What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Stud Rb Theory Is A Sham. (1 Viewer)

QB 2002 Averages Top 12 16.58Top 24 13.69Top 32 11.53RB 2002 AveragesTop 12 14.09Top 24 9.62Top 36 7.48Top 48 4.13WR 2002 AveragesTop 12 11.64Top 24 9.16Top 36 7.76Top 48 6.78Top 60 6.17TE 2002 AveragesTop 12 5.52Top 24 3.43
This should help a lot in this argument with the usual caveat that ALL LEGAUES HAVE DIFFERENT STARTING REQUIREMENTS AND SCORING SYSTEMS. Also, it is rare that every team in every league will simply leave in their players for every week, so that will slightly skew the math. Most teams will use some lineups based on injuries, bye weeks, and matchups. But that being said, here we go . . .If we go with a 1QB/2RB/2 WR lineup, we can count on the following in a 12 team league:All teams would get a decent QB, and even those that got stuck with a non Top 12 would only be losing 2 points and change. Clearly QB is not a life threatening position to have to stock early.Teams that got 2 Top 12 RB (stud RB theory) would have a big advantage over those that did not and went stud WR. That would mean Team A would have Top 12 RB/Top 12 RB/Top 24 WR/Top 24 WR in all likelihood. Team B would get Top 12 WR/Top 12 WR/Top 24 RB/Top 24 RB.The difference bewteen 2 Top 12 RB vs 2 Top 24 RB would be 10 points but 17 points if one of the RB is Top 36.The difference between 2 Top 12 WR and 2 Top 24 WR would only be 5 points--and only 7 if one of the WR fell to Top 32.So based on this data, we could argue that going stud RB would net a gain of a minimum of 5 points--a gain of 10 points from the RB at the expese of 5 points in WR. Now before people go crazy, yes I know there is a big difference in the Top 3 WR compared to the others that comprise the Top 12. And I also know that it is hard to predict who the Top 12 RB will be and it gets more difficult picking a stud RB after the top handful.But to me, this points out that getting RB first is more beneficial than going WR/WR and picking RB later on. Certainly there are a lot of other strategies and position combinations to work with.
 
Now before people go crazy, yes I know there is a big difference in the Top 3 WR compared to the others that comprise the Top 12. And I also know that it is hard to predict who the Top 12 RB will be and it gets more difficult picking a stud RB after the top handful.
Pops, very interesting analysis. I think it would be great if you could go one step further. Can you rank the top 12, top 24, etc. based on the player rankings BEFORE the season started? This would help account for the difficulty in predicting who will make the top 12, 24, etc. After the season, it is easy to see who the top players are.
 
As I move into my 5th year of this obsession I find that your "theory" is highly dependant on your scoring system, the guys you have in your league and your draft position. The guys in my league are QB drafting nuts. On the surface our QBs rack up points for a single position but they ignore the power of two stud RBs. My opponents always draft QBs in round one with only a few picking up a top 5 RB. I've stayed away from this "Stud QB" theory they have and drafted two RBs back to back the last two years. Both years I made it to our championship (only to lose, but that's another story).

I don't think there is any set "system" or "theory". The same ol' fantasy football rules apply.

Know your scoring rules

Know your opponents

Use VBD and have good projections
 
I think that leagues should try to make it so that more WRs and QBs go in the early rounds. I've found that this system does just that:10 team leaguestart: 2 QBs, 2 RBs, 4 WRs, TE, K, D6pts/all TDs1pt/20 yards passing1pt/10 yards rush or rec1pt/rec-1pt/INT-1pt/lost fumble

 
I think that leagues should try to make it so that more WRs and QBs go in the early rounds. I've found that this system does just that:

10 team league

start: 2 QBs, 2 RBs, 4 WRs, TE, K, D

6pts/all TDs

1pt/20 yards passing

1pt/10 yards rush or rec

1pt/rec

-1pt/INT

-1pt/lost fumble
Now we all know you have NO Live. :no:
 
I think that leagues should try to make it so that more WRs and QBs go in the early rounds. I've found that this system does just that:

10 team league

start: 2 QBs, 2 RBs, 4 WRs, TE, K, D

6pts/all TDs

1pt/20 yards passing

1pt/10 yards rush or rec

1pt/rec

-1pt/INT

-1pt/lost fumble
Now we all know you have NO Live. :no:
:unsure:
 
Not to mention picking up RB3 to make either him or the RB2 pick trade bait... I think it's pretty unsafe to bet no other RBs get taken until your next pick rolls around.

People don't stop drafting RBs just because they have their 2 starters, they often keep taking them until the good ones are gone. It would be silly to assume that no one would take any RBs between 3.02 and 4.n-1.

Another thing to consider is that due to what seems to be a high amount of injury at the RB position (feel free to disprove me on that if you wish), even if you are only a "start 2" league, that third and fourth RB have value as well because they, in all likelihood will start several games for you. Therefore, delaying your RB2 pick also has the potential to push your RB3 and RB4 picks out as well, and when you get out that far, you start seeing the big drop off in value between the reliable starters and non-factor rbs.
 
Bear with me for a second here, because it's true.

Picture a league, doesn't matter how big, where you start 2 RB's. Now imagine that every person in that league was a zealous follower of the stud RB theory. What would happen? You'd have two rounds of everybody drafting two RBs. Then the rest of the draft would start. How silly is that?

If stud RB'ers agree that that is silly, then I submit that you are not really a stud RB'er, you're a VBD'er. If you think the above scenario seems sensible, then I envy the people in leagues with you. At it's pure core, stud RB is a self-defeating principle that only truly works against people who draw their draft picks from a hat.

That was my only point, really. Please disperse, nothing else to see here.
Hi Smoo,I'd agree totally. Anyone who is just a "stud RB'er" is stupid. The stud RB idea is a direct result of VBD for most leagues. That's just how it works and where the value is. Understanding the VBD behind stud RB is imperative.

For instance, same draft pool in a league that starts 1 RB and 4 WRs would produce a heavy focus on WRs.

But yes, "stud any position" is just foolish. You have to look at the entire big picture before you can be stud anything.

J

 
On the contrary, I've always felt that stud RB is a failure to see value at other positions. The mindless, I gotta be set at RB - Can't win without 2 good RBs, RB RB RB dogma.

For the record, there is no scoring system that can be contrived that would ensure the first 24 picks were RBs in a VBD system. Even with huge RB scoring, values are relative to position, and subsequently would cancel each other out.

To me, its simple. Give me a high pick and I probably will go RB. but, give me a later pick and that stud QB or WR is tempting. Taking the 11th and 13th best RBs is a recipe for mediocrity.

Bear with me for a second here, because it's true.

Picture a league, doesn't matter how big, where you start 2 RB's.  Now imagine that every person in that league was a zealous follower of the stud RB theory.  What would happen?  You'd have two rounds of everybody drafting two RBs.  Then the rest of the draft would start.  How silly is that?

If stud RB'ers agree that that is silly, then I submit that you are not really a stud RB'er, you're a VBD'er.  If you think the above scenario seems sensible, then I envy the people in leagues with you.  At it's pure core, stud RB is a self-defeating principle that only truly works against people who draw their draft picks from a hat.

That was my only point, really.  Please disperse, nothing else to see here.
Hi Smoo,I'd agree totally. Anyone who is just a "stud RB'er" is stupid. The stud RB idea is a direct result of VBD for most leagues. That's just how it works and where the value is. Understanding the VBD behind stud RB is imperative.

For instance, same draft pool in a league that starts 1 RB and 4 WRs would produce a heavy focus on WRs.

But yes, "stud any position" is just foolish. You have to look at the entire big picture before you can be stud anything.

J
 
In most of my drafts I have drafted 3 RB's by the end of the 4th round. I have had very good seasons like this, but have also had a very bad one with no in betweens. I base this strategy on pure numbers. In the NFL there can be:-only 32 starting RB's (only about 20-25 are viable Fantasy starters due to talent or RBC).-about 70 starting WR's [(some teams start 3) about 35-40 will be viable every week fantasy starters with about 10 more being viable each week due to good match ups].-only 32 starting QB's in the NFL (about 25 are viable Fantasy starters).Most Fantasy leagues have 12 teams and start:-24 RB's (2 per team)-24 WR's (2 per team)-12 QB's (1 per team)-12-24 flex [(WR/RB) 1-2 per team]It's real easy to see where the shortage is. Let me run through some scenarios with these numbers. If you picked 2 RB's in the first 2 rounds and everyone else picked WR's, there would still be a large number of exceptable WR's available in round three and 4. If you picked 2 RB's in the first 2 rounds and every other team picked up a starting QB somewhere in the first 2 rounds, there would still be exceptable QB's available in round 3 and 4. If you did not pick a single RB in the first 2 rounds and everyone else did, you would find that most likely there wouldn't be an exceptable RB available to you in the 3rd round, and certainly would find no exceptable RB's for your #2 RB in round 4. So, it's not that I have a stud RB theory, it's kind of a supply and demand theory. Most leagues use a scoring system that makes each position's demand about the same, so it's the short supply that causes people to pick up RB's early, even at the expense of leaving better players on the board. In years where my RB's have stayed healthy, I have always come in one of the top 2 spots. Last year, when my RB's were injured I came in last. I started the year off with P. Holmes, S. Davis, and M. Faulk as my starting RBs. Lost Davis right away but was able to stay competative, moved around between 3rd and 4th, until Holmes got hurt. After that, it only took me 2 weeks to move from 4th to last. No strategy is perfect, but other than last year this strategy has worked well for me and I plan to continue to use it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My take on the VBD/Stud RB drafting theories.I think the drafting system is determined by the starting Lineup of the league more than anything else. MOST leagues start 2 (maybe a 3rd flex) RB's but yet most NFL teams only have 1 legitimate starter. Thus RB's are just more scarce than any other position and therefore the need to grab them early and often.If most leagues started 2 QB's AND 2 RB's (and even more so with just 1RB) then everyone and her dog would use the Stud QB theory and grab QB's w/o hesitation above any other position.WR is usally waited upon because most leagues start 2(maybe a 3rd flex) and most NFL teams have 1-2 legitimate starters thus there are much moreoptions at WR. If leagues started 4 WR's then I'd focus on getting WR's early and often abve all else.Thus, I think drafting systems are more lineup-driven than anything else and its really just a matter of supply and demand as to the focus on RB's early.

 
My take on the VBD/Stud RB drafting theories.

I think the drafting system is determined by the starting Lineup of the league more than anything else. MOST leagues start 2 (maybe a 3rd flex) RB's but yet most NFL teams only have 1 legitimate starter. Thus RB's are just more scarce than any other position and therefore the need to grab them early and often.

If most leagues started 2 QB's AND 2 RB's (and even more so with just 1RB) then everyone and her dog would use the Stud QB theory and grab QB's w/o hesitation above any other position.

WR is usally waited upon because most leagues start 2(maybe a 3rd flex) and most NFL teams have 1-2 legitimate starters thus there are much moreoptions at WR. If leagues started 4 WR's then I'd focus on getting WR's early and often abve all else.

Thus, I think drafting systems are more lineup-driven than anything else and its really just a matter of supply and demand as to the focus on RB's early.
Well said. Some have countered the "Stud RB" theory with setting better (IMO) lineups, like Gamebreakers - thread from IDP forum where we start 1 QB, 0-2 RBs, 3-5 WRs, and 1-3 TEs. Scoring is set different, so that TE is a lot more valuable than in most leagues, overall the O seems to be a good balance. I recomend more people experiment with the rules, instead of blindly going with 2 RBs and 2 WRs.
 
I'll add one more note but probably get slammed for it:At some point, we all want to use GBD (gut-based-drafting) at least in concert with our VBD/other statisitcal theory because of the "fun-ness" factor. I mean, if we just throw numbers into our spreadsheets and let it calculate our draft then we don't even need to show up. Just auto-select your playes based on your ranking. No matter what the value-based theories tell us, we all want to use our gut at some point and be the genious that chose rueben droughns.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top