Anarchy99
Footballguy
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.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