"RB & WR combo "article by Drinen (1 Viewer)

[joey]

First of all, great stuff Doug on the "combo" articles that just got posted.

I don't want to give away any subscriber info here so I'll just leave the

kudos at that.

One thing I found odd running some numbers drafting from the 12 spot:

scenario 1: RB12/RB13/RB34/RB35 = 404

scenario 2: RB12/RB24/RB34/RB35 = 464!!!

Looks like there might be a typo in the RB24 slot of your spreadsheet.

In scenario 2, if I change RB24 to RB23, I get 402.

If I change RB24 to RB25, I get 394.9.

Those seem more like it I'd say.

Something seems amiss unless RB24 is historically a BEAST!

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

 

[secretid]

I was thankful for your post as it alerted me to new content.

I gotta admit that one appears to be way out of line. But the points to ranks aren't always linear because of the unexpected outcomes. Perhaps LJ was RB24 last year?

Regardless, it certainly merits a double-check.

 

[secretid]

Some more thoughts:

***It would actually be nice to see some kind of base number for each RB/WR rank so that we could be aware of any outliers. If you're trying to make a strategic decision then that RB24 could throw everything off without you ever knowing it was an outlier.

***My league starts 3 RB and 3 WR. The system doesn't really work for this so my work around was this: Whoever is my top RB or top WR is an "entrenched" starter. I award my team the number of pts that player is projected for and then fill in all the rest into the database checker to find out how much production the other 2 spots are projected to yield. It's not perfect, but it's something. If you do this make sure you account for your scoring system vs the scoring system in effect here (edit: there's no mention of what scoring is being used, but I would think 6 pt TD, 10 yds/pt).

I hope I'm not giving the impression that I'm giving these numbers more credit than they deserve. No matter how high/low the accuracy there's something to be learned about my draft strategy by applying them properly.

 

[a_f13nd]

So, I ran it picking from the 14 slot. It seems like choosing WR-WR-RB-RB-RB-RB might be the best way to go. There wasn't much difference between the RB-RB-WR-WR-RB-RB scenario, however.

The combination of RB13 / RB14 / RB35 / RB36 has historically been worth an average of 369.1 points.

The combination of WR13 / WR14 / WR36 / WR40 has historically been worth an average of 336.3 points.

705

The combination of RB28 / RB29 / RB35 / RB36 has historically been worth an average of 270.8 points.

The combination of WR2 / WR3 / WR40 / WR41 has historically been worth an average of 446.3 points.

717

The combination of RB13 / RB28 / RB35 / RB36 has historically been worth an average of 282.7 points.

The combination of WR2 / WR13 / WR36 / WR40 has historically been worth an average of 389.1 points.

671

If this is reliable, and I did it right, then WR-RB (which I thought was best) is actually the worst way to go.

Anxiously awaiting installment 3.

 

[secretid]

It sounds like this program is already a bit of a behemoth, but I think averaging out the positions might make this info more relialbe.

E.g. RB24 is actually a weighted average of performances by RB21-27. This could get complicated with the line-up decisions being implemented in the system as well (which is, I think, what seperates this from a more simplified AVT/mock draft analysis).

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

If this is reliable, and I did it right, then WR-RB (which I thought was best) is actually the worst way to go.

Just read the same article and came up with the same results

 

[Doug Drinen]

Something seems amiss unless RB24 is historically a BEAST!

The QB data set was small enough that I could just eyeball it and note that it looked pretty much OK. But you can't do that with the RB data. It does appear that RB24 is historically a beast. These are MFL ADPs, by the way, for redrafts taking place after August 25.2000 - Thomas Jones. He stunk.2001 - Priest Holmes. Finished RB22002 - Clinton Portis. Finished RB42003 - Warrick Dunn. Finished RB272004 - Thomas Jones again. This time he finished RB192005 - Mike Anderson. RB10So yes, that's flukish. secretid suggested using a weighted average and I agree that that would be a good idea. So maybe if you want to look at a RB12/RB24/RB34/RB35 combination for instance, I should have the app compute the value for every combination RB11--RB13 / RB23--RB25 / RB33--RB35 / RB34--RB36 and average them together. That would probably smooth things out a bit, and I think it's doable.The programming for Part III is more involved than I thought, so it may be a week or so before you see it. But I might be able to make the above tweak to the app within a couple of days.Thanks for the feedback!

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Great stuff DD.

 

[joey]

Something seems amiss unless RB24 is historically a BEAST!

The QB data set was small enough that I could just eyeball it and note that it looked pretty much OK. But you can't do that with the RB data. It does appear that RB24 is historically a beast. These are MFL ADPs, by the way, for redrafts taking place after August 25.2000 - Thomas Jones. He stunk.2001 - Priest Holmes. Finished RB22002 - Clinton Portis. Finished RB42003 - Warrick Dunn. Finished RB272004 - Thomas Jones again. This time he finished RB192005 - Mike Anderson. RB10So yes, that's flukish. secretid suggested using a weighted average and I agree that that would be a good idea. So maybe if you want to look at a RB12/RB24/RB34/RB35 combination for instance, I should have the app compute the value for every combination RB11--RB13 / RB23--RB25 / RB33--RB35 / RB34--RB36 and average them together. That would probably smooth things out a bit, and I think it's doable.The programming for Part III is more involved than I thought, so it may be a week or so before you see it. But I might be able to make the above tweak to the app within a couple of days.Thanks for the feedback!

thanks for the response! I agree it would be an excellent enhancementto give an average result of +/- 1 or 2 slots. Would flatten out the bumpsa little. (heck, you could even create another pull-down menu called "Average Over..."with options of "0, 1, 2, 3" so the user can control how much they want to averageout the results).The math nerd in me LOVES this kind of stuff but the 10+ year fantasy football nutin me understands its relative place among solid rankings, drafting for value, etc.Putting this tool to use for me *this year specifically*... I'm drafting from the 12th slotin a 12 team league. It's great to see that there is historically a negligible differencebetween going RB12/RB13/WR12/WR13 or RB12/WR1/RB24/WR13. BUT, this year in particular, I see very little difference between the RB13 I'd get at thetop of the 2nd round and the RB24 I'd get at the end of the 3rd, so I think it validatesgoing RB/WR/RB/WR even more. Hope that makes some sense...thanks again.

 

[radballs]

Putting this tool to use for me *this year specifically*... I'm drafting from the 12th slot

in a 12 team league. It's great to see that there is historically a negligible difference

between going RB12/RB13/WR12/WR13 or RB12/WR1/RB24/WR13.

BUT, this year in particular, I see very little difference between the RB13 I'd get at the

top of the 2nd round and the RB24 I'd get at the end of the 3rd, so I think it validates

going RB/WR/RB/WR even more. Hope that makes some sense...

Not to mention that if you take one of each at the turn, it will allow you greater flexibility for your 3rd and 4th round picks. If you go RB/RB with your first two picks, it forces your hand a bit to go more WR heavy with your next few picks and that might not be where the value lies.

 

[Doug Drinen]

scenario 1: RB12/RB13/RB34/RB35 = 404scenario 2: RB12/RB24/RB34/RB35 = 464!!!

Hey guys, check out the app now:Scenario 1:

The combination of RB12 / RB13 / RB34 / RB35 has historically been worth an average of 404.4 points.The average of the 36 legal combinations which differ from this one by no more than one ADP position for each player is 397.1 points.

Scenario 2:

The combination of RB12 / RB24 / RB34 / RB35 has historically been worth an average of 464.7 points.The average of the 54 legal combinations which differ from this one by no more than one ADP position for each player is 380.1 points.

That's a lot of verbiage, but it just means we've added a +/- 1 to each of the numbers and averaged the resulting combinations. I like this method of valuing the combinations much better than simply looking up the average for the actual combo itself. This way, we get some "smoothing" without losing the flavor of the analysis. Excellent suggestions, guys.

 

[secretid]

Awesome!

Nothing like making a suggestion in the middle of the night and having it implemented the next afternoon. Great articles and great response to feedback.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

Sneak preview of Part III. Here is the "optimal" combo for the 12-hole:wr, rb, rb, rb, te, qb, wr, wr, te, rb, wr, qbI'd say this matches up with intuition pretty closely.Keep in mind, though, that there are another several hundred combinations within just a few points of this one. Almost all of them start with WR/RB. A few of them start with RB/RB. None start with WR/WR or anything else that doesn't include an RB.FWIW.

 

[Quez]

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

Sneak preview of Part III. Here is the "optimal" combo for the 12-hole:wr, rb, rb, rb, te, qb, wr, wr, te, rb, wr, qbI'd say this matches up with intuition pretty closely.Keep in mind, though, that there are another several hundred combinations within just a few points of this one. Almost all of them start with WR/RB. A few of them start with RB/RB. None start with WR/WR or anything else that doesn't include an RB.FWIW.

 

[joey]

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

Sneak preview of Part III. Here is the "optimal" combo for the 12-hole:wr, rb, rb, rb, te, qb, wr, wr, te, rb, wr, qbI'd say this matches up with intuition pretty closely.Keep in mind, though, that there are another several hundred combinations within just a few points of this one. Almost all of them start with WR/RB. A few of them start with RB/RB. None start with WR/WR or anything else that doesn't include an RB.FWIW.

thanks again for that QUICK tweak to your program. It's greatly appreciated.Thanks also for the preview to Part III (especially since you kindly used the 12-hole as your example )An interesting wrinkle for me is that the league where I'm drafting from the 12 spot is not TE-mandatory,so I'll most likely just swap out your "te" for a "wr". Probably not truly accurate but close enough inmy mind for what I'll be using this for.I anxiously await Part III.cheers...

 

[mbuehner]

There is a lesson here. ALWAYS DRAFT RB24!!!

 

[Dolfan]

There is a lesson here. ALWAYS DRAFT RB24!!!

I was just going to check MFL to see who RB24 is this year ETA: Looks like Corey Dillon right now, but it's still too early... Jamal Lewis, Joseph Addai, Tatum Bell, and De'shaun Foster are all possibilities too...Hmmmm...

 

[The Jerk]

Putting this tool to use for me *this year specifically*... I'm drafting from the 12th slot

in a 12 team league. It's great to see that there is historically a negligible difference

between going RB12/RB13/WR12/WR13 or RB12/WR1/RB24/WR13.

BUT, this year in particular, I see very little difference between the RB13 I'd get at the

top of the 2nd round and the RB24 I'd get at the end of the 3rd, so I think it validates

going RB/WR/RB/WR even more. Hope that makes some sense...

Not to mention that if you take one of each at the turn, it will allow you greater flexibility for your 3rd and 4th round picks. If you go RB/RB with your first two picks, it forces your hand a bit to go more WR heavy with your next few picks and that might not be where the value lies.

An excellent point by radballs! It is especially good strategy to split your first two picks (if you're drafting late first round/early second round) if you're in a league with at least a few maverick and/or non-shark owners. It's very frustrating to draft two RBs early than have a third RB sneak way down below his value. You're either forced to let him continue to drop to another owner who is probably stronger than you at WR, or you draft him putting yourself weaker at WR and relying on a trade to get your imbalance corrected.

 

[The Jerk]

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

Sneak preview of Part III. Here is the "optimal" combo for the 12-hole:wr, rb, rb, rb, te, qb, wr, wr, te, rb, wr, qbI'd say this matches up with intuition pretty closely.Keep in mind, though, that there are another several hundred combinations within just a few points of this one. Almost all of them start with WR/RB. A few of them start with RB/RB. None start with WR/WR or anything else that doesn't include an RB.FWIW.

I know Doug's work well enough not to argue against his conclusions, however, I still want to point out an important strategic aspect to any newbie owners. It is usually bad strategy to force your draft to fit a predetermined, inflexible draft plan. Doug's optimal approach will not fit each league the same, due to scoring differences and drafting tendencies.There have been several drafting 12th/drafting at the end of the first round threads in the past month. In one of them, I posted:

There are at least six reasonable ways to play drafting at the 12-13 turn, assuming a start 2 RB, 3 WR league. I have listed them in the order of most conservative to least conservative below:1. RB-RB, WR-RB Offers the best opportunity to have a strong running game2. RB-WR, RB-RB Should get a top 10-12 RB, top 3 WR and a good shot at a decent RB23. RB-RB, WR-WR Potentially two top 12 RB and two top 12 WR4. RB-WR, RB-WR The most balanced approach, should have four quality starters5. RB-WR, WR-WR Rolling the dice on finding a serviceable RB2 later6. WR-WR, RB-WR WR overload, going against the grain, but tough uphill battle on RBsI would try to use approach #3 or #4 in most leagues, but a lot depends on the talent available, the league in which I am competing, and the flow of the draft. In one of my leagues, only half of the teams have shark owners while another half are unpredictable and/or less competitive on average. In this league, I will consider becoming more conservative as I expect to be among the leaders as long as I don't make multiple mistakes. So maybe I choose approach #2 or even #1. In another league, competition is extremely close every year, so I just may be more aggressive, going against the grain, trying to give myself an edge. So perhaps #5 would enter consideration although probably not #6. If I use this approach, then come rounds 5-6 I'll be looking to snag a pair of players like Addai/Rhodes or TENN or JAX or SF. I know I'll be likely taking a hit at RB2, but if my RB committee works out, I'll be hard to beat considering my strength at WR. Even if RB2 flops, perhaps my WR strength will cancel out my RB weakness.Looking at #5 a little bit deeper, 35 picks will have occurred before team 12 gets their 3rd rounder. If each other teams has drafted 2 RBs, and at least Manning and Gates are gone, then at most 10 WRs will have been drafted. So theoretically, team 12 could have a top 10-12 RB (drafted at the first turn) along with a top 3 WR plus two more top 12 WR. If you choose #4, then you end up with a top 10-12 RB and a top 3 WR from the first turn, then likely RB 24 or so along with a top 12 WR. Your next WR probably fits anywhere between WR 20 and WR 25. So would you rather have:#4: RB 10, RB 24, WR 3, WR 11, WR 24or#5: RB 10, RB 30, WR3, WR11, WR12Considering that the “RB30” could be a team or relay RB with the potential to hit the top 20 as the situation resolves, I am tempted to go with approach #5. Risky, yes. But there's a chance to be dominant if the RB2 works out sometime during the year.

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

 

[joey]

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

I couldn't agree more about staying flexible but beforehand I like to have an idea of how I want to draftbased on a Worst Case Scenario (i.e. not a single player falls to me with an ADP above where I draft).So I plan for having to constantly pick the guy I have ranked at or below the position for my first pick atthe turn and then I have to "reach" for my second player at the turn by selecting the player I like mostof the next 22 players in my ADP chart. Hope that makes sense.I'll make the "best" team I can looking at ADP by only chosing the guys at or below each of my picks(ok, maybe I'll reach up a couple of slots above my pick assuming some random variation ) andI try to figure out where the best value lies at each turn. This is how I formulate my pre-draft plan.Of course, I hope that someone will fall to me and then I'll adjust my draft from there.

 

[The Jerk]

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

I couldn't agree more about staying flexible but beforehand I like to have an idea of how I want to draftbased on a Worst Case Scenario (i.e. not a single player falls to me with an ADP above where I draft).So I plan for having to constantly pick the guy I have ranked at or below the position for my first pick atthe turn and then I have to "reach" for my second player at the turn by selecting the player I like mostof the next 22 players in my ADP chart. Hope that makes sense.I'll make the "best" team I can looking at ADP by only chosing the guys at or below each of my picks(ok, maybe I'll reach up a couple of slots above my pick assuming some random variation ) andI try to figure out where the best value lies at each turn. This is how I formulate my pre-draft plan.Of course, I hope that someone will fall to me and then I'll adjust my draft from there.

It's a good approach. Some people use the "stay flexible" approach as a synonym for drafting by the seat of your pants, i.e., don't prepare to seriously. I don't agree. I prepare so that I can be flexible. I also do what you stated as far as worst case scenarios at each of my first 5-6 picks. It's areality check that helps me figure out the cost of drafting a TE like Gates in round 3, or a QB in round 4,...Good luck to you.

 

[a_f13nd]

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

I couldn't agree more about staying flexible but beforehand I like to have an idea of how I want to draftbased on a Worst Case Scenario (i.e. not a single player falls to me with an ADP above where I draft).So I plan for having to constantly pick the guy I have ranked at or below the position for my first pick atthe turn and then I have to "reach" for my second player at the turn by selecting the player I like mostof the next 22 players in my ADP chart. Hope that makes sense.I'll make the "best" team I can looking at ADP by only chosing the guys at or below each of my picks(ok, maybe I'll reach up a couple of slots above my pick assuming some random variation ) andI try to figure out where the best value lies at each turn. This is how I formulate my pre-draft plan.Of course, I hope that someone will fall to me and then I'll adjust my draft from there.

It's a good approach. Some people use the "stay flexible" approach as a synonym for drafting by the seat of your pants, i.e., don't prepare to seriously. I don't agree. I prepare so that I can be flexible. I also do what you stated as far as worst case scenarios at each of my first 5-6 picks. It's areality check that helps me figure out the cost of drafting a TE like Gates in round 3, or a QB in round 4,...Good luck to you.

I like RB-WR-WR-WR-RB combo from the 1-5 positions, because I feel like I can always trust my RB1. Would you adjust your strategy if you don't trust that the 12th RB is going to be as reliable as WR2.

 

[The Jerk]

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

I couldn't agree more about staying flexible but beforehand I like to have an idea of how I want to draftbased on a Worst Case Scenario (i.e. not a single player falls to me with an ADP above where I draft).So I plan for having to constantly pick the guy I have ranked at or below the position for my first pick atthe turn and then I have to "reach" for my second player at the turn by selecting the player I like mostof the next 22 players in my ADP chart. Hope that makes sense.I'll make the "best" team I can looking at ADP by only chosing the guys at or below each of my picks(ok, maybe I'll reach up a couple of slots above my pick assuming some random variation ) andI try to figure out where the best value lies at each turn. This is how I formulate my pre-draft plan.Of course, I hope that someone will fall to me and then I'll adjust my draft from there.

It's a good approach. Some people use the "stay flexible" approach as a synonym for drafting by the seat of your pants, i.e., don't prepare to seriously. I don't agree. I prepare so that I can be flexible. I also do what you stated as far as worst case scenarios at each of my first 5-6 picks. It's areality check that helps me figure out the cost of drafting a TE like Gates in round 3, or a QB in round 4,...Good luck to you.

I like RB-WR-WR-WR-RB combo from the 1-5 positions, because I feel like I can always trust my RB1. Would you adjust your strategy if you don't trust that the 12th RB is going to be as reliable as WR2.

I'm not sure what you mean by this question. Where did the 12th RB come from?

 

[joey]

I like RB-WR-WR-WR-RB combo from the 1-5 positions, because I feel like I can always trust my RB1. Would you adjust your strategy if you don't trust that the 12th RB is going to be as reliable as WR2.

I'm not sure what you mean by this question. Where did the 12th RB come from?

I think he's talking about the RB taken in the 12th spot of a 12 team draft,assuming all 11 teams before you take RBs too. If so...What's interesting about this situation to me is that one might think that since Idon't really love the options at RB12 (McGahee, Westbrook, DDavis), that I'd beinclined to take 2 RBs at the turn to spread out my risk. But this year I feel theopposite way because 1) I feel like the RBs available to me at 3/4 turn have almost thesame chance of finishing at or near the level of an injury prone DDavis/Westbrook (guyslike Dunn, Droughns, etc) and 2) I can't convince myself not to take at least 1 RB at the1/2 turn (sorry. just wouldn't be comfortable with my roster going WR/WR at 1/2).So for me, it's all about RB/WR at the 12-hole turn unless one of the top 11 RBs fallsto me. Then I'd go Caddy/McGahee (those are my 11 and 12th ranked RBs right now)and not look back. Otherwise, my worst case scenario has me going McGahee/WR1(still haven't decided who that is yet but I have 2 weeks to figure it out )

 

[The Jerk]

I like RB-WR-WR-WR-RB combo from the 1-5 positions, because I feel like I can always trust my RB1. Would you adjust your strategy if you don't trust that the 12th RB is going to be as reliable as WR2.

I'm not sure what you mean by this question. Where did the 12th RB come from?

I think he's talking about the RB taken in the 12th spot of a 12 team draft,assuming all 11 teams before you take RBs too. If so...What's interesting about this situation to me is that one might think that since Idon't really love the options at RB12 (McGahee, Westbrook, DDavis), that I'd beinclined to take 2 RBs at the turn to spread out my risk. But this year I feel theopposite way because 1) I feel like the RBs available to me at 3/4 turn have almost thesame chance of finishing at or near the level of an injury prone DDavis/Westbrook (guyslike Dunn, Droughns, etc) and 2) I can't convince myself not to take at least 1 RB at the1/2 turn (sorry. just wouldn't be comfortable with my roster going WR/WR at 1/2).So for me, it's all about RB/WR at the 12-hole turn unless one of the top 11 RBs fallsto me. Then I'd go Caddy/McGahee and not look back. Otherwise, my worst case scenariohas me going McGahee/WR1 (still haven't decided who that is yet but I have 2 weeksto figure it out )

You're probably right about what RB12 means...I'd strongly advocate RB/RB or RB/WR at the turn. I'd probably lean toward RB/WR so that if value falls to 3.12 (36) at any position, you can best take advantage of it. That said, if value falls to 1.12 and 2.01 in the form of 2 RBs, then I can live with that, too.

 

[The Jerk]

I appreciate Doug's insights, but I'm going to stay flexible because it gives me the best chance to pick out value as it falls to be throughout my draft.

I couldn't agree more about staying flexible but beforehand I like to have an idea of how I want to draftbased on a Worst Case Scenario (i.e. not a single player falls to me with an ADP above where I draft).So I plan for having to constantly pick the guy I have ranked at or below the position for my first pick atthe turn and then I have to "reach" for my second player at the turn by selecting the player I like mostof the next 22 players in my ADP chart. Hope that makes sense.I'll make the "best" team I can looking at ADP by only chosing the guys at or below each of my picks(ok, maybe I'll reach up a couple of slots above my pick assuming some random variation ) andI try to figure out where the best value lies at each turn. This is how I formulate my pre-draft plan.Of course, I hope that someone will fall to me and then I'll adjust my draft from there.

It's a good approach. Some people use the "stay flexible" approach as a synonym for drafting by the seat of your pants, i.e., don't prepare to seriously. I don't agree. I prepare so that I can be flexible. I also do what you stated as far as worst case scenarios at each of my first 5-6 picks. It's areality check that helps me figure out the cost of drafting a TE like Gates in round 3, or a QB in round 4,...Good luck to you.

One more thing to add... using Doug's plan as a starting point would be a good idea. If you're in between a player at one position vs. another, it would seem wise to follow the plan especially in the early rounds.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Again, great work that will help me with my 12th pick strategy this year.

Sneak preview of Part III. Here is the "optimal" combo for the 12-hole:wr, rb, rb, rb, te, qb, wr, wr, te, rb, wr, qbI'd say this matches up with intuition pretty closely.Keep in mind, though, that there are another several hundred combinations within just a few points of this one. Almost all of them start with WR/RB. A few of them start with RB/RB. None start with WR/WR or anything else that doesn't include an RB.FWIW.

But this is where failure to consider handcuffs may affect the results.You can take the top two WRs in the draft, and then take two different handcuff combos out of Foster+Williams, Bush+McAllister, Dillon+Maroney, Rhodes+Addai, Benson+Jones, Bell+Bell.This isn't an option every year; but this year in particular it seems that there are a lot of combos where one guy is available at the 3/4 turn and the other guy is available at the 5/6 or even 7/8 turn.