Redraft question on WR/WR picks (1 Viewer)

[Dulymus Mudhounds]

if your league were ppr and distance td's (heavily for 30yd + td's), would you consider going wr/wr at 10 or 12 depending on league size? And if so, would you consider Fitz and boldin over say TO and one of the two (based on Drinen's research)?

After the top6 or so rb's, there are around 10 that are the same, then another 10 or so in the same bucket, so this strategy THIS year is intriging should you get a late pick.

Not a who should I pick question, just a strategy question sparked by the WR/WR post today.

Mud out

 

[wannabee]

if your league were ppr and distance td's (heavily for 30yd + td's), would you consider going wr/wr at 10 or 12 depending on league size? And if so, would you consider Fitz and boldin over say TO and one of the two (based on Drinen's research)?

After the top6 or so rb's, there are around 10 that are the same, then another 10 or so in the same bucket, so this strategy THIS year is intriging should you get a late pick.

Not a who should I pick question, just a strategy question sparked by the WR/WR post today.

Mud out

Here is something I wrote yesterday:This is not the year for Stud WR theory:

I posted some of the below in the Shark Pool today. I recognize the stud WR theory as viable in some years. This is not one of them. If you draft WRs in your first two rounds of redraft, you are costing yourself a ton of value.

Here is the original post (and the follow up posts) altered for this thread:

Assuming no PPR, I think this will be a very difficult year to go WR/WR irregardless of your draft position. I think this year the WRs at the top are there out of default. There is no STUD WR in the mold of Rice, TO (as a niner), etc. As a result of the dropoff in RB talent, we are reaching for WRs too high. I think RB/WR is much more reasonable. Holt as a WR in second helps your team much more than either WR/RB or WR/WR. I much prefer Jordan (for example)/Holt than Fitz/Holt or even Fitz/Willis.

The point is that there is no sure WR1. If you look at most drafts going on now, there are three WRs that switch off as the first WR drafted (Fitz, Smith, and CJ) and a few with Holt going first.

Back in the day when stud WR was viable, imo, was when you could have an anchor WR in the first round. Also, imo, the WRs4-10 (not in any order: Boldin, Holt, Chambers, Harrison, TO, Moss, and Harrison) each have as good of chance to be WR1 at the end of the season as each of the WR1-3 (Fitz, Smith, and CJ).

The conclusion is that with this depth at WR, you do not have to draft a WR in first. In fact, if you do so, you leave a ton of value on the table. A first round RB and second round WR will out score the WR/RB or WR/WR. This is because you can get Harrison, Chambers or even Moss in the 3rd round. Whereas the WR dropoff is not steep this year through the first 10 WRs, the dropoff at RB is.

Here are the ADPs to support my statements above:

12 13 1 WR1 Steve Smith Car/9

17 17 0 WR2 Chad Johnson Cin/5

18 18 0 WR3 Terrell Owens Dal/3

19 19 0 WR4 Larry Fitzgerald Ari/9

20 20 0 WR5 Torry Holt StL/7

22 22 0 WR6 Randy Moss Oak/3

23 23 0 WR7 Marvin Harrison Ind/6

24 24 0 WR8 Anquan Boldin Ari/9

29 29 0 WR9 Chris Chambers Mia/8

32 34 2 WR10 Reggie Wayne Ind/6

34 32 -2 WR11 Hines Ward Pit/4

36 38 2 WR12 Darrell Jackson Sea/5

37 35 -2 WR13 Santana Moss Was/8

39 42 3 WR14 Roy Williams Det/8

40 39 -1 WR15 Plaxico Burress NYG/4

Here are the ADPs of the RBs in the late 1st round through the mid 2nd round:

8 8 0 RB8 LaMont Jordan Oak/3

9 9 0 RB9 Ronnie Brown Mia/8

10 11 1 RB10 Cadillac Williams TB/4

11 10 -1 RB11 Rudi Johnson Cin/5

14 12 -2 RB12 Willis McGahee Buf/8

15 15 0 RB13 Domanick Davis Hou/5

16 16 0 RB14 Brian Westbrook Phi/9

21 21 0 RB15 Julius Jones Dal/3

25 27 2 RB16 Kevin Jones Det/8

26 25 -1 RB17 Willie Parker Pit/4

28 28 0 RB18 Jamal Lewis Bal/7

30 30 0 RB19 Reuben Droughns Cle/6

31 31 0 RB20 Reggie Bush NO/7

33 33 0 RB21 Chester Taylor Min/6

35 36 1 RB22 Warrick Dunn Atl/5

So, in the late 1st round, you have a choice of, at the very worst, Rudi, Willis, or DDavis (per ADP) or a top WR. My conclusion says that, per ADP, at pick 1.10 (for example), you should have the following choices for the first two rounds:

Rudi and any WR not named Smith

Smith and any WR not named Smith

Smith and either DomDavis or Westbrook

Rudi and either DomDavis or Westbrook

The WRs available in the 3rd round allow th savvy owner to take a very solid first round RB in round one, CJohnson (for example) in round two, and a very solid WR in round three like Hines Ward.

Here are the choices once again (I used CJ and Ward as examples and realize that personal preferences will apply):

Rudi, CJohnson, Ward

Rudi, CJohnson, Dunn

Smith, CJohnson, Ward

Smith, CJohnson, Dunn

Smith, DomDavis, Dunn

Smith, DomDavis, Ward

Rudi, DomDavis, Dunn

Rudi, DomDavis, Ward

Since this is a non-PPR example, I think the best team is the Rudi, CJ, and Ward. I think this is a very good start for a team in the 10 spot in a 12 team draft.It seems to me that the third round WRs offer very good value. Even if drafting from the 1.02 spot, a LT, Harrison, Chambers is a very good start. But, imo, there is no possible way a team drafting WR/WR in rounds one and two can compete with a team starting LT, Harrison, and Chambers assuming no injuries.

 

[wannabee]

if your league were ppr and distance td's (heavily for 30yd + td's), would you consider going wr/wr at 10 or 12 depending on league size? And if so, would you consider Fitz and boldin over say TO and one of the two (based on Drinen's research)?

After the top6 or so rb's, there are around 10 that are the same, then another 10 or so in the same bucket, so this strategy THIS year is intriging should you get a late pick.

Not a who should I pick question, just a strategy question sparked by the WR/WR post today.

Mud out

My post above assumes no PPR. But, I think a RB like Jordan or Westbrook, paired with a top WR will offer you the most value since the WRs in round3 are still very good. In addition, in PPR, WRs drafted in middle rounds like Mason, Driver, and Coles produce much better than the RBs in those rounds.

 

[Marc Levin]

no - for all the reasons already DONE TO DEATH in the picking 12th in a 12 team league thread.

PPR and distance leagues don't change the philosophy. Unless it is PPR for WRs only - then, maybe.

 

[Dulymus Mudhounds]

no - for all the reasons already DONE TO DEATH in the picking 12th in a 12 team league thread.

PPR and distance leagues don't change the philosophy. Unless it is PPR for WRs only - then, maybe.

Levin,My main league is ppr for wr's only. Maybe a little selfish in me asking that way, but I'm sure there are several people out there that have similar scoring where rb's don't get ppr's.

So what do you think about it now?

mo

 

[The Jerk]

Just posted the following in the drafting 12th out of 12 thread. Most of it applies here...

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 game

2. RB-WR, RB-RB Should get a top 10-12 RB, top 3 WR and a good shot at a decent RB2

3. RB-RB, WR-WR Potentially two top 12 RB and two top 12 WR

4. RB-WR, RB-WR The most balanced approach, should have four quality starters

5. RB-WR, WR-WR Rolling the dice on finding a serviceable RB2 later

6. WR-WR, RB-WR WR overload, going against the grain, but tough uphill battle on RBs

I 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 24

or

#5: RB 10, RB 30, WR3, WR11, WR12

Considering 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.

 

[Marc Levin]

no - for all the reasons already DONE TO DEATH in the picking 12th in a 12 team league thread.

PPR and distance leagues don't change the philosophy. Unless it is PPR for WRs only - then, maybe.

Levin,My main league is ppr for wr's only. Maybe a little selfish in me asking that way, but I'm sure there are several people out there that have similar scoring where rb's don't get ppr's.

So what do you think about it now?

mo

the distance TD scoring is irrelevant.In PPR for WR/TE only and not RBs, I'd still look for a RB/WR unless all the RBs really were trash - the problem is that while I am sure the cream will rise to the top and there will be two or three outstanding WRs and the rest of the good ones will be clumped near the top, there are a LOT of WRs who could be the top-3. Grabing CJ and SS doesn;'t guarantee you anything the way grabbing Harrison or MOss or TO guaranteed you a lot in the past.

regardless, run the DD on the value of the WRs with PR and the RBs don;t get it and you will have your answer on who you should take.

If I went WR/WR, I would take RB handcuffs at the 3/4 (probably Bush/Deuce) and 5/6 (Rhodes/Addai?) turns and then look for 2 QBs at 7/8, then a lot more WRs and a smattering of TEs the rest of the way.