overall not a ton of major differences, but i dont have sankey in my top 25. only 3 RBs actuallyI couldn't read your list so here is mine-
WR Sammy Watkins
WR Mike Evans
RB Bishop Sankey
WR Marqise Lee
RB Carlos Hyde
WR Odell Beckham Jr.
WR Brandin Cooks
TE Eric Ebron
RB Lache Seastrunk
QB Johnny Manziel
WR Jordan Matthews
RB Charles Sims
QB Teddy Bridgewater
QB Blake Bortles
WR Davonte Adams
RB Tre Mason
WR Kelvin Benjamin
WR Allen Robinson
RB Jeremy Hill
QB Derek Carr
TE Jace Amaro
TE Austin Seferian-Jenkins
RB Isaiah Crowell
WR Donte Moncrief
RB Devonta Freeman
RB Terrance West
WR Cody Latimer
WR Martavis Bryant
Ha... that's the highest I've seen anyone on Jace tooYou sure you didn't flip #6 and #10 on accident?
nope. Amaro's skillset is more fantasy friendly. destination could easily swap them back. amaro is going to be drafted to catch a ton of short passes and move the chains. ebron is going to be drafted to put defenses in binds and create some bigger downfield plays. they would be closer to even in nonpprYou sure you didn't flip #6 and #10 on accident?
I hear what you're saying, I just haven't seen anyone put Amaro as the top rookie TE. Mad props to you for putting this together.nope. Amaro's skillset is more fantasy friendly. destination could easily swap them back. amaro is going to be drafted to catch a ton of short passes and move the chains. ebron is going to be drafted to put defenses in binds and create some bigger downfield plays. they would be closer to even in nonpprYou sure you didn't flip #6 and #10 on accident?
someone in the NFL will stick their neck out for him on day 2. all the physical qualities are there and he just started getting it together last year. if he really turned the corner, could be very good. i dont mind risk/reward picks in late 2nd of rook draftsSome of your player comparisons are pretty funny Sigmund. Thanks for that.![]()
I was mainly curious where you might slot Clowney on this list. I haven't done a combined offense/IDP ranking.
24th overall is still pretty high but not as high as I think he could be. But you are projecting him to OLB not DE which would make a significant difference.
I like that you stuck your neck out for Martavis Bryant at pick 22.
whichever RBs land in good spots (there aren't many - ATL, TEN - NE, MIA, BUF to a lesser extent) will move up considerably on the post draft list. But most of those backs will end up spots where they are slated to be backups for at least the first 2-3 years of their career, and by then, teams could draft someone even better, or they could flame out. I'm not going to spend a pick in the first two rounds of rookie drafts on an RB who is unlikely to see much action without an injury to the starter unless I am a big believer in their talent, and those 3 backs are represented on the list.Nice list. I do think you are too far down on guys like Tre Mason, Bishop Sankey, Charles Sims, etc.
There's such a dearth of quality young RBs in fantasy that I think if any of these guys hit, their value will shoot through the roof compared to the WRs. The risk/reward is just so much higher than it is with these guys than with the 10th or 12th best WR. I'll take the chance that one of these guys hits over Moncrief, Bryant, Richardson and others. If Richardson hits, he's a poor man's DJax (imo). The other 2 maybe poor man's Mike Wallace. I can get the actual, mid 20 year old, rich man's version of these guys on the trade market and it doesn't cost me much. If Sankey, Mason or Sims hit they could easily be top 10 PPR RBs. You couldn't get Gio Bernard for Mike Wallace and DJax combined.
I just think that dynasty owners are all getting enraptured with the idea of building with WRs and I do get it. Everyone wants to have a stable of AJ, Julio and Dez. But in most of my leagues, it was the owners of Jamaal Charles, Shady McCoy, Forte, etc. who were winning it all while the guys with pretty WR rosters (and the guys who attempted to assemble pretty WR rosters with Hakeem Nicks, Greg Little, Justin Blackmon, etc.) who were done after 13 or 14 weeks.
i struggled with that because i think in an absolute way he is worth a pick around 6-7, but there is just no need to take him that high, but of course i said the same thing at 11, so good point. we'll see where he lands. dallas for instance would hurt, but cleveland or minnesota, jackpotGood list. Your write-up on Manziel made me feel like he probably should have been a few slots higher on your list. Totally agree there, regardless of wins/losses, I think he will be a fantasy star.
Fair enough I guess. However, I would ask you one question to maybe test your assertion:whichever RBs land in good spots (there aren't many - ATL, TEN - NE, MIA, BUF to a lesser extent) will move up considerably on the post draft list. But most of those backs will end up spots where they are slated to be backups for at least the first 2-3 years of their career, and by then, teams could draft someone even better, or they could flame out. I'm not going to spend a pick in the first two rounds of rookie drafts on an RB who is unlikely to see much action without an injury to the starter unless I am a big believer in their talent, and those 3 backs are represented on the list.Nice list. I do think you are too far down on guys like Tre Mason, Bishop Sankey, Charles Sims, etc.
There's such a dearth of quality young RBs in fantasy that I think if any of these guys hit, their value will shoot through the roof compared to the WRs. The risk/reward is just so much higher than it is with these guys than with the 10th or 12th best WR. I'll take the chance that one of these guys hits over Moncrief, Bryant, Richardson and others. If Richardson hits, he's a poor man's DJax (imo). The other 2 maybe poor man's Mike Wallace. I can get the actual, mid 20 year old, rich man's version of these guys on the trade market and it doesn't cost me much. If Sankey, Mason or Sims hit they could easily be top 10 PPR RBs. You couldn't get Gio Bernard for Mike Wallace and DJax combined.
I just think that dynasty owners are all getting enraptured with the idea of building with WRs and I do get it. Everyone wants to have a stable of AJ, Julio and Dez. But in most of my leagues, it was the owners of Jamaal Charles, Shady McCoy, Forte, etc. who were winning it all while the guys with pretty WR rosters (and the guys who attempted to assemble pretty WR rosters with Hakeem Nicks, Greg Little, Justin Blackmon, etc.) who were done after 13 or 14 weeks.
The problem in doing rankings pre-draft is that RB's are far more situation dependent than WR's. I have not gone back to look at old Bloom 100's but I'd venture to guess that the pre-draft rankings favored WR's moreso than RB's compared to the post-draft.If someone offered you a $1,000 bet that Sankey, Sims and Mason would combine for a higher career VBD than Moncrief, Bryant and Richardson, would you take that bet and feel pretty good that your WRs would come out ahead?
I understand that. Just for the sake of argument, let's say there are 2 shares of stock, A and B.The problem in doing rankings pre-draft is that RB's are far more situation dependent than WR's. I have gone back to look at old Bloom 100's but I'd venture to guess that the pre-draft rankings favored WR's moreso than RB's compared to the post-draft.If someone offered you a $1,000 bet that Sankey, Sims and Mason would combine for a higher career VBD than Moncrief, Bryant and Richardson, would you take that bet and feel pretty good that your WRs would come out ahead?
The Pre-draft 100 rankings are with a few exceptions based almost completely on an assessment of ceiling/floor and likelihood of where they'll end up on that spectrum with only players projected to go in the first 2 rounds given the benefit of the doubt about opportunity. This is a very poor class of RBs, and I only see three with any special qualities (it's also a WR class very deep with potential productive WR2s in their offense). Now, the threshold for a running back to be effective and productive in the NFL is pretty low, so I won't be one bit surprised if talents like Sims, Sankey, Carey, Freeman, Mason, Johnson, Grice, Williams and Hill are pretty productive backs if injury or other breaks ever get them into the lineup. I'll probably project them as at least flex/low RB2 plays if they ever get spot starts. They might even be impressive enough to be a starter/lead back coming into a season or two if they can land somewhere with an opening on the horizon and have some good luck. But it seems just as likely, if not more likely that these talents who are marginal starters at the very best thru an NFL lens will never amount to more than being a backup running back. So until I see where that opportunity lines up, I can't go against my evaluation and recommend a running back that looks like a backup NFL RB in the most likely scenario over a WR that I see with a most likely scenario of being a starter.I understand that. Just for the sake of argument, let's say there are 2 shares of stock, A and B.The problem in doing rankings pre-draft is that RB's are far more situation dependent than WR's. I have gone back to look at old Bloom 100's but I'd venture to guess that the pre-draft rankings favored WR's moreso than RB's compared to the post-draft.If someone offered you a $1,000 bet that Sankey, Sims and Mason would combine for a higher career VBD than Moncrief, Bryant and Richardson, would you take that bet and feel pretty good that your WRs would come out ahead?
A. This stock, I currently value at $50 a share. But there's about a 35% chance that in 2 weeks, I will value it at $150 a share because it has the potential for a huge value jump and a 65% chance that it'll stay valued at $50.
B. here is a stock that I currently value at $55 a share. In 2 weeks, I will probably still value it between $50 and $60 a share.
You may technically think stock B is "worth" more now, but would a savvy investor pay more for Stock A or Stock B?
Maybe that's a little bit of a stretch, but that's basically how I view the RBs. Even if they are somewhat situation dependent, you have to play the odds if you are drafting right now. The 4th-6th rated RBs are stock A. The 11th-13th rated WRs are Stock B.
Assuming we're talking about a league where you start 2 RBs and 3 WRs, does it really make sense to have 3 RBs and 13 WRs in your top 25? Am I the only one who sees a flaw in that type of reasoning?
Anyway, I like Bloom and appreciate that he usually is self aware enough to try to figure out if his reasoning on certain things is potentially flawed. I think this is one of those situations.
Sig, love your stuff.Sigmund Bloom said:
If you think Im off for having 3 RBs and 13 WRs in the top 25, is the NFL off if they only have 3 RBs but 13 WRs in the top 75 picks?
manziel and bridgewater in the 3-5 overall tier (with an argument for 1 or 2), bortles after that in 6-10 tier - other QBs in good situations maybe mid 2ndSig, love your stuff.Sigmund Bloom said:
Realizing it's impossible to address all formats, what's your rough draft of where the QBs would go in 2 start leagues or large leagues (like 24 or 32 team leagues) where QBs always have a premium?
the 3rd/4th rd RBs who land in good situations will be above some of the WRs who land in the 2nd, but im not going to guess which ones they will be.If you think Im off for having 3 RBs and 13 WRs in the top 25, is the NFL off if they only have 3 RBs but 13 WRs in the top 75 picks?but we all know RB value in FF is much higher than it is in the NFL.
Most years you can see 3rd or 4th round RBs taken above WRs who were drafted in the 2nd, but is this year that bad for RB (or great for WR)?
Personally, I like Hyde and would be surprised to see him fall to #8 unless he's drafted into a bad situation. He's my #3 pick right now assuming a 1/2/3/1 lineup.
Love that you put both top TEs in the top 10, which most people are reluctant to do.
just don't see him breaking tackles or being sudden enough to make guys miss in the NFL. he'll be a very good backup RB who could shine in a good offense if he gets a shot. think robert turbinBishop Sankey bested Giovanni Bernard in every combine measure, he displayed great production in a big-time conference, he seems to be a tougher runner than Gio, and is a great athlete. Last year you had Gio as your top RB and #3 on your list (I also had him as my #1 back last year). How is it that Sankey is not even in your top 25? What specifically do you not like about him?
not trying to be dramatic. just see them as lesser RBBC or backups in most likely scenarioSurprised on the RB rankings, or lack thereof. Sankey and Mason not making the list strikes me as overly-dramatic, but I respect going out on a limb and making something other than cookie-cutter rankings.
I look forward to these rankings every year.
Seastrunk looks like the epitome of a COP RB yet he is ranked while others aren't. Love some unpacking of that one.not trying to be dramatic. just see them as lesser RBBC or backups in most likely scenarioSurprised on the RB rankings, or lack thereof. Sankey and Mason not making the list strikes me as overly-dramatic, but I respect going out on a limb and making something other than cookie-cutter rankings.
I look forward to these rankings every year.
this is what i said in the article:Seastrunk looks like the epitome of a COP RB yet he is ranked while others aren't. Love some unpacking of that one.not trying to be dramatic. just see them as lesser RBBC or backups in most likely scenarioSurprised on the RB rankings, or lack thereof. Sankey and Mason not making the list strikes me as overly-dramatic, but I respect going out on a limb and making something other than cookie-cutter rankings.
I look forward to these rankings every year.
he doesn’t really project as an everydown back, but he could still be a CJ Spiller/Andre Ellington type in an RBBC.
he's a better running back on tape than sankey or mason. as long as he isn't in da'rick rogers territory, where his character makes him a UDFA, I think it'll play out that way on the field in the NFL toojurb26 said:I also don't particularly like the Crowell ranking. The reward just doesn't supersede the risk IMO. As you say in the article he isn't as physically gifted as a guy like Michael and has significantly more warts. Michael was drafted at the very end of round 2 in a much weaker class. Ranking him above guys like Sankey and Mason is crazy if you ask me. Those guys have nearly the same amount of ability with almost none of the character warts. I expect him to be taken in round 5 of the draft.
when it's all said and done 2-3 RB's will be going in the top 6 of rookie drafts.Most of these WRs are really over-rated. Dynasty drafters are going to be dealing with some serious WRs busts drafting them in the 3-6 range.
Agreed. I think at least 4 RBs will go in the first round, and more likely 6 or 7 given the weakness of QBs in this draft. RBs are just too hard to come by, whereas it's not too difficult to find a WR fill-in for bye weeks and injuries. Also, the fact that WR is so deep this year, I believe owners will be wanting to snag a RB while they have the chance and taking a WR in the later rounds.when it's all said and done 2-3 RB's will be going in the top 6 of rookie drafts.Most of these WRs are really over-rated. Dynasty drafters are going to be dealing with some serious WRs busts drafting them in the 3-6 range.
Right now i can understand people being heavy WR's, but it's not realistic to think that will happen when real rookie drafts start.
Yeah, that's kind of the point. Sankey and Mason could be every down backs and Seastrunk is the epitome of a 3rd down back yet he ranks 13 on the list? This class has way too much talent, in all positions, to rank a guy you think is a 3rd down back that high.this is what i said in the article:Seastrunk looks like the epitome of a COP RB yet he is ranked while others aren't. Love some unpacking of that one.not trying to be dramatic. just see them as lesser RBBC or backups in most likely scenarioSurprised on the RB rankings, or lack thereof. Sankey and Mason not making the list strikes me as overly-dramatic, but I respect going out on a limb and making something other than cookie-cutter rankings.
I look forward to these rankings every year.he doesn’t really project as an everydown back, but he could still be a CJ Spiller/Andre Ellington type in an RBBC.
Off Brand LeSean McCoy isI enjoy Bloom's player comparisons
Completely and totally irrelevant to a fantasy football ranking...The Pre-draft 100 rankings are with a few exceptions based almost completely on an assessment of ceiling/floor and likelihood of where they'll end up on that spectrum with only players projected to go in the first 2 rounds given the benefit of the doubt about opportunity. This is a very poor class of RBs, and I only see three with any special qualities (it's also a WR class very deep with potential productive WR2s in their offense). Now, the threshold for a running back to be effective and productive in the NFL is pretty low, so I won't be one bit surprised if talents like Sims, Sankey, Carey, Freeman, Mason, Johnson, Grice, Williams and Hill are pretty productive backs if injury or other breaks ever get them into the lineup. I'll probably project them as at least flex/low RB2 plays if they ever get spot starts. They might even be impressive enough to be a starter/lead back coming into a season or two if they can land somewhere with an opening on the horizon and have some good luck. But it seems just as likely, if not more likely that these talents who are marginal starters at the very best thru an NFL lens will never amount to more than being a backup running back. So until I see where that opportunity lines up, I can't go against my evaluation and recommend a running back that looks like a backup NFL RB in the most likely scenario over a WR that I see with a most likely scenario of being a starter.I understand that. Just for the sake of argument, let's say there are 2 shares of stock, A and B.The problem in doing rankings pre-draft is that RB's are far more situation dependent than WR's. I have gone back to look at old Bloom 100's but I'd venture to guess that the pre-draft rankings favored WR's moreso than RB's compared to the post-draft.If someone offered you a $1,000 bet that Sankey, Sims and Mason would combine for a higher career VBD than Moncrief, Bryant and Richardson, would you take that bet and feel pretty good that your WRs would come out ahead?
A. This stock, I currently value at $50 a share. But there's about a 35% chance that in 2 weeks, I will value it at $150 a share because it has the potential for a huge value jump and a 65% chance that it'll stay valued at $50.
B. here is a stock that I currently value at $55 a share. In 2 weeks, I will probably still value it between $50 and $60 a share.
You may technically think stock B is "worth" more now, but would a savvy investor pay more for Stock A or Stock B?
Maybe that's a little bit of a stretch, but that's basically how I view the RBs. Even if they are somewhat situation dependent, you have to play the odds if you are drafting right now. The 4th-6th rated RBs are stock A. The 11th-13th rated WRs are Stock B.
Assuming we're talking about a league where you start 2 RBs and 3 WRs, does it really make sense to have 3 RBs and 13 WRs in your top 25? Am I the only one who sees a flaw in that type of reasoning?
Anyway, I like Bloom and appreciate that he usually is self aware enough to try to figure out if his reasoning on certain things is potentially flawed. I think this is one of those situations.
If you think Im off for having 3 RBs and 13 WRs in the top 25, is the NFL off if they only have 3 RBs but 13 WRs in the top 75 picks?