Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
QBs in the first round is awful every year in every format that doesn't give bonuses for QBs or that you don't start 2QBs in.
imo there are more quality backs to choose from this year which led people to go qb last year.
The RBs being drafted in the first round last year were AWFUL overall. Aside from maybe three of them, they all had serious question marks that made me question why they were first rounders at all. Last year at this time, McFadden, Mathews, and Murray were all first rounders. This is why smart people stayed away from that risk and went with a safe QB in round 1.
While I typically agree, I think this one specifically is safe bet. I don't think a scenario exists where the RB1s and RB2s are so poor as well as the WR1s and WR2s that you can justify taking one in the first especially since there is enough of an equillibrium between the non-QB skill positions that all things become equal. Would need a QB that runs for 2k yards and throws for 3k+
I disagree. I've been mocking heavily at the back turn and I am going WR/WR just about every time. But then I admit I am pretty sour on most of the names that are concensus 2nd round RBs. I'd much rather get two guys I know will produce huge and have a guaranteed advantage at WR and then take some high-upside guys like Lamar Miller or one of the rookies later. If I mine a gem at RB in rounds 3-5, then I'm golden.
I don't see it as an automatic safe bet. If you went into last year saying you weren't drafting a QB in the first round and you ended up with a mid-late pick in the first, you either got Calvin which was a good pick or a RB who busted which is a horrible pick. The VBD numbers were calced in another thread, and confirmed that a QB in round 1 last year was a wise move.
A TON has changed. First off, QB is much deeper this season. Less of a need to grab the top couple of QBs in the first two rounds. RG3, Kap, Wilson and Luck all joined the "Very solid fantasy QB" group. Manning bounced back from injury to join the top of that group as well. But nobody really dropped out of that group.
I would have to see the VBD numbers and then I would have to question the method. I've been a proponent for QBBC for a very long time so I may just be biased but I just don't see how its even possible, you're playing catchup the entire draft and the only way to actually get ahead of the pack is if players consistently slip or all of your sleepers pay off.
How were you not playing catch up from even further behind if you had drafted either of McFadden, Murray, or Mathews, and to a lesser extent, CJ2K?
Because they will still outperform the RBs you would have gotten 3 rounds later by more than your QB you get 9 rounds later was underperforming. How is injury risk weighted or even quantified in VBD?
This wasn't the case last year. Go take a look at the "Was drafting a QB early last year a mistake" thread for details. You're line of thinking is right most of the time but as I said, I believe last year was a sort of perfect storm of really bad first round RB value and really good mid round RB value. The final VBD numbers seemed to back this up.
Your point about the "good QB" ranks swelling by 4 is right (Peyton was already being drafted in the top ten last year), but Vick and Rivers definitely dropped out. Eli was more pushed out by better options and is still a decent choice at QB13, but the other two got a firm boot.
It does limit your flexibility when players slip and present value later. If you're overstocked at that position and deficient in another, often times you need to pass on a good deal. It also helps those drafting close to you predict your next move, particularly near the turns in a serp.
I like those two WR's there as well, but you almost are praying that Mathews makes it to 4.11. After him it's Lacy who has a ton of question marks, Bradshaw who has even more, Mendenhall who is probably next best, Bernard (who I like, but could easily start the season with 5 carry, 2 catch games), Vereen, a StL back, a CAR back or BJGE. Because of the weakness you're almost forced to double dip in RB at 4.11 and 5.02. So, you end up with Martin, Mendenhall, Mathews, Thomas and Fitzgerald, but have a major question mark around your #2 RB. Because that WR pool is so deep, there's still good value at the 4/5 turn. An easy substitution would be Reggie Bush and Hakeem Nicks for Mendenhall and Fitzgerald. I'd take the Bush/Nicks side 6 ways to Sunday.
Who you are playing against is obviously a factor here. Most of my leagues, and all of my 12 team leagues, are with people I know or e-know, and are not comprised entirely of sharks. I expect to have a shot at Bell or Ball or somebody similar at 4.11, worse case. If not, if RB's really do just get destroyed, I'll consider taking two RB's, 4.11 and 5.02, to mitigate risk, with one of the two probably be an 'injury' guy since either Murray/Mathews/McFadden seem to fall in a lot of mocks/drafts as people shy away. But between Bell, Ball, the three-M's, Ivory, Miller, even Wilson or Sproles...some one or the other of them often falls to 4.11
Couldn't disagree more with this. Each year is its own entity and "poor roster management" only comes when you lack the flexibility to adapt to what the draft gives you. I've played in many leagues (definition of "highly competitive" is going to vary per individual) over the years and I've seen just as many winners roster waiver wire gems as I have seen guys run the whole season without making a roster move.
No, it doesnt.
2 RB 3 WR 2 flex
I really dislike the RB's that are available in the second round from that draft position. Unless Forte is there I am not loving it. Not a fan of the Jackson's or CJ2K.
It really depends on the draft/other guys drafting. If were talking a middle pick (1.4-1.8) like bagger is, its the toughest spot to think about RB/RB. If youre picking late 1st, I think RB/RB is a no-brainer. If youre picking early 1st, taking a WR or Graham in the 2nd isnt a bad idea because youre also getting first shot at a RB who slips into Round 3.
My league setup similar to yours we also start 1qb 1rb 1wr 1te and 3 flex RB/WR all td under 40 6pt over 40 9pt. The hardest part of my league I pick #10 in first rd but we go random every other rd so I go #10 then #3 but then It's random again so I'm #8 in the 3rdGottabesweet said:
Agreed. Plus Richardson. There are probably twice as many "safe" RB picks this year vs. last year.butcher boy said:
I think there are three times as many. It's just ridiculously different. Last year the three consensus round 1 RB's were Foster, Rice, McCoy. That was it. Three.
No doubt. I think that we are just talking about perception in most people's minds. I don't know that it necessarily means that RB in rounds 1 and 2 is the best strategy.
Which makes me think next year will be completely different. An abnormally high number of RBs did not suffer meaningful injury in 2012, which led to many of them having solid numbers, and subsequently they're going early in 2013 drafts.
2011 was much more of a statistical outlier than 2012. Based on that, one would not expect a 2011 repeat to be too likely. Possible, sure.
