Posted this in a recent thread:
I have the second pick in a 16 team draft (no PPR, start 1/2/3/1/1/1). 16 teams makes the value thin out a lot faster, with 28 picks between my odd and even round picks. I plan to go RB at 1.2 and get at least one WR at 2.15 and 3.2, with the other spot best available RB/WR. After that, I'll just go best available.I like the benefit of an early pick in terms of getting LT/AP, but I think this position tends to be the beneficiary of less sliding value players, since there aren't enough picks between even and odd picks for value to develop and there are so many picks between odd and even picks that it is less likely a value pick will slide all the way back. Also, it is sometimes necessary to take a position earlier than you might normally be inclined to do so (e.g., QB, TE, D/ST) to avoid being frozen out of a position run.
In case anyone cares, I did some strategizing about this tonight, and I'm seriously considering the following plan:1.2 - LT/AP2.15 - WR1 (last year only 4 WRs were gone at this point, compared to 22 RBs)3.2 - WR24.15 - QB1 or TE, based on needs of the team at 1.15.2 - TE or QB1, whichever I didn't take at 4.15Notes: last year, by pick 6.15, 17 QBs were gone, so I feel forced to avoid getting frozen out at the position; meanwhile, last year, only 1 RB went between 5.2 and 6.15, and only 1 TE was taken by 5.2.6.15 - RB27.2 - RB38.15 - QB2 or WR3, based on needs of the team at 1.19.2 - WR3 or QB2, whichever I didn't take at 8.1510.15 to 14.15 - RB4, WR4, K, D/ST, and best value in some order determined by valueOh yeah, only 14 rounds. By foregoing RB2 until 6.15, I should be able to get 2 top 6-8 WRs, a top 2 TE, and a solid QB to go with LT/AP.
In the other thread, people responded to generally say they were uncomfortable waiting until the 6th for RB2. So let me make one point on that: Last year, I went RB-WR-WR to start from the third draft position, and took Foster at 4.14 as my RB2, then QB in the 5th. I could have had Witten/Winslow at TE in the 4th/5th, and only 1 RB was taken between my Foster pick and my 6.14 pick. So in retrospect I would have been better off waiting on RB2. Of course, that was last year...I made a spreadsheet to analyze a number of different combinations in the first 7 picks, based on last year's draft (i.e., what was available at each pick). If I want to avoid getting the 18th QB taken as my first QB, then I have to take QB by the 5th. Using FBG projections with no tweaks, it turns out that this route projects the most points:QB1 - BradyRB23 - e.g., ParkerWR6 - e.g., EdwardsWR20 - e.g., CotcheryTE2 - e.g., WinslowRB34 - e.g., Chester TaylorThis lineup yields a great QB, TE, and set of WRs at the expense of RB. When I did this analysis last week, this group would produce 1117 points (FBG projections).However, I'm not sure I'm comfortable taking Brady at 1.2. The next best solution was this:RB2 - presumably APWR5 - e.g., Andre JohnsonWR6 - e.g., EdwardsRB32 - e.g., MendenhallTE2 - e.g., WinslowQB18 - e.g., RodgersThis group has much better RBs, carried by the AP choice, even better WRs, and the same strong TE... at the expense of the drop from Brady to Rodgers. This group would produce 1106 points (FBG projections).Another alternative is almost identical:RB2 - presumably APWR5 - e.g., Andre JohnsonWR6 - e.g., EdwardsTE2 - e.g., WinslowQB12 - e.g., Derek AndersonRB34 - e.g., Chester TaylorThis group would produce 1105 points (FBG projections).If I'm not comfortable taking Brady at 1.2, I have to decide whether or not I'm comfortable waiting until QB18 or so to get my starting QB. Note that we have only a 5 man bench, so I do not want to carry 3 QBs for a QBBC approach... 2 QBs in a committee may work, though.All that said, I am just trying to explore options, and I will definitely adjust as the draft unfolds.
