Spending a high pick on an RB3 when you have two studs already (1 Viewer)

[smcindoe]

For sake of argument, let's assume you have two legitimate studs at RB1 and RB2, either in a keeper league or due to trading your way into two high picks on draft day. Do you still spend an early pick on an RB3, or do you get to a point of diminishing returns?

I've always been a guy who's happy to have three RBs through three rounds if the value is there, and usually has my RB3 by the 4th or 5th round at the latest. But last year I went into my keeper league draft with two surefire studs already on my roster. (I won't name them here to avoid this becoming an assistant coach thread, but let's just say there were top five RBs, and both their first names start with "L".)

Anyways... I spent my first round pick on Maroney, which in theory was a solid pick. But he sat on my bench all year except for bye weeks. A top pick seems like a high price to pay for two games of production, yes? So this year, facing the same situation, I'm thinking of passing on a Peterson or Benson-type RB3 and going for a stud QB or solid WR if I can find one.

Thoughts on this? Obviously you need your RB depth due to injuries and other surprises, but how high a price do you pay? At what point, if any, do you focus on the other positions even at the expense of some VBD karma?

 

[SSOG]

For sake of argument, let's assume you have two legitimate studs at RB1 and RB2, either in a keeper league or due to trading your way into two high picks on draft day. Do you still spend an early pick on an RB3, or do you get to a point of diminishing returns?I've always been a guy who's happy to have three RBs through three rounds if the value is there, and usually has my RB3 by the 4th or 5th round at the latest. But last year I went into my keeper league draft with two surefire studs already on my roster. (I won't name them here to avoid this becoming an assistant coach thread, but let's just say there were top five RBs, and both their first names start with "L".)Anyways... I spent my first round pick on Maroney, which in theory was a solid pick. But he sat on my bench all year except for bye weeks. A top pick seems like a high price to pay for two games of production, yes? So this year, facing the same situation, I'm thinking of passing on a Peterson or Benson-type RB3 and going for a stud QB or solid WR if I can find one.Thoughts on this? Obviously you need your RB depth due to injuries and other surprises, but how high a price do you pay? At what point, if any, do you focus on the other positions even at the expense of some VBD karma?

A studly 3rd RB in a no-trade league? Overkill. A studly 3rd RB in a trade league? Quality depth and trade fodder. If the highest player left on your board is an RB, and you've already got two, then draft him. Trust me, at some point during the year, either one of your other two RBs is going to go down (in which case, you'll be glad for the depth)... or one of someone else's top RBs is going to go down (in which case you can trade this RB for more value than you could have drafted with that pick, anyway).

 

[FFdork]

This question doesn't have one correct answer. It depends on the specifics of your league and its owners. I usually have leaned towards taking the 3rd stud RB. After all, sometimes they bust, and given the realtive dirth of WW RB studs, you have built in insurance.

SSOG's trade plan is nice, but just be aware that unless your entire league is FBGs subscribers, getting equal value for your RB is difficult. In their minds your nice RB (let's say currently RB15 overall) is equal to, say, QB8 or WR14 in value. Without delving too deep into the psychology of it, in their minds it's your "extra" RB vs. someone they probably view as an important part of their lineup. Plus, if you've drafted well, your potential trading partner will often be reluctant to give you that last piece of a monster starting lineup.

 

[Spartans Rule]

For sake of argument, let's assume you have two legitimate studs at RB1 and RB2, either in a keeper league or due to trading your way into two high picks on draft day. Do you still spend an early pick on an RB3, or do you get to a point of diminishing returns?

I've always been a guy who's happy to have three RBs through three rounds if the value is there, and usually has my RB3 by the 4th or 5th round at the latest. But last year I went into my keeper league draft with two surefire studs already on my roster. (I won't name them here to avoid this becoming an assistant coach thread, but let's just say there were top five RBs, and both their first names start with "L".)

Anyways... I spent my first round pick on Maroney, which in theory was a solid pick. But he sat on my bench all year except for bye weeks. A top pick seems like a high price to pay for two games of production, yes? So this year, facing the same situation, I'm thinking of passing on a Peterson or Benson-type RB3 and going for a stud QB or solid WR if I can find one.

Thoughts on this? Obviously you need your RB depth due to injuries and other surprises, but how high a price do you pay? At what point, if any, do you focus on the other positions even at the expense of some VBD karma?

A studly 3rd RB in a no-trade league? Overkill. A studly 3rd RB in a trade league? Quality depth and trade fodder. If the highest player left on your board is an RB, and you've already got two, then draft him. Trust me, at some point during the year, either one of your other two RBs is going to go down (in which case, you'll be glad for the depth)... or one of someone else's top RBs is going to go down (in which case you can trade this RB for more value than you could have drafted with that pick, anyway).

It depends on the league, but I usually don't find that you can get more value in trade than you could have by drafting another position. Guppies often don't understand the importance of the RB position and won't want to give up a stud at another position no matter how favorable the trade may actually be to them (had some frustrating experiences with this), while sharks tend to keep a decent RB3 of their own stocked. And in general, your opponents are drafting players that they value more than you and you're drafting players that you value more than them.

 

[Jayrod]

FFDork & Spartans both bring up a great point.

In theory a solid backup should be good for trade talks, but alot of that depends upon your leaguemates. I've been in several leagues that are very difficult to trade in. Everyone seems to latch on to what they've got and be very reluctant to make any meaningful trades. In that case, a stud sitting your bench is very limited in value unless you have an injury. Often times the only thing you can do is use that player to upgrade the rest of your bench, but teams very rarely trade a solid starter for one of your backups.

The best way to utilize, I've found, is to offer up one of your starters for a high quality starter at a different position and then allow your solid backup move into starting position, thus bolstering your overall team. But that still requires the right situation and the right "other guy" to make it a reality. Trades tend to be much greater in theory than in practice, IMO.

 

[supermark_28]

I was at a draft this past weekend where guys before me had very solid RB's and were

actually taking RB3 and even RB4 before addressing their QB and WR positions. What

I mean by QB and WR are QB1 and WR1 or WR2. I think people get so wrapped up in the

depth they just ignore glaring needs. And yes,you might have trade fodder or you

might just sit on those RB's all year long without anyone coming to you for one.

 

[wraith5]

Maroney on my bench, Plaxico on the field...

OR

Cadillac on my bench, Harrison on the field...

You do the math.

 

[smcindoe]

In theory a solid backup should be good for trade talks, but alot of that depends upon your leaguemates. I've been in several leagues that are very difficult to trade in. Everyone seems to latch on to what they've got and be very reluctant to make any meaningful trades. In that case, a stud sitting your bench is very limited in value unless you have an injury. Often times the only thing you can do is use that player to upgrade the rest of your bench, but teams very rarely trade a solid starter for one of your backups.

I've found this to be the case as well. They feel like they should get a discount, since you're not really the using the guy anyways. And in some sense, they're right -- there's a supply-and-demand element to evaluating trade values.I ended up passing on an RB early to get a stud QB and very good WR, then wound up with Barber III as RB3. I think that's about right -- he's not so good that I'll feel like a fool with him sitting on tbe bench all year, but good enough that I won't have to go Owen Wilson if one of my studs gets hurt.

 

[ATC1]

In larger leagues, especially Non-PPR, if I see teams not taking RBs when they should or there are a couple of Auto drafts in the league, I will continue to take RBs until the value runs out, unless there is a steal at another position. Imediately after the draft I received trade offered from two people and wound up getting a steal for a backup RB, that I couldn't have done better if I would have taken someone else at that point in the draft.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Depends on the league. I tried it once in a league I was in and found out in a hurry that trading was very difficult.

Also, don't fall into the trap of doing it in a league that has everyone "filling out their roster" first. You'll find that the QB and WR you wanted are long gone before you get a shot at them.

 

[redman]

This thread has Portis written all over it this particular year . . .

Here's what you know - your RB3 will tend to start for you at least twice during your season, once during each of your top two RB's bye weeks. That's essentially your baseline for value. Now, you factor in injuries and, if your RB3 is good enough, superior/inferior matchups and perhaps you get more mileage out of your RB3.

I agree though - if your redraft league is reluctant to trade much, then that's a disincentive to draft a RB3 before you fill other spots first.

 

[LordHusker]

This thread has Portis written all over it this particular year . . .Here's what you know - your RB3 will tend to start for you at least twice during your season, once during each of your top two RB's bye weeks. That's essentially your baseline for value. Now, you factor in injuries and, if your RB3 is good enough, superior/inferior matchups and perhaps you get more mileage out of your RB3. I agree though - if your redraft league is reluctant to trade much, then that's a disincentive to draft a RB3 before you fill other spots first.

 

[Judge Smails]

It really depends. I HATE leaving scoring on the bench. But having depth at RB can be gold for trades down the road. The rule is it's hard to trade for WR's because there is always a FA of the week people are willing to gamble on. But not with RB's. So if somebody's RB squad starts sucking (maybe someone who went QB/WR early and is left with a Lynch/Caddy type backfield), then your RB3 may fetch gold. I hope so. Have LJ and MJD as starters, then picked up AD and Kevin Jones (late). If either of the latter 2 hit I will be in great shape

 

[The Red Scare]

I guess a lot of it depends on your starting requirements. Someone in my 12-team Keep 2 league yesterday drafted Clinton Portis at 3.12 (great value pick there, but he already had 2 RBs), but proceeded to take a QB at 4.01 (Palmer, I think?) . I had the 3.11 pick and the 4.02 pick, but passed on Portis to snag Housh and Roy Williams. The other guy is deeper at RB, but is now screwed at WR in a start 3WR league.

 

[Rhino]

Maroney on my bench, Plaxico on the field... ORCadillac on my bench, Harrison on the field... You do the math.

Excellent Posting

 

[Gopher State]

Good topic here. In my 10 team performance money league, I planned to fill out my roster for position players before any back ups, we start 1-QB, 2RB, 3WR, K, Def, TE's players as WR if you wish. I had the 10 spot, I went:

Westbrook

Henry

Walker WR

At my 4 spot sits Portis, and the team below me has drafted Addai, S. Smith, T. Owens, would he take Portis?, I wanted to take L. Evans, but I thought the value for Portis was greater then Evans, I took Portis and guy next up took Evans, he ended up as his #2rb= M. Barber. My team finished out with:

Portis

S. Moss WR

B. Edwards WR

Kitna QB

Betts RB wash

Romo QB

B. Jackson RB GB

I. Bruce WR

J. Jones WR GB

J. Jones WR Hou

K. Stover

Def Jac

My hope is 1. I can package Portis and Betts and trade for a WR, or 2. Play Portis or Betts in bye weeks and perhaps win two more games. I burned a 4th and 8th round pick on the Wash running game as a back up on my team, I not real happy with my decision, but I think I can work the Waiver wire for WR's better then RB's. It be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[SSOG]

For sake of argument, let's assume you have two legitimate studs at RB1 and RB2, either in a keeper league or due to trading your way into two high picks on draft day. Do you still spend an early pick on an RB3, or do you get to a point of diminishing returns?

I've always been a guy who's happy to have three RBs through three rounds if the value is there, and usually has my RB3 by the 4th or 5th round at the latest. But last year I went into my keeper league draft with two surefire studs already on my roster. (I won't name them here to avoid this becoming an assistant coach thread, but let's just say there were top five RBs, and both their first names start with "L".)

Anyways... I spent my first round pick on Maroney, which in theory was a solid pick. But he sat on my bench all year except for bye weeks. A top pick seems like a high price to pay for two games of production, yes? So this year, facing the same situation, I'm thinking of passing on a Peterson or Benson-type RB3 and going for a stud QB or solid WR if I can find one.

Thoughts on this? Obviously you need your RB depth due to injuries and other surprises, but how high a price do you pay? At what point, if any, do you focus on the other positions even at the expense of some VBD karma?

A studly 3rd RB in a no-trade league? Overkill. A studly 3rd RB in a trade league? Quality depth and trade fodder. If the highest player left on your board is an RB, and you've already got two, then draft him. Trust me, at some point during the year, either one of your other two RBs is going to go down (in which case, you'll be glad for the depth)... or one of someone else's top RBs is going to go down (in which case you can trade this RB for more value than you could have drafted with that pick, anyway).

It depends on the league, but I usually don't find that you can get more value in trade than you could have by drafting another position. Guppies often don't understand the importance of the RB position and won't want to give up a stud at another position no matter how favorable the trade may actually be to them (had some frustrating experiences with this), while sharks tend to keep a decent RB3 of their own stocked. And in general, your opponents are drafting players that they value more than you and you're drafting players that you value more than them.

My experiences have been very different. Guppies are quick to understand the importance of RBs when they don't have any left, and even if sharks would prefer to have 3 startable RBs, positional scarcity means that's simply not possible for everyone. While the RB may have fallen because his perceived value is low, in my experience, no players see their value rise MORE during the course of the season than quality RBs.Of course your mileage may vary, but when I say "No Trade League", I'm not just referring to leagues where the practice of trading has been outlawed by rule, I'm talking about any league where you cannot count on being able to find a trading partner.

 

[GroveDiesel]

It depends on a few things:

1) When is my next pick?

2) Do I already have other WRs?

3) How many good RBs are left vs. how many good WRs are left?

I ran into this exact situation at my draft last night in my keeper league.

I kept 2 top 15 WRs and a top 3 RB. I had the first pick in the draft, the 10th pick in the draft and the 13th pick in the draft.

I took another top 10 RB with my first pick and when I got to the 10th pick I had 2 top 10 RBs and 2 top 15 WRs. There were no top 15 WRs left but 16-25 were all there still and IMO had similar value. There was ONE top 20 RB left. I took the RB knowing that I could get one of the WRs with my next pick. The value at RBs dropped off a ton after that pick and I was still able to get a another top 20 WR with my 3rd pick (I could have, but didn't!)

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Another thing to consider - A stud on your bench is one less on each of your league mate's starting roster.

 

[gianmarco]

Another thing to consider - A stud on your bench is one less on each of your league mate's starting roster.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Maroney on my bench, Plaxico on the field... ORCadillac on my bench, Harrison on the field... You do the math.

If these were the only two options, sure, this thread will be over.Unfortunately, a lot more happens in the fantasy world. Injuries, disappointments, etc...it's a lot harder to replace Frank Gore than it is Marvin Harrison.

 

[videoguy505]

I ended up with 4 RBs that don't heavily share carries--LJ, Rudi Johnson, Ahman Green, and Jamal Lewis--on my roster after round 7. Couldn't pass up 4 RBs my scoring system places in the top 24. I'm weak at QB, but, when I drafted those guys the good QBs were gone anyway--7 were kept and the rest were drafted very quickly after that, for some reason my leaguemates all love QBs too much. So even though it was the 7th I didn't have a need to draft anything else. I figure if LJ goes down I can run some kind of committee with Green and Lewis, or, since they aren't in committees, they are also decent trade bait for a mid-tier QB.