r/b,r/b,r/b,r/b? (1 Viewer)

[ATG]

I'm in a 12 team non ppr trading league at work. We start 2 running backs, 2 wide receivers and one flex of r/b w/r or te. In my mock drafts I seem to be able to take 4 running backs with first four picks. Typically they are top 35 players regardless of position. Is this a dumb play if I concentrate on receivers for the rest of the draft? I usually wait on quarterbacks anyway.

 

[ponchsox]

I would advise taking at least on WR in the first four rounds otherwise the advantage you have in RB will be given up by terrible WR.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

What is an r/b?

 

[Twenty-Four Eighty-Four]

In my league we get 1 keeper then we start the draft. I kept Lynch the took two more RB on the turn (1.12, 2.01). So essentially 3 RBs. When it got back to me, the best WR left was Reggie Wayne. Just an FYI.

 

[Ilov80s]

I'm in a 12 team non ppr trading league at work. We start 2 running backs, 2 wide receivers and one flex of r/b w/r or te. In my mock drafts I seem to be able to take 4 running backs with first four picks. Typically they are top 35 players regardless of position. Is this a dumb play if I concentrate on receivers for the rest of the draft? I usually wait on quarterbacks anyway.

Wrong forum man.

 

[Charlie Batch]

this is a great strategy despite what the tards will say. depends where you pick in rd 4/5 & how many good rbs are left. might be able to wait til rd5. either way definintely want 4 starting rbs.

 

[Man of Zen]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

 

[ponchsox]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

If you can only start 3 RB, taking a 4th RB in round 4 is a waste. He may have an advantage in RB over most teams, but he will get smoked head to head in WR. I would take at least one short bet at WR and then take your 3 RB.

 

[Man of Zen]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

If you can only start 3 RB, taking a 4th RB in round 4 is a waste. He may have an advantage in RB over most teams, but he will get smoked head to head in WR. I would take at least one short bet at WR and then take your 3 RB.

I guess that's the point of contention.

I don't really see a meaningful drop in production between the guys you can get in round 4 and the guys you can get in round 5. You get smoked, if you do at all, by the guys who took the Calvins, Dez's, and the rest of that top tier, but they're already giving up a ton at RB, and will be giving up even more if you stack up more RB depth.

I think WR is deep enough that you give up next to nothing by passing on what I see as the modest value bump at the top of that second tier of wideouts.

I'm not necessarily saying I think Rb/Rb/Rb/Rb is optimal, but I do think it's viable. Obviously depending on who is there.

At current values, you could stack up guys like Bowe, Garcon, Desean, TY, Nicks, Shorts, Torrey, Britt, Givens, Gordon...Get five of those guys in rd five and beyond, and I think you have a chance to compete with anyone who doesn't go straight upside-down...and you kill that guy at RB anyway, so no matter.

 

[pbandy1]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

If you can only start 3 RB, taking a 4th RB in round 4 is a waste. He may have an advantage in RB over most teams, but he will get smoked head to head in WR. I would take at least one short bet at WR and then take your 3 RB.

Agreed. Guys, if you didn't know you have to start a WR or two. I understand that you may want a 4th RB based on overall value, but the RB situation is not so unbelievably bad that you can't wait another round or two to get a 4th RB. Injuries will happen, players will emerge.

I also agree that WR's are deep, but that doesn't mean they will be posting near-elite points. Get at least 1 WR in the first 4 rounds.

 

[Man of Zen]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

If you can only start 3 RB, taking a 4th RB in round 4 is a waste. He may have an advantage in RB over most teams, but he will get smoked head to head in WR. I would take at least one short bet at WR and then take your 3 RB.

Agreed. Guys, if you didn't know you have to start a WR or two. I understand that you may want a 4th RB based on overall value, but the RB situation is not so unbelievably bad that you can't wait another round or two to get a 4th RB. Injuries will happen, players will emerge.

I also agree that WR's are deep, but that doesn't mean they will be posting near-elite points. Get at least 1 WR in the first 4 rounds.

Which WR's do you see available in the 37-48 range, who have a significantly better shot at "near-elite points" than the group of guys you can load up on thereafter?

Because looking at, let's say MFL's ADP thingy, standard scoring, 12 team, after Aug. 1, you'd only be passing on VJax, Welker, and Colston in that range. And I rate a handful of guys you can get after than higher than any of them anyway.

And again, this all assumes some RB you have rated high enough to consider slips down and presents a great value anyway.

 

[pbandy1]

I think there's more than enough high-upside depth at WR, more than enough QB's with potential, and more than enough depth at TE to justify going 4-RB strong at the start of the draft, depending on who you can get. Especially true in leagues where you can start 3 RB and your 4th gets a minimum of 3 starts.

Take a decent QB in those middle rounds, load up on WR's in the rest of the 5-10 rounds, and go TE and D by endgame committee. Chances are at least a few of the WR's will work out if you choose smartly, but if not, you've got crazy trade leverage.

If you can only start 3 RB, taking a 4th RB in round 4 is a waste. He may have an advantage in RB over most teams, but he will get smoked head to head in WR. I would take at least one short bet at WR and then take your 3 RB.

Agreed. Guys, if you didn't know you have to start a WR or two. I understand that you may want a 4th RB based on overall value, but the RB situation is not so unbelievably bad that you can't wait another round or two to get a 4th RB. Injuries will happen, players will emerge.

I also agree that WR's are deep, but that doesn't mean they will be posting near-elite points. Get at least 1 WR in the first 4 rounds.

Which WR's do you see available in the 37-48 range, who have a significantly better shot at "near-elite points" than the group of guys you can load up on thereafter?

Because looking at, let's say MFL's ADP thingy, standard scoring, 12 team, after Aug. 1, you'd only be passing on VJax, Welker, and Colston in that range. And I rate a handful of guys you can get after than higher than any of them anyway.

And again, this all assumes some RB you have rated high enough to consider slips down and presents a great value anyway.

Actually I was assuming a 10-team league, but in a 12-team league my opinion changes a bit (my mistake). In a 10-team I can see someone getting a Fitzgerald or Cruz in the 4th round, and then the drop-off after that is pretty big in terms of talent/risk as your WR1 (Colston, Wayne, Welker, Amendola, Bowe, Wallace, etc). Now in a 12-team league, I can certainly see how going RB-RB-RB-RB is viable if that 4th RB is of significant value, since after that I think there is marginal difference between WR's: Antonio Brown, Torrey Smith, Cecil Shorts, Eric Decker, Hakeem Nicks, Steve Smith, Djax, etc).

 

[PinkydaPimp]

If you go rb-rb-rb-rb your likely grabbing some rb's higher than their ADP. You can likely get a stronger roster and more importantly a stronger starting lineup by grabbing at least 1 wr in there. Really though, you dont want to pigeonhole yourself into any one draft strategy. you want to be drafting where the value is. If people draft qb and wr heavy early and 4 top 15 rbs fall to you, then so be it. However, chances are value will present itself at other positions and you need to take advantage of that. Otherwise, you are screwed if you cant make a trade to better your starting lineup. having a stud rb doesnt help you if he is sitting on the bench every week.

 

[dickey moe]

In a 12-team PPR draft yesterday from the 1.10 spot, I went Forte, RBush, and Gore, and thought about taking McFadden in the 4th, but took Roddy White instead, and then got Amendola in the 5th. So two options I could've had after 5 rounds:

Forte

RBush

Gore

McFadden

Amendola

or

Forte

RBush

Gore

RWhite

Amendola

I like the look of the second squad a lot better than the first squad.

 

[Man of Zen]

If you go rb-rb-rb-rb your likely grabbing some rb's higher than their ADP. You can likely get a stronger roster and more importantly a stronger starting lineup by grabbing at least 1 wr in there. Really though, you dont want to pigeonhole yourself into any one draft strategy. you want to be drafting where the value is. If people draft qb and wr heavy early and 4 top 15 rbs fall to you, then so be it. However, chances are value will present itself at other positions and you need to take advantage of that. Otherwise, you are screwed if you cant make a trade to better your starting lineup. having a stud rb doesnt help you if he is sitting on the bench every week.

On the other hand, it helps you a lot if you use him for the three bye weeks (minimum) or injury replacement, AND you get players at the other positions who give you value because of depth at those positions.

 

[Man of Zen]

In a 12-team PPR draft yesterday from the 1.10 spot, I went Forte, RBush, and Gore, and thought about taking McFadden in the 4th, but took Roddy White instead, and then got Amendola in the 5th. So two options I could've had after 5 rounds:

Forte

RBush

Gore

McFadden

Amendola

or

Forte

RBush

Gore

RWhite

Amendola

I like the look of the second squad a lot better than the first squad.

I do too, but McFadden isn't one of those guy's I'd be willing to risk going to a 4th RB for. How would you feel if it were Bush who had fallen?

Sorry...just saw PPR. Forget Bush, but Gore, Murray, Lacy, and more fall in DMC's range in PPR. One of them?

 

[PinkydaPimp]

If you go rb-rb-rb-rb your likely grabbing some rb's higher than their ADP. You can likely get a stronger roster and more importantly a stronger starting lineup by grabbing at least 1 wr in there. Really though, you dont want to pigeonhole yourself into any one draft strategy. you want to be drafting where the value is. If people draft qb and wr heavy early and 4 top 15 rbs fall to you, then so be it. However, chances are value will present itself at other positions and you need to take advantage of that. Otherwise, you are screwed if you cant make a trade to better your starting lineup. having a stud rb doesnt help you if he is sitting on the bench every week.

On the other hand, it helps you a lot if you use him for the three bye weeks (minimum) or injury replacement, AND you get players at the other positions who give you value because of depth at those positions.

Best case, all 4 have different bye weeks. then you have a nice bye week filler for those 4 weeks. However you have 11 other weeks when you have them wasting away on the bench. The wr you can get in the 3rd can put up comparable numbers, maybe more. And, chances are, that rb3 or rb4 you can still get a round or two later which gives you better value ar your wr1. Every league is different so at the end of the day it just depends on how your draft unfolds. However, i know that would be a huge fail in one of my leagues.

 

[dickey moe]

In a 12-team PPR draft yesterday from the 1.10 spot, I went Forte, RBush, and Gore, and thought about taking McFadden in the 4th, but took Roddy White instead, and then got Amendola in the 5th. So two options I could've had after 5 rounds:

Forte

RBush

Gore

McFadden

Amendola

or

Forte

RBush

Gore

RWhite

Amendola

I like the look of the second squad a lot better than the first squad.

I do too, but McFadden isn't one of those guy's I'd be willing to risk going to a 4th RB for. How would you feel if it were Bush who had fallen?

Sorry...just saw PPR. Forget Bush, but Gore, Murray, Lacy, and more fall in DMC's range in PPR. One of them?

If one of those guys you mentioned had slipped I would've had to think really hard about picking up one of them instead of RWhite (I may have ended up doing it, though).

 

[ConnSKINS26]

I did just this is a keeper league this week.

Kept

Foster

Lynch

Graham.

Got the first pick, followed up with:

Charles (guy had three keepers he liked better, amazingly)

David Wilson

Torrey Smith

RG3

Cecil Shorts

Miles Austin

Anquan Boldin

Lance Moore

Bernard Pierce

Martellus Bennett

Emannuel Sanders

Etc.

So I'm looking at:

RG3

Charles, Foster, Lynch, Wilson, Pierce

Shorts,T. Smith/M. Austin/Boldin/L. Moore E. Sanders

Graham, Bennett

I know my keepers skew the whole thing so it's not REALLY like going RB/RB/RB/RB, but hey. It's all I had to contribute.

I feel that my QB/RB's/TE give me such a high floor every week that if I can choose the right WR's some of the time I'll be unbeatable.

 

[PinkydaPimp]

I did just this is a keeper league this week.

Kept

Foster

Lynch

Graham.

Got the first pick, followed up with:

Charles (guy had three keepers he liked better, amazingly)

David Wilson

Torrey Smith

RG3

Cecil Shorts

Miles Austin

Anquan Boldin

Lance Moore

Bernard Pierce

Martellus Bennett

Emannuel Sanders

Etc.

So I'm looking at:

RG3

Charles, Foster, Lynch, Wilson, Pierce

Shorts,T. Smith/M. Austin/Boldin/L. Moore E. Sanders

Graham, Bennett

I know my keepers skew the whole thing so it's not REALLY like going RB/RB/RB/RB, but hey. It's all I had to contribute.

I feel that my QB/RB's/TE give me such a high floor every week that if I can choose the right WR's some of the time I'll be unbeatable.

Wow at keeping foster, lynch and graham. your going to be hard to beat. Id trade wilson and a wr for an upgraded WR if possible.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Cheeseburger Cheeseburger Cheeseburger Cheeseburger!!!

 

[cobalt_27]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

 

[Ilov80s]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

And this entire country.

 

[Man of Zen]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

If you like, I could start one about how wr/wr/wr/wr is a viable strategy this year.

 

[Ilov80s]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

If you like, I could start one about how wr/wr/wr/wr is a viable strategy this year.

Stop trying to make a fool of America.

 

[cobalt_27]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

And this entire country.

Even worse. Its a metaphysical disturbance of catastrophic proportions.

Stooped RB leagues.

 

[Ilov80s]

This thread speaks to everything that's wrong with this hobby and the state of fantasy football as it stands today.

And this entire country.

Even worse. Its a metaphysical disturbance of catastrophic proportions.Stooped RB leagues.

Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.