 of my 3 dynasty leagues do, I personally don't care for it, but it's here to stay in those leagues.

(please only answer punter if your league uses it) I had to delete this option.

 

[rzrback77]

Really dependent on the scoring, but when the TE position gets extra points per reception, it is definitely the TE. There are less of them utilized as frequently so the very good ones stand out even more.

Another position that I considered was WR, which usually has more fantasy starters than any other.

 

[code]

I'm not sure I understand in what way we are defining "undervalued"...do you mean the position is not given strong enough scoring to make it as "score valuable" as it should be in FF or do you mean given any acoring system which players are overlooked most often and represent the best "draft value"?

For "scoring value" I would say DL...for "draft value" I would vote LB...

 

[-OZ-]

I'm not sure I understand in what way we are defining "undervalued"...do you mean the position is not given strong enough scoring to make it as "score valuable" as it should be in FF or do you mean given any scoring system which players are overlooked most often and represent the best "draft value"?

For "scoring value" I would say DL...for "draft value" I would vote LB...

The bolded part. LB is an answer I can agree with in IDP leagues.

 

[Islander]

offensive line

 

[Mike Herman]

My first thought was you-know-what, but I admit I could be biased. My real answer is probably Team Defense. Just like the skill positions, a scoring frenzy on any given week by the team D can carry a fantasy team to victory. The extent of analysis on team D's however is generally much less than is devoted to the skill guys.

 

[code]

I'm not sure I understand in what way we are defining "undervalued"...do you mean the position is not given strong enough scoring to make it as "score valuable" as it should be in FF or do you mean given any scoring system which players are overlooked most often and represent the best "draft value"?

For "scoring value" I would say DL...for "draft value" I would vote LB...

The bolded part. LB is an answer I can agree with in IDP leagues.

It appears I'm the only guy to vote for any IDP so far...interesting...

 

[fruity pebbles]

I'm not sure I understand in what way we are defining "undervalued"...do you mean the position is not given strong enough scoring to make it as "score valuable" as it should be in FF or do you mean given any scoring system which players are overlooked most often and represent the best "draft value"?

For "scoring value" I would say DL...for "draft value" I would vote LB...

The bolded part. LB is an answer I can agree with in IDP leagues.

It appears I'm the only guy to vote for any IDP so far...interesting...

I actually think IDPs in general are overvalued by owners in most leagues. I'm probably in the minority though.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

TE is like QB, you start 1, but the number of viable options is less, and the dropoff is much much steeper. I dont understand why Gates goes a round later than Manning.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I'd have to say it's receiver.

 

[rzrback77]

TE is like QB, you start 1, but the number of viable options is less, and the dropoff is much much steeper. I dont understand why Gates goes a round later than Manning.

I agree, VERY

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

I don't understand why leagues have a mandatory TE starting requirement. There aren't enough offensive-oriented TEs to go around in a 12+ team league. I'm 100% behind the "start 4 WRs/TEs" without a requirement on that position (note: not total flex, since you can't use RBs in that position).

That way, the guy with Gates still has a top 10 producing player in the WR/TE slot. Just adds more players to pick from in the pool in my book.

That said, I voted team DEF. Depending on the scoring, your team DEF can be the difference in close games. Although, in some leagues, all team DEF score within 50 pts of each other on the season ...

 

[ookook]

That's funny. I thought the solution was to force teams to start 2 TEs....

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

That's funny. I thought the solution was to force teams to start 2 TEs....

Why force teams to field multiple positions with extremely high-variance players? That takes away from the "skill" element in forming a team and makes luck an even larger factor in deciding head to head matchups. By allowing TEs to start in the WR position, it gives the players the opportunity to better show their skill in who they draft and start.

 

[Domination]

That's funny. I thought the solution was to force teams to start 2 TEs....

Why force teams to field multiple positions with extremely high-variance players? That takes away from the "skill" element in forming a team and makes luck an even larger factor in deciding head to head matchups. By allowing TEs to start in the WR position, it gives the players the opportunity to better show their skill in who they draft and start.

I totally disagree. If you are to show your skill, then you should be able to pick a TE to compliment your team. Otherwise it just gives owners an out for not knowing enough about TEs.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

That's funny. I thought the solution was to force teams to start 2 TEs....

Why force teams to field multiple positions with extremely high-variance players? That takes away from the "skill" element in forming a team and makes luck an even larger factor in deciding head to head matchups. By allowing TEs to start in the WR position, it gives the players the opportunity to better show their skill in who they draft and start.

I totally disagree. If you are to show your skill, then you should be able to pick a TE to compliment your team. Otherwise it just gives owners an out for not knowing enough about TEs.

but there are only 7-8 TEs who score points at all ... it's not like you're showing your skill by successfully picking one of them out of the pool ...

 

[ookook]

That's funny. I thought the solution was to force teams to start 2 TEs....

Why force teams to field multiple positions with extremely high-variance players? That takes away from the "skill" element in forming a team and makes luck an even larger factor in deciding head to head matchups. By allowing TEs to start in the WR position, it gives the players the opportunity to better show their skill in who they draft and start.

I disgree. Forcing owners to start positions with LOW variability is senseless.Forcing them to draft multiple positions where there are different baselines forces trade-offs and increases skill.

Flex positions are crutches for cripples.

 

[ookook]

but there are only 7-8 TEs who score points at all ... it's not like you're showing your skill by successfully picking one of them out of the pool ...

Well that is just factually not true.

Still, it forces owners who are drafting to decide between TE6, WR37, or K9 (or whatever). That is where the skill is.

 

[-OZ-]

Flex positions are crutches for cripples.

but this is why there are different leagues, with different rules.

 

[SSOG]

It's absolutely, positively, no doubt in my mind, 100% TEs. TEs are the most undervalued position in fantasy football.

To wit: Here is a list of the season ending VBD rank of each TE last season, next to the average draft position of each TE this season.

TE#: - VBD - ADP

TE1 - 8th - 26th

TE2 - 22nd - 50th

TE3 - 24th - 52nd

TE4 - 30th - 62nd

TE5 - 31st - 66th

TE6 - 33rd - 73rd

TE7 - 44th - 79th

TE8 - 57th - 82nd

TE9 - 59th - 96th

TE10 - 62nd - 99th

Find me one other position where the first player is leaving the board EIGHTEEN PICKS behind where he finished last season, the next two players are TWENTY EIGHT picks behind where they finished last season, and everyone else is 30 or more selections behind where they finished last season. According to the principals of value-based drafting, there is not a single position that is anywhere NEAR as underrated as is the TE position.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

To wit: Here is a list of the season ending VBD rank of each TE last season, next to the average draft position of each TE this season.

TE#: - VBD - ADP

TE1 - 8th - 26th

TE2 - 22nd - 50th

TE3 - 24th - 52nd

TE4 - 30th - 62nd

TE5 - 31st - 66th

TE6 - 33rd - 73rd

TE7 - 44th - 79th

TE8 - 57th - 82nd

TE9 - 59th - 96th

TE10 - 62nd - 99th

From the looks of it, "TE6" may refer to a different player in the second column than it does in the third column. If so, the results (that each TE had a higher VBD value than ADP) might be due to the fact that TEs are generally undervalued, or it might just be due to the fact that TEs are impossible to predict. (If TEs' weekly scores were determined by dice rolls for example, nobody would draft them until the last round; so they'd all have very low ADPs. But the top ten fantasy TEs would have VBD values far ahead of their ADPs. This is in fact what I contend largely happens with team defenses.)To solve this problem, I would make "TE6" the same guy in each column. It could be the sixth most valuable guy, or it could be the sixth guy drafted; but it should be consistent.

If you do it this way, you'd probably get similar results for the TE position (since TEs in fact have not been all that difficult to predict in recent years) -- but not for other positions like QBs and Team Defenses. So it would (I predict) strengthen your case for the TE position being the most overvalued.

JMHO.

 

[videoguy505]

My first though was you-know-what, but I admit I could be biased. My real answer is probably Team Defense. Just like the skill positions, a scoring frenzy on any given week by the team D can carry a fantasy team to victory. The extent of analysis on team D's however is generally much less than is devoted to the skill guys.

My vote too. My league puts a lot of points on turnovers, plus sacks, Def TDs, and pts & yds allowed. When the league first started 2 years ago, I drafted out of the 1.12 and 2.01 spot--picks were Rudi and Kevan Barlow. Yikes. Last year was the first "keep 3" season, my keepers were Rudi, Andre Johnson (yikes), and Larry Johnson. I let go of Steve Smith (double yikes).I made the playoffs both years by being the only owner dedicated to TeamDs. Most owners drafted one, and played that same one every week. I was cycling through the waiver wire for whomever played the 49ers or Texans so I could rack up sacks and turnovers. Drafting out of the last spot--and blowing my 2.01 pick--I kept pace with the guys with Alexanders and Holts, or LTs and Lamont Jordans combos, by beating them up with DSTs. Some weeks my waiver wire D would outscore all but the top 5 position players, which is incredible value for a waiver move.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I was cycling through the waiver wire for whomever played the 49ers or Texans so I could rack up sacks and turnovers.

This is what I always do and it works great. Which is why I think spending a draft pick on a defense before the last round is unnecessary.

 

[LC-Hawks]

There is little or no value to team defense so it cannot be undervalued. I read an article today that claimed that there was only 1 point difference between #1 and #12 in '05 Team defense. There are not enough creative site managers to make this position anything other than a round 15-16 selection.

The kickers are all fairly evenly bunched. Once you get by the top three there is only a 17 point drop between #4 and #19.

There is a lot of thought and calculation that goes into predicting RB, QB and WR.

But ever since I bought into VBD I can tell you I have made a point of paying special attention to TE. When you do the math and the #1 TE can get you a 30-70 point edge on the #2-10 at the position THAT is a bigger jump than you find in any other category.

Take your top 10 receiver in the third round, I'll take my TE and I'll win virtually EVERY time (if I have done my homework at the other positions and am well prepared).

Noone wants to bother with a TE till the 8th-11th rounds. By that time I have the #1 and #6 plus the league title.

 

[videoguy505]

Team D does bunch up, but that's over the course of a season. After 16 weeks, every team has played about 4 good teams, 4 bad teams, and 8 average teams. The #1 D might outscore the #12 team by only 1 point per week. But that's not the point, and not why I consider them Undervalued.

They're undervalued because, with proper projections and research, you can pick the one D that, for that one week, will outperform all other DSTs, and, possibly, the majority of position players. If you're going to draft one horse and ride it all year, as most owners to, you're losing out on value. The #1 DST (CAR, 172 points), for example, is projected to outscore #12 by 60 points, about 3.75 per week. That #12 DST might net you 7 points per week, the #1 would get you 10 per week, averaged over the course of the season.

But by going through the waiver wire, you should be able to pick one of the free agent DSTs that will be up against one of the bottom 4 offenses for that week, and projected to score 15-20 points in that week.

When the #1 Ds play the 49ers, they'll score 20 points. But when they play the Rams or Colts, they might only get you 2. It's that variance in scoring that averages out to the 10 points-per-week projection. By focusing on weekly matchups, an owner could average 15 points a week, for 240 total points, a near-50% improvement over the #1 rating.

I think DSTs are undervalued because few owners want the weekly carousel. They want an every-week plugin that they don't have to think about, the DST equivalent of Ladainian Tomlinson. But by doing so they're losing out on points. The only reason these points are available is because other owners don't see value in playing matchups, which is what keeps the Detroit Lions as Free Agents the week they play the 49ers. They'd rather keep Carolina or Chicago active vs. the Colts than risk the Lions vs. Niners.

 

[Hagger]

I voted QB. I'm glad this thread got brought up. I definitely find I'm in the minority opinion about this, but I think scoring systems are a little out of whack when it concerns QB's. QB scoring has been watered down way too much in fantasy football imo. How can arguably the most important position on the team and the leader of the offense be so watered down compared to RB's and WR's, and even TE's nowadays?

Let me give you an example of what I mean. On yahoo sports Brandon Funston has his 'big board' where he ranks is top 100 players. (You may or may not like him and his rankings but that's not important to the point I'm going to try and make). On his board he has players such as Chester Taylor, Reggie Bush, Willie Parker and Chris Chambers (to name a few) ranked ahead of his #2 QB, Carson Palmer. This is not uncommon at all when viewing top 100 lists regardless of position. This site has the likes of Reuben Droughns, Thomas Jones, Jeremy Shockey and a bunch of others ranked ahead of their #2 QB, McNabb. Oh yeah, and this site has Chester Taylor ranked ahead of Tom Brady, which beautifully illustrates the point I'm trying to make. Chester Taylor being a better pick than Tom Brady.... and with current scoring systems that might just be correct.

This is really just not right. McNabb and Palmer and Brady are falling way, way behind very mediocre players. This to me shows one of the major flaws in fantasy scoring. I understand they project Brady to 'score' more than Taylor... but when ranking on their 'value' they are forced to rank him below, because fantasy scoring so amazingly over-values RB's and under-values QB's.

I already know most people disagree with this opinion, which is OK. But surely someone else sees this as at least somewhat of a problem too. Fantasy scoring needs to come up with a way to more accurately reflect a QB's value to a team. Just some tweaking to the scoring systems is all that needs to be done imo.

 

[code]

Find me one other position where the first player is leaving the board EIGHTEEN PICKS behind where he finished last season, the next two players are TWENTY EIGHT picks behind where they finished last season, and everyone else is 30 or more selections behind where they finished last season.

Ok...Linebacker (VBD, ADP, "Value") in 2006 Zealots Drafts

LB1 VBD=31 ADP=60 "Value"=29

LB2 VBD=33 ADP=84 "Value"=51

LB3 VBD=35 ADP=87 "Value"=52

LB4 VBD=39 ADP=89 "Value"=50

LB5 VBD=44 ADP=90 "Value"=46

LB6 VBD=45 ADP=95 "Value"=50

LB7 VBD=46 ADP=104 "Value"=58

LB8 VBD=53 ADP=117 "Value"=64

LB9 VBD=57 ADP=121 "Value"=64

LB10 VBD=65 ADP=125 "Value"=60

LB11 VBD=69 ADP=126 "Value"=57

LB12 VBD=70 ADP=127 "Value"=57

By contrast, using the same Zealots system as a basis...

TE1 "Value"=13

TE2 "Value"=17

TE3 "Value"=17

TE4 "Value"=16

TE5 "Value"=11

TE6 "Value"=18

Even granting that the ADP in question here is based on dynasty strategy, LBs are still significantly more undervalued than TEs...

Ref: Tick's 2006 ADP, 2005 Zealots Scoring Results

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Find me one other position where the first player is leaving the board EIGHTEEN PICKS behind where he finished last season, the next two players are TWENTY EIGHT picks behind where they finished last season, and everyone else is 30 or more selections behind where they finished last season.

Ok...Linebacker (VBD, ADP, "Value") in 2006 Zealots Drafts

LB1 VBD=31 ADP=60 "Value"=29

LB2 VBD=33 ADP=84 "Value"=51

LB3 VBD=35 ADP=87 "Value"=52

LB4 VBD=39 ADP=89 "Value"=50

LB5 VBD=44 ADP=90 "Value"=46

LB6 VBD=45 ADP=95 "Value"=50

LB7 VBD=46 ADP=104 "Value"=58

LB8 VBD=53 ADP=117 "Value"=64

LB9 VBD=57 ADP=121 "Value"=64

LB10 VBD=65 ADP=125 "Value"=60

LB11 VBD=69 ADP=126 "Value"=57

LB12 VBD=70 ADP=127 "Value"=57

By contrast, using the same Zealots system as a basis...

TE1 "Value"=13

TE2 "Value"=17

TE3 "Value"=17

TE4 "Value"=16

TE5 "Value"=11

TE6 "Value"=18

Even granting that the ADP in question here is based on dynasty strategy, LBs are still significantly more undervalued than TEs...

Ref: Tick's 2006 ADP, 2005 Zealots Scoring Results

For Dynasty:One big difference between LB and TE is that you can almost never find a viable TE on waivers. Another is that all the talented TEs usually go in the first two rounds of rookie drafts. Viable LBs emerge from the FA pool every year and talented LBs are available into 4th round of rookie drafts and sometimes later.

 

[renesauz]

Sorry guys, but how can this be answered without the scoring system clarified? In my experience, what positions are over or undervalued depends entirely on the scoring system, and almost as much on the league size.

In bigger PPR leagues, top-flight recievers can be undervalued. In smaller non-ppr leagues, recievers are almost always over-valued.

IMHO, this survey has little merit (Sorry to whomever started it.)

 

[drlynn]

I voted QB. I'm glad this thread got brought up. I definitely find I'm in the minority opinion about this, but I think scoring systems are a little out of whack when it concerns QB's. QB scoring has been watered down way too much in fantasy football imo. How can arguably the most important position on the team and the leader of the offense be so watered down compared to RB's and WR's, and even TE's nowadays?

Let me give you an example of what I mean. On yahoo sports Brandon Funston has his 'big board' where he ranks is top 100 players. (You may or may not like him and his rankings but that's not important to the point I'm going to try and make). On his board he has players such as Chester Taylor, Reggie Bush, Willie Parker and Chris Chambers (to name a few) ranked ahead of his #2 QB, Carson Palmer. This is not uncommon at all when viewing top 100 lists regardless of position. This site has the likes of Reuben Droughns, Thomas Jones, Jeremy Shockey and a bunch of others ranked ahead of their #2 QB, McNabb. Oh yeah, and this site has Chester Taylor ranked ahead of Tom Brady, which beautifully illustrates the point I'm trying to make. Chester Taylor being a better pick than Tom Brady.... and with current scoring systems that might just be correct.

This is really just not right. McNabb and Palmer and Brady are falling way, way behind very mediocre players. This to me shows one of the major flaws in fantasy scoring. I understand they project Brady to 'score' more than Taylor... but when ranking on their 'value' they are forced to rank him below, because fantasy scoring so amazingly over-values RB's and under-values QB's.

I already know most people disagree with this opinion, which is OK. But surely someone else sees this as at least somewhat of a problem too. Fantasy scoring needs to come up with a way to more accurately reflect a QB's value to a team. Just some tweaking to the scoring systems is all that needs to be done imo.

I understand your point, but I'm not sure I agree. If you change the QB scoring system, you will increase the differential of raw score between QB and other positions, but you won't change the value of one QB over another QB significantly. The reason mid-tier RB's have more value than upper tier QB's is that most leagues start 2 RB's and 1 QB. The VALUE difference between QB 1 and 12 is probably in the 50 point range. The VALUE difference between RB 1 and 24 is probably 200 points. I don't see how changes in fantasy scoring systems can change that without grossly exaggerating QB scoring. I just tried tweaking our league settings to 9 points for passing TD's and a 5 point bonus for 300 yd passing games, and the differential between QB1 and QB12 is still less than 100 points.

 

[ookook]

It is much more a function of supply-and-demand that make positions over- or under-valued. This is a function of line-up requirements, roster size, and number of teams.

With DEF it is both scoring and supply and demand. In many leagues the WW is surfed for favorable match-ups.

I think this unfortunate.

In both the leagues I run we give lots of weight to pts allowed and yards allowed. This increases the dispersion of DEFs and therefore their value.

But what works best is the league where we start 2 DEFs each week. No longer are they out there on the wire, and boy do they matter.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Not to completely reverse the topic, but I think the most overvalued position is RB (particularily through a dynasty format). I see teams in my league carrying 1-2 starting QBs. If you do not have a starting QB it is going to result in a last place finish. It is more difficult to grab a QB that will contribute off the waiver than any other position. If an RB goes down, you can find a 3rd downer, or fullback, or goalline back that may produce points. Teams are evolving to RBBC and RBs typically take the most beating out of any of the major positions. Elite WRs are great to have, but are also replaceable due to 3-4 WR sets.

So...

The most undervalued position in my mind would be QB. I do admit, I play in a 6 pt per passing td league. Drafters are more prone to wait on QBs, but their relevant importance make them the most undervalued. I think most FFers take QBs for granted. Well, Big Ben goes down, who is your QB? You could be stacked at all positions, but w/o the QB it would not matter. The most difficult position to fill if in trouble, makes this the most undervalued position (IMO).

**My opinions are based from my Dynasty league and may not be relevant to all leagues.

 

[Hagger]

I voted QB.  I'm glad this thread got brought up.  I definitely find I'm in the minority opinion about this, but I think scoring systems are a little out of whack when it concerns QB's.  QB scoring has been watered down way too much in fantasy football imo.  How can arguably the most important position on the team and the leader of the offense be so watered down compared to RB's and WR's, and even TE's nowadays?

Let me give you an example of what I mean.  On yahoo sports Brandon Funston has his 'big board' where he ranks is top 100 players.  (You may or may not like him and his rankings but that's not important to the point I'm going to try and make).  On his board he has players such as Chester Taylor, Reggie Bush, Willie Parker and Chris Chambers (to name a few) ranked ahead of his #2 QB, Carson Palmer.  This is not uncommon at all when viewing top 100 lists regardless of position.  This site has the likes of Reuben Droughns, Thomas Jones, Jeremy Shockey and a bunch of others ranked ahead of their #2 QB, McNabb.  Oh yeah, and this site has Chester Taylor ranked ahead of Tom Brady, which beautifully illustrates the point I'm trying to make.  Chester Taylor being a better pick than Tom Brady.... and with current scoring systems that might just be correct.

This is really just not right.  McNabb and Palmer and Brady are falling way, way behind very mediocre players.  This to me shows one of the major flaws in fantasy scoring. I understand they project Brady to 'score' more than Taylor... but when ranking on their 'value' they are forced to rank him below, because fantasy scoring so amazingly over-values RB's and under-values QB's.

I already know most people disagree with this opinion, which is OK.  But surely someone else sees this as at least somewhat of a problem too.  Fantasy scoring needs to come up with a way to more accurately reflect a QB's value to a team.  Just some tweaking to the scoring systems is all that needs to be done imo.

I understand your point, but I'm not sure I agree. If you change the QB scoring system, you will increase the differential of raw score between QB and other positions, but you won't change the value of one QB over another QB significantly. The reason mid-tier RB's have more value than upper tier QB's is that most leagues start 2 RB's and 1 QB. The VALUE difference between QB 1 and 12 is probably in the 50 point range. The VALUE difference between RB 1 and 24 is probably 200 points. I don't see how changes in fantasy scoring systems can change that without grossly exaggerating QB scoring. I just tried tweaking our league settings to 9 points for passing TD's and a 5 point bonus for 300 yd passing games, and the differential between QB1 and QB12 is still less than 100 points.

Yes I see your point. And that thought had occured to me also; that part of it is because on fantasy teams there are usually 2 starting RB's and in the NFL teams really only have 1 most the time. That puts a strain on supply vs. demand. With that said there are still some options though. I doubt they'd be popular ideas but... QB's could be scored on the same criteria... 1 point per 10 yards passing, 6 per passing touchdown. Yes it would inflate their total points compared to other positions... but like you pointed out that doesn't actually matter because they're competing against other team's QB's who would be scored on the same criteria. People could also try starting a FB rather than a second RB. Starting a FB would be very hard to do, but it could be done. Guys like Alstott who get a lot of TD's would become hot prospects.

I have been in a league before where QB's were scored like I mentioned above, and it went a long way in actually making them drafted more where they belonged as far as player talent went. You didn't see guys like Chester Taylor going before Tom Brady. And it didn't really hurt the top RB's, WR's and TE's like some people might worry about. The great RB's all still were 1st and 2nd round picks, there were just several QB's mixed in with them for once.

I know most people wouldn't go for this idea. People don't like change in general, and the current "way to do it" is pretty set in stone now. But for my own personal taste I'd like to see some leagues like this and give people more variety than the standard 25 RB's getting drafted in the first 30 picks.

 

[code]

Find me one other position where the first player is leaving the board EIGHTEEN PICKS behind where he finished last season, the next two players are TWENTY EIGHT picks behind where they finished last season, and everyone else is 30 or more selections behind where they finished last season.

Ok...Linebacker (VBD, ADP, "Value") in 2006 Zealots Drafts

LB1 VBD=31 ADP=60 "Value"=29

LB2 VBD=33 ADP=84 "Value"=51

LB3 VBD=35 ADP=87 "Value"=52

LB4 VBD=39 ADP=89 "Value"=50

LB5 VBD=44 ADP=90 "Value"=46

LB6 VBD=45 ADP=95 "Value"=50

LB7 VBD=46 ADP=104 "Value"=58

LB8 VBD=53 ADP=117 "Value"=64

LB9 VBD=57 ADP=121 "Value"=64

LB10 VBD=65 ADP=125 "Value"=60

LB11 VBD=69 ADP=126 "Value"=57

LB12 VBD=70 ADP=127 "Value"=57

By contrast, using the same Zealots system as a basis...

TE1 "Value"=13

TE2 "Value"=17

TE3 "Value"=17

TE4 "Value"=16

TE5 "Value"=11

TE6 "Value"=18

Even granting that the ADP in question here is based on dynasty strategy, LBs are still significantly more undervalued than TEs...

Ref: Tick's 2006 ADP, 2005 Zealots Scoring Results

For Dynasty:One big difference between LB and TE is that you can almost never find a viable TE on waivers. Another is that all the talented TEs usually go in the first two rounds of rookie drafts. Viable LBs emerge from the FA pool every year and talented LBs are available into 4th round of rookie drafts and sometimes later.

I grant the dynasty skew, but I'm not sure it changes the conclusions about "value" as you suggest (do you believe that in a redraft LBs would suddenly start flying off the board in the 3rd?)...the fact that TEs are grabbed early suggests that they are overvalued, while LBs (presumably under the assumption that alternatives will arise on the waiver wire) are passed over, therefore making them undervalued...I will posit that the same effect is true in redraft leagues (while it may be to a lesser extent), furthering my belief that the elite LBs, whose VBD ranking should put them in the first four rounds, slip in drafts and represent some of the greatest value...

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Linebacker (VBD, ADP, "Value") in 2006 Zealots Drafts

LB1 VBD=31 ADP=60 "Value"=29

LB2 VBD=33 ADP=84 "Value"=51

LB3 VBD=35 ADP=87 "Value"=52

LB4 VBD=39 ADP=89 "Value"=50

LB5 VBD=44 ADP=90 "Value"=46

LB6 VBD=45 ADP=95 "Value"=50

LB7 VBD=46 ADP=104 "Value"=58

LB8 VBD=53 ADP=117 "Value"=64

LB9 VBD=57 ADP=121 "Value"=64

LB10 VBD=65 ADP=125 "Value"=60

LB11 VBD=69 ADP=126 "Value"=57

LB12 VBD=70 ADP=127 "Value"=57

This is exactly why I commented on SSOG's list. This method will make any position look undervalued if people generally hold off on drafting that position until the later rounds and there is significant variance in points scored among players at the position.I do not believe any IDP positions tend to be undervalued in IDP leagues (largely for the reasons Bloom mentioned), but the method of comparing the VBD value of "LB6" and the ADP of "LB6" where "LB6" is actually two different players will give the appearance that linebackers are undervalued.

 

[code]

the method of comparing the VBD value of "LB6" and the ADP of "LB6" where "LB6" is actually two different players will give the appearance that linebackers are undervalued.

So your argument is that the lack of predictability in scoring mutes the notion of "value"?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

the method of comparing the VBD value of "LB6" and the ADP of "LB6" where "LB6" is actually two different players will give the appearance that linebackers are undervalued.

So your argument is that the lack of predictability in scoring mutes the notion of "value"?

Yes. The guy with the higher expected VBD value is worth more, and uncertainty affects expectation.Consider two hypothetical positions, A and B, that have the following end-of-year scoring distributions:

A1 = 100 points

A2 = 80 points

A3 = 60 points

A4 = 40 points

B1 = 100 points

B2 = 80 points

B3 = 60 points

B4 = 40 points

The difference is that we know ahead of time that Bill Smith is very likely to be A1, Tom Jones is very likely to be A2, Pat Boone is very likely to be A3, and Manny Moto is very likely to be A4. Nothing is guaranteed, but it's usually not so hard to predict what order they'll finish in.

On the other hand, at position B, the players are John Walls, Mookie Parsons, Hank Hill, and Preston Kelly. Unfortunately, the players could finish in any order at all. They're impossible to predict.

In this hypothetical fantasy situation, A1 and A2 would be the first players drafted, followed by the B players, followed by A3 and A4. Since the two positions would have the same end-of-year point distributions, but the top B players would be drafted after the top A players, the SSOG method would make the top B players appear to be undervalued. But they're not.

The expectation for both A1 and B1 is 100 points. But the expectation for Bill Smith is very near 100 points while the expectation for any particular B player (including whoever ends up being B1) is only 70 points. B1 and B2 look undervalued in hindsight only because there's such a large difference in expectation between "B1" and "John Walls." On the other hand, there's almost no difference in expectation between "A1" and "Bill Smith."

 

[code]

the method of comparing the VBD value of "LB6" and the ADP of "LB6" where "LB6" is actually two different players will give the appearance that linebackers are undervalued.

So your argument is that the lack of predictability in scoring mutes the notion of "value"?

Yes. The guy with the higher expected VBD value is worth more, and uncertainty affects expectation.

Ah, I hadn't made the +/-EV leap when reading your earlier post...I understand the argument now, but I don't know if I'm willing to concede the variance in rankings by position between LB and TE is enough to close the raw value gap with respect to EV...

 

[ookook]

Has there been a good study on the temporal stability of different postions across years in terms of fantasy points per game?

 

[SSOG]

Find me one other position where the first player is leaving the board EIGHTEEN PICKS behind where he finished last season, the next two players are TWENTY EIGHT picks behind where they finished last season, and everyone else is 30 or more selections behind where they finished last season.

Ok...Linebacker (VBD, ADP, "Value") in 2006 Zealots Drafts

LB1 VBD=31 ADP=60 "Value"=29

LB2 VBD=33 ADP=84 "Value"=51

LB3 VBD=35 ADP=87 "Value"=52

LB4 VBD=39 ADP=89 "Value"=50

LB5 VBD=44 ADP=90 "Value"=46

LB6 VBD=45 ADP=95 "Value"=50

LB7 VBD=46 ADP=104 "Value"=58

LB8 VBD=53 ADP=117 "Value"=64

LB9 VBD=57 ADP=121 "Value"=64

LB10 VBD=65 ADP=125 "Value"=60

LB11 VBD=69 ADP=126 "Value"=57

LB12 VBD=70 ADP=127 "Value"=57

By contrast, using the same Zealots system as a basis...

TE1 "Value"=13

TE2 "Value"=17

TE3 "Value"=17

TE4 "Value"=16

TE5 "Value"=11

TE6 "Value"=18

Even granting that the ADP in question here is based on dynasty strategy, LBs are still significantly more undervalued than TEs...

Ref: Tick's 2006 ADP, 2005 Zealots Scoring Results

I have to admit, I am completely clueless when it comes to IDP leagues, since I am very opposed to them and have never played in one. I won't hijack the thread with my reasons, but I figured I'd lay my bias out there for everyone to see.

the method of comparing the VBD value of "LB6" and the ADP of "LB6" where "LB6" is actually two different players will give the appearance that linebackers are undervalued.

So your argument is that the lack of predictability in scoring mutes the notion of "value"?

Yes. The guy with the higher expected VBD value is worth more, and uncertainty affects expectation.Consider two hypothetical positions, A and B, that have the following end-of-year scoring distributions:

A1 = 100 points

A2 = 80 points

A3 = 60 points

A4 = 40 points

B1 = 100 points

B2 = 80 points

B3 = 60 points

B4 = 40 points

The difference is that we know ahead of time that Bill Smith is very likely to be A1, Tom Jones is very likely to be A2, Pat Boone is very likely to be A3, and Manny Moto is very likely to be A4. Nothing is guaranteed, but it's usually not so hard to predict what order they'll finish in.

On the other hand, at position B, the players are John Walls, Mookie Parsons, Hank Hill, and Preston Kelly. Unfortunately, the players could finish in any order at all. They're impossible to predict.

In this hypothetical fantasy situation, A1 and A2 would be the first players drafted, followed by the B players, followed by A3 and A4. Since the two positions would have the same end-of-year point distributions, but the top B players would be drafted after the top A players, the SSOG method would make the top B players appear to be undervalued. But they're not.

The expectation for both A1 and B1 is 100 points. But the expectation for Bill Smith is very near 100 points while the expectation for any particular B player (including whoever ends up being B1) is only 70 points. B1 and B2 look undervalued in hindsight only because there's such a large difference in expectation between "B1" and "John Walls." On the other hand, there's almost no difference in expectation between "A1" and "Bill Smith."

I'd love to produce a more accurate list, such as what you're asking for, but I don't know where to find the 2005 ADPs. Any clue where I could get this info?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I'd love to produce a more accurate list, such as what you're asking for, but I don't know where to find the 2005 ADPs. Any clue where I could get this info?

You know, I just noticed right now that you were using 2006 projections rather than 2005 data. Careless reading on my part.Here is ADP from 8/31/05.

 

[SSOG]

I'd love to produce a more accurate list, such as what you're asking for, but I don't know where to find the 2005 ADPs. Any clue where I could get this info?

You know, I just noticed right now that you were using 2006 projections rather than 2005 data. Careless reading on my part.Here is ADP from 8/31/05.

I'd hardly call it careless reading, since I wouldn't expect you to go back and actually VERIFY the ADP of all 10 top TEs, especially since you wouldn't know what ADP I was using.If anything, I think using 2006 ADP doesn't introduce too much noise, since ADP tends to be pretty reactive to the previous season. Most players wind up getting drafted this year about where they finished last year (see Manning, Peyton), so theoretically, given the ridiculously great finishes by TEs in VBD, they should be going a lot higher this year.

Still, thanks for the link, and I'll run the numbers with last year's ADP and get back on the issue.

 

[SSOG]

Also, while I'm thinking of it, does anyone know where I could get the ADP data for the 2004 or 2003 seasons, too, to verify that last year wasn't just a statistical fluke?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Also, while I'm thinking of it, does anyone know where I could get the ADP data for the 2004 or 2003 seasons, too, to verify that last year wasn't just a statistical fluke?

I don't know about ADP, but I can give the draft orders from the Great White league (which is the one I've been using 2002-2005 data from for purposes to be revealed in a future article). It uses a pretty standard scoring system and should be pretty close to ADP.2004

QB1 2.1 22 Culpepper, Daunte MIN QB

QB2 2.12 24 Manning, Peyton IND QB

QB3 4.05 41 McNabb, Donovan PHI QB

QB4 4.06 42 Vick, Michael ATL QB

QB5 4.11 47 Hasselbeck, Matt SEA QB

QB6 5.01 49 Bulger, Marc STL QB

QB7 5.04 52 McNair, Steve TEN QB

QB8 5.12 60 Brooks, Aaron NOS QB

QB9 6.02 62 Brady, Tom NEP QB

QB10 6.04 64 Green, Trent KCC QB

QB11 6.12 72 Pennington, Chad NYJ QB

QB12 7.05 77 Favre, Brett GBP QB

QB13 8.03 87 Garcia, Jeff DET QB

QB14 9.04 100 Plummer, Jake DEN QB

QB15 9.05 101 Brunell, Mark WAS QB

QB16 9.06 102 Leftwich, Byron JAC QB

QB17 9.07 103 McCown, Josh ARI QB

QB18 11.08 128 Carr, David HOU QB

QB19 11.1 130 Palmer, Carson CIN QB

QB20 11.12 132 Johnson, Brad MIN QB

QB21 12.05 137 Gannon, Rich OAK QB

QB22 13.02 146 Delhomme, Jake CAR QB

QB23 13.03 147 Maddox, Tommy PIT QB

QB24 13.07 151 Grossman, Rex CHI QB

QB25 13.09 153 Bledsoe, Drew DAL QB

QB26 13.11 155 Warner, Kurt ARI QB

QB27 14.03 159 Harrington, Joey DET QB

QB28 15.01 169 Carter, Quincy NYJ QB

QB29 15.12 180 Feeley, A.J. MIA QB

QB30 16.01 181 Fiedler, Jay NYJ QB

QB31 16.02 182 Manning, Eli NYG QB

QB32 17.04 196 Collins, Kerry OAK QB

RB1 1.01 1 Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB

RB2 1.02 2 Holmes, Priest KCC RB

RB3 1.03 3 Green, Ahman GBP RB

RB4 1.04 4 McAllister, Deuce NOS RB

RB5 1.05 5 Portis, Clinton WAS RB

RB6 1.06 6 Alexander, Shaun SEA RB

RB7 1.07 7 James, Edgerrin IND RB

RB8 1.08 8 Lewis, Jamal BAL RB

RB9 1.09 9 Williams, Ricky (ex-mia) FA RB

RB10 1.1 10 Taylor, Fred JAC RB

RB11 1.11 11 Barlow, Kevan SFO RB

RB12 1.12 12 Davis, Domanick HOU RB

RB13 2.03 15 Faulk, Marshall STL RB

RB14 2.04 16 Johnson, Rudi CIN RB

RB15 2.06 18 Henry, Travis BUF RB

RB16 2.07 19 Dillon, Corey NEP RB

RB17 2.08 20 Barber, Tiki NYG RB

RB18 2.09 21 Davis, Stephen CAR RB

RB19 3.02 26 Bennett, Michael MIN RB

RB20 3.05 29 Martin, Curtis NYJ RB

RB21 3.06 30 Westbrook, Brian PHI RB

RB22 3.07 31 Staley, Duce PIT RB

RB23 3.08 32 Jones, Thomas CHI RB

RB24 3.12 36 Jones, Julius DAL RB

RB25 4.01 37 Jones, Kevin DET RB

RB26 4.02 38 Griffin, Quentin DEN RB

RB27 5.08 56 Garner, Charlie TBB RB

RB28 5.1 58 Duckett, T.J. ATL RB

RB29 5.11 59 Shipp, Marcel ARI RB

RB30 6.09 69 Dunn, Warrick ATL RB

RB31 6.1 70 Brown, Chris TEN RB

RB32 7.03 75 Suggs, Lee CLE RB

RB33 7.04 76 Foster, De'shaun CAR RB

RB34 7.06 78 Buckhalter, Correll PHI RB

RB35 7.12 84 Hearst, Garrison DEN RB

RB36 8.02 86 Bell, Tatum DEN RB

RB37 8.04 88 Green, William CLE RB

RB38 8.07 91 McGahee, Willis BUF RB

RB39 8.11 95 Smith, Onterrio MIN RB

RB40 9.01 97 Jackson, Steven STL RB

RB41 9.11 107 Smith, Emmitt DAL RB

RB42 10.03 111 Thomas, Anthony CHI RB

RB43 10.05 113 Fargas, Justin OAK RB

RB44 10.08 116 Wheatley, Tyrone FA RB

RB45 10.1 118 Anderson, Richie DAL RB

RB46 10.11 119 Bettis, Jerome PIT RB

RB47 10.12 120 George, Eddie DAL RB

RB48 11.07 127 Williams, Moe MIN RB

RB49 12.04 136 Jordan, Lamont OAK RB

RB50 13.08 152 Smith, Musa BAL RB

RB51 13.1 154 Hambrick, Troy ARI RB

RB52 14.06 162 Rhodes, Dominic IND RB

RB53 14.09 165 Faulk, Kevin NEP RB

RB54 15.06 174 Jones, Greg JAC RB

RB55 15.09 177 Alstott, Mike TBB RB

RB56 15.1 178 Hollings, Tony HOU RB

RB57 16.03 183 Perry, Chris CIN RB

RB58 16.07 187 Morris, Maurice SEA RB

RB59 16.12 192 Dayne, Ron DEN RB

RB60 17.05 197 Johnson, Larry KCC RB

RB61 17.09 201 Pinner, Artose DET RB

RB62 17.1 202 Zereoue, Amos OAK RB

RB63 18.03 207 Davenport, Najeh GBP RB

RB64 18.09 213 Stecker, Aaron NOS RB

WR1 2.01 13 Moss, Randy OAK WR

WR2 2.02 14 Harrison, Marvin IND WR

WR3 2.05 17 Holt, Torry STL WR

WR4 2.11 23 Johnson, Chad CIN WR

WR5 3.01 25 Ward, Hines PIT WR

WR6 3.03 27 Owens, Terrell PHI WR

WR7 3.04 28 Mason, Derrick BAL WR

WR8 3.1 34 Coles, Laveranues NYJ WR

WR9 3.11 35 Horn, Joe NOS WR

WR10 4.03 39 Boldin, Anquan ARI WR

WR11 4.04 40 Moss, Santana WAS WR

WR12 4.07 43 Smith, Steve CAR WR

WR13 4.08 44 Johnson, Andre HOU WR

WR14 4.09 45 Jackson, Darrell SEA WR

WR15 4.1 46 Price, Peerless ATL WR

WR16 4.12 48 Moulds, Eric BUF WR

WR17 5.02 50 Smith, Jimmy JAC WR

WR18 5.05 53 Chambers, Chris MIA WR

WR19 5.06 54 Toomer, Amani NYG WR

WR20 5.09 57 Robinson, Koren SEA WR

WR21 6.01 61 Rogers, Charles DET WR

WR22 6.03 63 Bruce, Isaac STL WR

WR23 6.05 65 Boston, David FA WR

WR24 6.06 66 Walker, Javon GBP WR

WR25 6.07 67 McCareins, Justin NYJ WR

WR26 6.08 68 Burress, Plaxico NYG WR

WR27 7.01 73 Porter, Jerry OAK WR

WR28 7.02 74 McCardell, Keenan SDC WR

WR29 7.07 79 Smith, Rod DEN WR

WR30 7.08 80 Booker, Marty MIA WR

WR31 7.09 81 Stallworth, Donte' NOS WR

WR32 7.11 83 Johnson, Keyshawn DAL WR

WR33 8.05 89 Wayne, Reggie IND WR

WR34 8.06 90 Warrick, Peter CIN WR

WR35 8.08 92 Lelie, Ashley DEN WR

WR36 8.1 94 Kennison, Eddie KCC WR

WR37 9.02 98 Driver, Donald GBP WR

WR38 9.08 104 Lloyd, Brandon SFO WR

WR39 9.1 106 Branch, Deion NEP WR

WR40 10.01 109 Fitzgerald, Larry ARI WR

WR41 10.02 110 Morgan, Quincy DAL WR

WR42 10.06 114 Galloway, Joey TBB WR

WR43 10.09 117 Gardner, Rod WAS WR

WR44 11.01 121 Bennett, Drew TEN WR

WR45 11.03 123 Northcutt, Dennis CLE WR

WR46 11.04 124 Givens, David NEP WR

WR47 11.05 125 Williams, Roy DET WR

WR48 11.06 126 Davis, Andre' CLE WR

WR49 11.09 129 Robinson, Marcus MIN WR

WR50 12.01 133 Johnson, Kevin FA WR

WR51 12.02 134 Hilliard, Ike FA WR

WR52 12.03 135 Williams, Reggie JAC WR

WR53 12.07 139 Calico, Tyrone TEN WR

WR54 12.1 142 Glenn, Terry DAL WR

WR55 13.04 148 Muhammad, Muhsin CHI WR

WR56 14.04 160 Evans, Lee BUF WR

WR57 14.07 163 Washington, Kelley CIN WR

WR58 14.08 164 Woods, Rashaun SFO WR

WR59 14.1 166 Rice, Jerry FA WR

WR60 14.11 167 Brown, Troy FA WR

WR61 14.12 168 Ferguson, Robert GBP WR

WR62 15.07 175 Jenkins, Michael ATL WR

WR63 15.08 176 Gage, Justin CHI WR

WR64 15.11 179 Gabriel, Doug OAK WR

WR65 16.04 184 Pinkston, Todd PHI WR

WR66 17.02 194 Taylor, Travis MIN WR

WR67 17.06 198 Clayton, Michael TBB WR

WR68 17.12 204 White, Dez ATL WR

WR69 18.05 209 Dyson, Kevin FA WR

WR70 18.08 212 Wilson, Cedrick PIT WR

WR71 18.11 215 Morton, Johnnie KCC WR

TE1 3.09 33 Gonzalez, Tony KCC TE

TE2 5.03 51 Heap, Todd BAL TE

TE3 5.07 55 Shockey, Jeremy NYG TE

TE4 6.11 71 Winslow, Kellen CLE TE

TE5 7.1 82 Crumpler, Alge ATL TE

TE6 8.09 93 Williams, Boo NOS TE

TE7 9.12 108 McMichael, Randy MIA TE

TE8 11.11 131 Franks, Bubba GBP TE

TE9 12.06 138 Gates, Antonio SDC TE

TE10 12.12 144 Clark, Dallas IND TE

TE11 13.05 149 Jones, Freddie ARI TE

TE12 13.12 156 Mili, Itula SEA TE

TE13 14.05 161 Clark, Desmond CHI TE

TE14 15.03 171 Graham, Daniel NEP TE

TE15 15.04 172 Pollard, Marcus DET TE

TE16 17.11 203 Witten, Jason DAL TE

TE17 18.04 208 Kinney, Erron TEN TE

TE18 18.07 211 Kleinsasser, Jim MIN TE

TE19 18.12 216 Smith, L.J. PHI TE

PK1 9.03 99 Vanderjagt, Mike IND PK

PK2 9.09 105 Wilkins, Jeff STL PK

PK3 12.11 143 Vinatieri, Adam NEP PK

PK4 13.01 145 Akers, David PHI PK

PK5 13.06 150 Elam, Jason DEN PK

PK6 14.01 157 Stover, Matt BAL PK

PK7 15.05 173 Longwell, Ryan GBP PK

PK8 16.05 185 Nedney, Joe TEN PK

PK9 16.06 186 Brown, Josh SEA PK

PK10 16.09 189 Feely, Jay NYG PK

PK11 16.11 191 Andersen, Morten MIN PK

PK12 18.01 205 Janikowski, Sebastian OAK PK

PK13 18.02 206 Carney, John NOS PK

PK14 18.06 210 Kasay, John CAR PK

PK15 18.1 214 Elling, Aaron MIN PK

DT1 8.01 85 Ravens, Baltimore BAL Def

DT2 8.12 96 Patriots, New England NEP Def

DT3 10.04 112 Panthers, Carolina CAR Def

DT4 10.07 115 Buccaneers, Tampa Bay TBB Def

DT5 11.02 122 Cowboys, Dallas DAL Def

DT6 12.08 140 Eagles, Philadelphia PHI Def

DT7 12.09 141 Dolphins, Miami MIA Def

DT8 14.02 158 Rams, St. Louis STL Def

DT9 15.02 170 Jaguars, Jacksonville JAC Def

DT10 16.08 188 Bills, Buffalo BUF Def

DT11 16.1 190 Packers, Green Bay GBP Def

DT12 17.01 193 Vikings, Minnesota MIN Def

DT13 17.03 195 Chiefs, Kansas City KCC Def

DT14 17.07 199 Titans, Tennessee TEN Def

DT15 17.08 200 Broncos, Denver DEN Def

2003

QB1 2.07 19 Culpepper, Daunte MIN QB

QB2 3.01 25 Vick, Michael ATL QB

QB3 3.03 27 McNabb, Donovan PHI QB

QB4 3.09 33 Warner, Kurt STL QB

QB5 3.11 35 Gannon, Rich OAK QB

QB6 4.01 37 Manning, Peyton IND QB

QB7 4.03 39 Garcia, Jeff CLE QB

QB8 4.05 41 Brooks, Aaron NOS QB

QB9 5.07 55 Favre, Brett GBP QB

QB10 6.11 71 McNair, Steve TEN QB

QB11 7.07 79 Hasselbeck, Matt SEA QB

QB12 8.07 91 Bledsoe, Drew BUF QB

QB13 8.08 92 Pennington, Chad NYJ QB

QB14 9.02 98 Collins, Kerry NYG QB

QB15 9.03 99 Brady, Tom NEP QB

QB16 9.04 100 Green, Trent KCC QB

QB17 9.05 101 Maddox, Tommy PIT QB

QB18 9.06 102 Johnson, Brad TBB QB

QB19 10.02 110 Plummer, Jake DEN QB

QB20 10.03 111 Fiedler, Jay MIA QB

QB21 11.02 122 Ramsey, Patrick WAS QB

QB22 11.06 126 Brees, Drew SDC QB

QB23 12.01 133 Kitna, Jon CIN QB

QB24 12.04 136 Stewart, Kordell FA QB

QB25 14.08 164 Bulger, Marc STL QB

QB26 15.01 169 Carr, David HOU QB

QB27 15.08 176 Blake, Jeff FA QB

QB28 15.09 177 Harrington, Joey DET QB

QB29 16.09 189 Brunell, Mark WAS QB

QB30 18.05 209 Bouman, Todd NOS QB

RB1 1.01 1 Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB

RB2 1.02 2 Williams, Ricky MIA RB

RB3 1.03 3 Portis, Clinton WAS RB

RB4 1.04 4 Faulk, Marshall STL RB

RB5 1.05 5 Holmes, Priest KCC RB

RB6 1.06 6 McAllister, Deuce NOS RB

RB7 1.07 7 James, Edgerrin IND RB

RB8 1.08 8 Alexander, Shaun SEA RB

RB9 1.09 9 Henry, Travis BUF RB

RB10 1.1 10 Green, Ahman GBP RB

RB11 1.11 11 Lewis, Jamal BAL RB

RB12 2.02 14 Taylor, Fred JAC RB

RB13 2.03 15 Barber, Tiki NYG RB

RB14 2.05 17 Dillon, Corey CIN RB

RB15 2.06 18 Davis, Stephen CAR RB

RB16 2.08 20 Bennett, Michael MIN RB

RB17 2.09 21 Garner, Charlie TBB RB

RB18 2.1 22 George, Eddie TEN RB

RB19 2.11 23 Green, William CLE RB

RB20 2.12 24 Martin, Curtis NYJ RB

RB21 3.07 31 Barlow, Kevan SFO RB

RB22 3.12 36 Stewart, James FA RB

RB23 4.04 40 Canidate, Trung WAS RB

RB24 4.08 44 Staley, Duce PIT RB

RB25 4.09 45 Dunn, Warrick ATL RB

RB26 5.02 50 Mack, Stacey HOU RB

RB27 5.04 52 Thomas, Anthony CHI RB

RB28 5.11 59 Smith, Antowain NEP RB

RB29 5.12 60 Zereoue, Amos FA RB

RB30 6.01 61 Alstott, Mike TBB RB

RB31 6.04 64 Hambrick, Troy DAL RB

RB32 6.05 65 Smith, Emmitt ARI RB

RB33 6.09 69 Hearst, Garrison DEN RB

RB34 7.05 77 Johnson, Larry KCC RB

RB35 7.06 78 Duckett, T.J. ATL RB

RB36 7.1 82 Bettis, Jerome PIT RB

RB37 7.12 84 Shipp, Marcel ARI RB

RB38 8.12 96 Jordan, Lamont NYJ RB

RB39 9.08 104 Betts, Ladell WAS RB

RB40 9.11 107 Buckhalter, Correll PHI RB

RB41 10.07 115 Gordon, Lamar STL RB

RB42 11.01 121 Jones, Thomas CHI RB

RB43 12.05 137 Morris, Maurice SEA RB

RB44 12.1 142 Faulk, Kevin NEP RB

RB45 12.11 143 White, Jamel TBB RB

RB46 13.03 147 Peterson, Adrian CHI RB

RB47 13.05 149 Davenport, Najeh GBP RB

RB48 13.08 152 Womack, Antwoine FA RB

RB49 13.09 153 Gary, Olandis DET RB

RB50 13.1 154 Levens, Dorsey FA RB

RB51 14.06 162 Anderson, Mike DEN RB

RB52 14.12 168 Stecker, Aaron NOS RB

RB53 15.05 173 Williams, Moe MIN RB

RB54 15.06 174 Wheatley, Tyrone OAK RB

RB55 15.12 180 Pittman, Michael TBB RB

RB56 16.02 182 Joseph, Elvis FA RB

RB57 16.03 183 Richardson, Tony KCC RB

RB58 16.05 185 Toefield, Labrandon JAC RB

RB59 16.07 187 Smith, Lamar NOS RB

RB60 16.1 190 Crockett, Zack OAK RB

RB61 16.11 191 Brown, Chris TEN RB

RB62 18.03 207 Rhodes, Dominic IND RB

RB63 18.11 215 Wiley, Michael FA RB

WR1 1.12 12 Harrison, Marvin IND WR

WR2 2.01 13 Owens, Terrell PHI WR

WR3 2.04 16 Moss, Randy MIN WR

WR4 3.02 26 Moulds, Eric BUF WR

WR5 3.04 28 Ward, Hines PIT WR

WR6 3.05 29 Horn, Joe NOS WR

WR7 3.06 30 Burress, Plaxico PIT WR

WR8 3.08 32 Holt, Torry STL WR

WR9 3.1 34 Boston, David MIA WR

WR10 4.02 38 Robinson, Koren SEA WR

WR11 4.06 42 Driver, Donald GBP WR

WR12 4.07 43 Toomer, Amani NYG WR

WR13 4.11 47 Johnson, Chad CIN WR

WR14 5.01 49 Smith, Rod DEN WR

WR15 5.03 51 Smith, Jimmy JAC WR

WR16 5.05 53 Price, Peerless ATL WR

WR17 5.08 56 Coles, Laveranues WAS WR

WR18 5.09 57 Rice, Jerry OAK WR

WR19 5.1 58 Mason, Derrick TEN WR

WR20 6.02 62 Chambers, Chris MIA WR

WR21 6.03 63 Booker, Marty CHI WR

WR22 6.06 66 Bruce, Isaac STL WR

WR23 6.07 67 Johnson, Keyshawn DAL WR

WR24 6.08 68 Gardner, Rod WAS WR

WR25 6.1 70 Pinkston, Todd PHI WR

WR26 6.12 72 Stallworth, Donte' NOS WR

WR27 7.01 73 Porter, Jerry OAK WR

WR28 7.02 74 Brown, Troy NEP WR

WR29 7.03 75 Morgan, Quincy CLE WR

WR30 7.04 76 Conway, Curtis FA WR

WR31 7.08 80 Reed, Josh BUF WR

WR32 7.09 81 Taylor, Travis BAL WR

WR33 8.01 85 Streets, Tai DET WR

WR34 8.02 86 Brown, Tim OAK WR

WR35 8.03 87 Jackson, Darrell SEA WR

WR36 8.04 88 Muhammad, Muhsin CAR WR

WR37 8.05 89 Thrash, James WAS WR

WR38 8.06 90 Lelie, Ashley DEN WR

WR39 8.1 94 Wayne, Reggie IND WR

WR40 8.11 95 Rogers, Charles DET WR

WR41 9.01 97 Hilliard, Ike NYG WR

WR42 9.09 105 Bryant, Antonio DAL WR

WR43 9.12 108 Galloway, Joey TBB WR

WR44 10.04 112 Moss, Santana NYJ WR

WR45 10.06 114 Bradford, Corey HOU WR

WR46 10.1 118 Smith, Steve CAR WR

WR47 10.11 119 Chrebet, Wayne NYJ WR

WR48 11.07 127 McCaffrey, Ed FA WR

WR49 11.08 128 Walker, Javon GBP WR

WR50 11.09 129 Randle El, Antwaan PIT WR

WR51 11.1 130 Ferguson, Robert GBP WR

WR52 11.11 131 Johnson, Kevin JAC WR

WR53 11.12 132 Kennison, Eddie KCC WR

WR54 12.02 134 McCardell, Keenan TBB WR

WR55 12.06 138 Jurevicius, Joe TBB WR

WR56 12.07 139 Finneran, Brian ATL WR

WR57 12.08 140 Boerigter, Marc KCC WR

WR58 12.09 141 Morton, Johnnie KCC WR

WR59 12.12 144 Warrick, Peter CIN WR

WR60 13.01 145 Johnson, Andre HOU WR

WR61 14.03 159 Wilson, Cedrick SFO WR

WR62 14.09 165 Patten, David NEP WR

WR63 14.1 166 Bates, D'wayne FA WR

WR64 15.11 179 McAddley, Jason ARI WR

WR65 16.01 181 Gilmore, Brian ARI WR

WR66 16.12 192 Glenn, Terry DAL WR

WR67 17.03 195 Terrell, David CHI WR

WR68 17.05 197 Bennett, Drew TEN WR

WR69 17.09 201 Caldwell, Reche SDC WR

WR70 18.02 206 McCareins, Justin NYJ WR

WR71 18.07 211 Stokes, J.J. NEP WR

WR72 18.08 212 Thompson, Derrius MIA WR

WR73 18.09 213 Hakim, Az-zahir DET WR

TE1 4.1 46 Gonzalez, Tony KCC TE

TE2 4.12 48 Shockey, Jeremy NYG TE

TE3 5.06 54 Heap, Todd BAL TE

TE4 7.11 83 Franks, Bubba GBP TE

TE5 9.07 103 McMichael, Randy MIA TE

TE6 10.01 109 Sharpe, Shannon DEN TE

TE7 10.05 113 Pollard, Marcus IND TE

TE8 12.03 135 Jolley, Doug OAK TE

TE9 13.06 150 Crumpler, Alge ATL TE

TE10 13.12 156 Miller, Billy HOU TE

TE11 14.04 160 Alexander, Stephen FA TE

TE12 16.04 184 Jones, Freddie ARI TE

TE13 16.06 186 Becht, Anthony NYJ TE

TE14 16.08 188 Lewis, Chad PHI TE

TE15 17.02 194 Ricks, Mikhael DET TE

TE16 17.06 198 Johnson, Eric SFO TE

TE17 17.11 203 Wycheck, Frank FA TE

PK1 11.05 125 Akers, David PHI PK

PK2 13.04 148 Vanderjagt, Mike IND PK

PK3 14.02 158 Janikowski, Sebastian OAK PK

PK4 14.05 161 Gramatica, Martin TBB PK

PK5 14.07 163 Elam, Jason DEN PK

PK6 15.02 170 Feely, Jay ATL PK

PK7 15.03 171 Carney, John NOS PK

PK8 15.04 172 Longwell, Ryan GBP PK

PK9 15.07 175 Wilkins, Jeff STL PK

PK10 17.01 193 Mare, Olindo MIA PK

PK11 17.1 202 Brown, Josh SEA PK

PK12 17.12 204 Epstein, Hayden DEN PK

PK13 18.04 208 Reed, Jeff PIT PK

PK14 18.06 210 Vinatieri, Adam NEP PK

DT1 8.09 93 Buccaneers, Tampa Bay TBB Def

DT2 9.1 106 Eagles, Philadelphia PHI Def

DT3 10.08 116 Panthers, Carolina CAR Def

DT4 10.09 117 Dolphins, Miami MIA Def

DT5 10.12 120 Steelers, Pittsburgh PIT Def

DT6 11.03 123 Patriots, New England NEP Def

DT7 11.04 124 Ravens, Baltimore BAL Def

DT8 13.02 146 Titans, Tennessee TEN Def

DT9 13.07 151 Falcons, Atlanta ATL Def

DT10 13.11 155 Giants, New York NYG Def

DT11 14.01 157 Packers, Green Bay GBP Def

DT12 14.11 167 Raiders, Oakland OAK Def

DT13 15.1 178 Bengals, Cincinnati CIN Def

DT14 17.04 196 Rams, St. Louis STL Def

DT15 17.07 199 Broncos, Denver DEN Def

DT16 17.08 200 Redskins, Washington WAS Def

DT17 18.01 205 Jets, New York NYJ Def

DT18 18.1 214 Cowboys, Dallas DAL Def

DT19 18.12 216 Bills, Buffalo BUF Def

 

[fsufan]

7 votes for RBs

How can RBs be undervalued in FF

 

[Burning Sensation]

7 votes for RBs

How can RBs be undervalued in FF

Because every year, in every draft, people still take QB's and WR's in the first 12-15 picks of a draft.P.S. i am vote #8