Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
If your league-mates feel the same way you do, you'll likely have a tougher decision to make. How about if your choices are between Forte and AJ Green? I ran into that choice in my draft.Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
Neither. If I could start 3 RB and 2 WR, I'd probably get 4 RB and 1 WR in the first 5 rounds, assuming I pass on elite QBs.what about in a 2/2 wr/rb flex so you can start 2 rb 3wr or 3 rb 2 wr.. would you grab 3 wr and 2 rbs in first 5 rounds or other way around?
every year this antique line of thinking is debunked and debunked but it never sets in for some folksOf course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
I agree that RBs have high trade value, but I disagree that taking other positions after securing 2 RBs is a bad strategy.Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
It's only scarce at the top. After you get past Graham and Gronk, and then the next tier of Witten and Gonzalez, the next 15 TEs could easily end up TE1s. So it's scarce if you want to secure a top guy......otherwise it's not and you should just wait as long as you can.I think TE is particularly scarce this year beyond Gronk (assuming he can get back to health) and Graham. Pretty sharp dropoff and if your league is particularly TE-friendly, and you can get one of those guys, that could be a big advantage.
In shallow leagues, I agree with you.every year this antique line of thinking is debunked and debunked but it never sets in for some folksOf course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
History tells us that the 2 guys you think are in the top 15 will not finish the season that high. Last year we did a study on one of the threads and the turnover rate for top 10 backs is 60%. So basically 6 out of the top 10 preseason rating running backs will not finish there. For WR's and QB the number is drastically lower. So in essence you are getting more guaranteed points by taking a wr or qb in the top 2 roundsI agree that RBs have high trade value, but I disagree that taking other positions after securing 2 RBs is a bad strategy.Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
You have to consider the opportunity cost of drafting these RBs, which is not taking an elite WR, or Jimmy Graham, or Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. To me the cost is very high, way too high to take a RB-RB-RB approach.
I have no issues going RB-RB if you can get two top 15 guys. But I generally wouldn't take that strategy. I would rather have an elite WR to anchor my team along with a top 10 RB. You have to get a RB in the 1st round IMO. But after the 1st 10 are gone, the next 5 have potential but aren't sure things like Forte, Jackson, C Johnson, Murray and Ridley. I would rather get a more sure option in 2nd round, and WRs like Green, Marshall, and Bryant are sure things.
That said, if I was playing in a standard non-PPR league with a 2RB-2WR-1 Flex at RB/WR format, then I would take as many decent RBs as I can. But I play in start 3 WR leagues with a flex and PPR. The elite WRs are much more valuable in this format, and I can't pass them up to take a RB with a lot of risk like Murray.
Your logic is flawed. There's usually a big difference between Year-N final rankings and Year-N+1 draft order.History tells us that the 2 guys you think are in the top 15 will not finish the season that high. Last year we did a study on one of the threads and the turnover rate for top 10 backs is 60%. So basically 6 out of the top 10 preseason rating running backs will not finish there. For WR's and QB the number is drastically lower. So in essence you are getting more guaranteed points by taking a wr or qb in the top 2 roundsI agree that RBs have high trade value, but I disagree that taking other positions after securing 2 RBs is a bad strategy.Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
You have to consider the opportunity cost of drafting these RBs, which is not taking an elite WR, or Jimmy Graham, or Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. To me the cost is very high, way too high to take a RB-RB-RB approach.
I have no issues going RB-RB if you can get two top 15 guys. But I generally wouldn't take that strategy. I would rather have an elite WR to anchor my team along with a top 10 RB. You have to get a RB in the 1st round IMO. But after the 1st 10 are gone, the next 5 have potential but aren't sure things like Forte, Jackson, C Johnson, Murray and Ridley. I would rather get a more sure option in 2nd round, and WRs like Green, Marshall, and Bryant are sure things.
That said, if I was playing in a standard non-PPR league with a 2RB-2WR-1 Flex at RB/WR format, then I would take as many decent RBs as I can. But I play in start 3 WR leagues with a flex and PPR. The elite WRs are much more valuable in this format, and I can't pass them up to take a RB with a lot of risk like Murray.
Actually, it looks like you were referring to pre-season rankings holding up, not turn-over. In that case, you have a point, but the same sort of thing happens for other positions, as well (at a smaller percentage, I'm sure.)Your logic is flawed. There's usually a big difference between Year-N final rankings and Year-N+1 draft order.History tells us that the 2 guys you think are in the top 15 will not finish the season that high. Last year we did a study on one of the threads and the turnover rate for top 10 backs is 60%. So basically 6 out of the top 10 preseason rating running backs will not finish there. For WR's and QB the number is drastically lower. So in essence you are getting more guaranteed points by taking a wr or qb in the top 2 roundsI agree that RBs have high trade value, but I disagree that taking other positions after securing 2 RBs is a bad strategy.Of course they are ... in a start 2 required RB league it's critical to hit on your running backs... the more the better. The reason so many are taken is that the replacement RBs available are scoring a pittance compared to the top ~24 guys. Replacement WRs are a dime a dozen. Even in start "only 2" RB leagues I don't hesitate to go RB/RB/RB if I think the third one has upside (or is in) the top 24.That's what most people think. Go do a mock at FFC.com and watch 25+ RBs come off the board in the 1st three rounds.
If you play in a league that can only start 2 RBs, I think it's crazy to take a RB like SJax, Forte, MJD, Reggie Bush, or Frank Gore in the 2nd over young studs like Dez Bryant and AJ Green. I also see Darren McFadden, David Wilson, Lamar Miller, and Monte Ball going before Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I understand that QBs and WRs are "SO DEEP" but in my experience, you win fantasy leagues by avoiding busts in the early rounds.
I think RBs are top heavy, but guys are getting pushed way up just because they are RBs. I also think there's the illusion of depth at QB and WR. We'll see how deep they really are come October.
Trading a decent RB mid season is extremely easy. If people only draft until a position is full they are falling behind. Meaning, if you start 2 RB, only draft two, then move on to fill other positions, that's a really bad strategy. I always grab an extra RB at some point before filling out my roster... it's almost necessary. In fact, I can't think of a 2-RB league I have ever drafted where I didn't get 3 RB in the first five rounds.
And by drafting three, your odds of having two in the top 24 is much higher, not to mention bye-weeks and injuries. I will take Forte over guys like Julio all day. This is also extremely dependent on league settings. If scoring is tilted to high scoring WRS (+points for 100 yard games, yadda yadda) and/or the baseline for the WRs is higher, then I might consider taking one of those top WRs. You have to evaluate the risks/rewards in your own leagues but the generally rule is that guys like Forte will end up being more valuable than the top WRs.
You have to consider the opportunity cost of drafting these RBs, which is not taking an elite WR, or Jimmy Graham, or Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees. To me the cost is very high, way too high to take a RB-RB-RB approach.
I have no issues going RB-RB if you can get two top 15 guys. But I generally wouldn't take that strategy. I would rather have an elite WR to anchor my team along with a top 10 RB. You have to get a RB in the 1st round IMO. But after the 1st 10 are gone, the next 5 have potential but aren't sure things like Forte, Jackson, C Johnson, Murray and Ridley. I would rather get a more sure option in 2nd round, and WRs like Green, Marshall, and Bryant are sure things.
That said, if I was playing in a standard non-PPR league with a 2RB-2WR-1 Flex at RB/WR format, then I would take as many decent RBs as I can. But I play in start 3 WR leagues with a flex and PPR. The elite WRs are much more valuable in this format, and I can't pass them up to take a RB with a lot of risk like Murray.
Everyone would appreciate some sort of proven stat or analysis and not random negativity.every year this antique line of thinking is debunked and debunked but it never sets in for some folks