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!

"Team X prefers Player Y because they drafted him ahead of Player Z, so you should too" (1 Viewer)

Lansdowne

Footballguy
I know we're dealing with outliers here but I thought it was important to be reminded that a team's first choice isn't always their best choice. I put 2000 as the cutoff as I'm sure there are many more examples historically but I wanted to keep the timeline fairly recent.

---

Arizona

2003 - WR Bryant Johnson ahead of Anquan Boldin

Baltimore

2010 - TE Ed Dickson ahead of Dennis Pitta
2018 - TE Hayden Hurst ahead of Mark Andrews
2022 - TE Charlie Kolar ahead of Isaiah Likely

Buffalo

2008 - WR James Hardy ahead of Stevie Johnson

Green Bay

2017 - RB Jamaal Williams ahead of Aaron Jones

Jacksonville

2014 - WR Marqis Lee ahead of Allen Robinson

Kansas City

2016 - WR Demarcus Robinson ahead of Tyreek Hill

New England

2009 - WR Brandon Tate ahead of Julian Edelman
2023 - WR Kayshon Boutte ahead of DeMario Douglas

New Orleans

2006 - WR Mike Hass ahead of Marques Colston

Pittsburgh

2010 - WR Emmanuel Sanders ahead of Antonio Brown

San Francisco

2021 - RB Trey Sermon ahead of Elijah Mitchell

Tampa Bay

2010 - WR Arrelious Benn ahead of Mike Williams

Washington

2012 - QB Robert Griffin III ahead of Kirk Cousins

---

Just something to think about. I know the Javon Baker > Ja'Lynn Polk crowd have been considering it as part of their argument, and I'm honestly not sure where I stand on that.

Also I acknowledge it's unfair to list Griffin here because injury is what derailed him not performance. But I figure if I didn't include him it would still seem like an oversight to the overall picture.
 
Last edited:
I know we're dealing with outliers here but I thought it was important to be reminded that a team's first choice isn't always their best choice. I put 2000 as the cutoff as I'm sure there are many more examples historically but I wanted to keep the timeline fairly recent.

---

Arizona

2003 - WR Bryant Johnson ahead of Anquan Boldin

Baltimore

2010 - TE Ed Dickson ahead of Dennis Pitta
2018 - TE Hayden Hurst ahead of Mark Andrews
2022 - TE Charlie Kolar ahead of Isaiah Likely

Buffalo

2008 - WR James Hardy ahead of Stevie Johnson

Green Bay

2017 - RB Jamaal Williams ahead of Aaron Jones

Jacksonville

2014 - WR Marqis Lee ahead of Allen Robinson

Kansas City

2016 - WR Demarcus Robinson ahead of Tyreek Hill

New England

2009 - WR Brandon Tate ahead of Julian Edelman
2023 - WR Kayshon Boutte ahead of DeMario Douglas

New Orleans

2006 - WR Mike Hass ahead of Marques Colston

Pittsburgh

2010 - WR Emmanuel Sanders ahead of Antonio Brown

San Francisco

2021 - RB Trey Sermon ahead of Elijah Mitchell

Tampa Bay

2010 - WR Arrelious Benn ahead of Mike Williams

Washington

2012 - QB Robert Griffin III ahead of Kirk Cousins

---

Just something to think about. I know the Javon Baker > Ja'Lynn Polk crowd have been considering it as part of their argument, and I'm honestly not sure where I stand on that.
I'm sure the statement in the thread title is still valid, especially if there is any significant distance between the two selections. Obviously that never means that the earlier pick is guaranteed to be a better player or have a better career. But the team that made the picks surely preferred Y over Z.

I suppose it is possible, though, that there could be very unusual cases where the team actually preferred Z over Y. If they prefer Z, but believe that the rest of the league far prefers Y, then they may think they have a shot to get Z later, but no shot to get Y unless they take him now.
 
I know we're dealing with outliers here but I thought it was important to be reminded that a team's first choice isn't always their best choice. I put 2000 as the cutoff as I'm sure there are many more examples historically but I wanted to keep the timeline fairly recent.

---

Arizona

2003 - WR Bryant Johnson ahead of Anquan Boldin

Baltimore

2010 - TE Ed Dickson ahead of Dennis Pitta
2018 - TE Hayden Hurst ahead of Mark Andrews
2022 - TE Charlie Kolar ahead of Isaiah Likely

Buffalo

2008 - WR James Hardy ahead of Stevie Johnson

Green Bay

2017 - RB Jamaal Williams ahead of Aaron Jones

Jacksonville

2014 - WR Marqis Lee ahead of Allen Robinson

Kansas City

2016 - WR Demarcus Robinson ahead of Tyreek Hill

New England

2009 - WR Brandon Tate ahead of Julian Edelman
2023 - WR Kayshon Boutte ahead of DeMario Douglas

New Orleans

2006 - WR Mike Hass ahead of Marques Colston

Pittsburgh

2010 - WR Emmanuel Sanders ahead of Antonio Brown

San Francisco

2021 - RB Trey Sermon ahead of Elijah Mitchell

Tampa Bay

2010 - WR Arrelious Benn ahead of Mike Williams

Washington

2012 - QB Robert Griffin III ahead of Kirk Cousins

---

Just something to think about. I know the Javon Baker > Ja'Lynn Polk crowd have been considering it as part of their argument, and I'm honestly not sure where I stand on that.
I'm sure the statement in the thread title is still valid, especially if there is any significant distance between the two selections. Obviously that never means that the earlier pick is guaranteed to be a better player or have a better career. But the team that made the picks surely preferred Y over Z.

I suppose it is possible, though, that there could be very unusual cases where the team actually preferred Z over Y. If they prefer Z, but believe that the rest of the league far prefers Y, then they may think they have a shot to get Z later, but no shot to get Y unless they take him now.
Yeah I believe in vast majority of cases it's true that a team prefers one of the other and the draft capital tells the story there. But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all. I'll update the title a bit to reflect that.

I took Marquis Lee late in the second round of my rookie draft that year. Allen Robinson went undrafted (only two rounds in this league). I don't remember anyone having Robinson ranked ahead of Lee going into the year, but I do remember people liking Robinson as a prospect.
 
Last edited:
But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all.
There is nothing worse in trade talks during week 8 of the season and getting the "but that guy was a 2nd round pick and the other guy was a 10th round pick. No way that is a fair deal"

Once the draft is over, draft capital is meaningless. (for FF)
 
I know we're dealing with outliers here but I thought it was important to be reminded that a team's first choice isn't always their best choice. I put 2000 as the cutoff as I'm sure there are many more examples historically but I wanted to keep the timeline fairly recent.

---

Arizona

2003 - WR Bryant Johnson ahead of Anquan Boldin

Baltimore

2010 - TE Ed Dickson ahead of Dennis Pitta
2018 - TE Hayden Hurst ahead of Mark Andrews
2022 - TE Charlie Kolar ahead of Isaiah Likely

Buffalo

2008 - WR James Hardy ahead of Stevie Johnson

Green Bay

2017 - RB Jamaal Williams ahead of Aaron Jones

Jacksonville

2014 - WR Marqis Lee ahead of Allen Robinson

Kansas City

2016 - WR Demarcus Robinson ahead of Tyreek Hill

New England

2009 - WR Brandon Tate ahead of Julian Edelman
2023 - WR Kayshon Boutte ahead of DeMario Douglas

New Orleans

2006 - WR Mike Hass ahead of Marques Colston

Pittsburgh

2010 - WR Emmanuel Sanders ahead of Antonio Brown

San Francisco

2021 - RB Trey Sermon ahead of Elijah Mitchell

Tampa Bay

2010 - WR Arrelious Benn ahead of Mike Williams

Washington

2012 - QB Robert Griffin III ahead of Kirk Cousins

---

Just something to think about. I know the Javon Baker > Ja'Lynn Polk crowd have been considering it as part of their argument, and I'm honestly not sure where I stand on that.
I'm sure the statement in the thread title is still valid, especially if there is any significant distance between the two selections. Obviously that never means that the earlier pick is guaranteed to be a better player or have a better career. But the team that made the picks surely preferred Y over Z.

I suppose it is possible, though, that there could be very unusual cases where the team actually preferred Z over Y. If they prefer Z, but believe that the rest of the league far prefers Y, then they may think they have a shot to get Z later, but no shot to get Y unless they take him now.
Yeah I believe in vast majority of cases it's true that a team prefers one of the other and the draft capital tells the story there. But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all. I'll update the title a bit to reflect that.

I took Marquis Lee late in the second round of my rookie draft that year. Allen Robinson went undrafted (only two rounds in this league). I don't remember anyone having Robinson ranked ahead of Lee going into the year, but I do remember people liking Robinson as a prospect. On the flip side, I remember Colston getting drafted in a keeper league I was in while Hass went undrafted, but that's because Colston built up enough hype that preseason (along with the TE eligibility in Yahoo).
Yep that makes sense, always good to at least acknowledge the possibility. I'll never get over drafting Jamaal Williams and Royce Freeman in consecutive years with picks with a late first (1.08?) and the 1.02 picks, respectively, only to have the same leaguemate draft Aaron Jones and Philip Lindsay those same years with like third or fourth round picks. I know Lindsay didn't last long, but it was really irritating for that one year at least!
 
But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all.
There is nothing worse in trade talks during week 8 of the season and getting the "but that guy was a 2nd round pick and the other guy was a 10th round pick. No way that is a fair deal"

Once the draft is over, draft capital is meaningless. (for FF)
Correct! I often times see managers who don't want to trade for a player who they could've picked up for free on waivers, weeks after that player's value shot up. I'm guilty of this myself at times, as I'll refuse to trade for players I previously owned but dropped. Just out of principle. But yes player values change all the time, and when they went in the fantasy draft doesn't mean much once the season is rolling.
 
I have Brock Purdy in two of my three leagues, still on taxi and I'm trying to trade him away. No takers. I and the rest of my leagues are also guilty of this.
 
(Nice research OP) I can tell the back story for some of these guys.
Anquan Boldin was absolutely lesser than Bryant Johnson. He was a former QB that tested favorably as a WR but it simply wasn't known how he'd do. Johnson would solely be a deep threat and there's a zillion examples of misjudging those guys. How hard is it to learn to cut well? It's hard to logically process a guy stuck as just a deep threat.

It's important to be fluid in FF and it's very difficult to trade when people aren't. Boldin's better. He's starting. Yeah well they drafted Johnson higher. I get the OP and have dealt with it plenty.

I think you have to respect the draft spot until events tell you not to.
There's a long list of 6th to UDFA players not getting in til a higher pick flopped; despite them playing better at every practice.
In general there's probably some almost rule some common understanding. Boldin (a 2nd) can start over Johnson (a 1st) but some UDFA can not until Johnson busts. It can be aggravating but sometimes it's (likely) simply the GM telling a coach to watch out for his job.
 
CMC and Curtis Samuel I remember as two RB/WR guys selected in the same draft by the same team. I absolutely enjoyed all the discussion. Which is more valuable the majority RB or the majority WR in PPR? What if CMC gets the bulk of the carries but Samuel plays the third down back role? It was fun and some of the best debates ever to learn FF from.
We know how it turned out but I swear there was a good number of Samuel fans that have never put down that candle.
 
I remember 5 of those examples being clear "how did this happen?" questions at the time.

I thought Mark Andrews was a clear better prospect than Hurst. I have no idea how Hurst was a 1st round pick. He was an old prospect with nowhere near as complete a game as Andrews, nor did he have great measurables. Hurst went 2 rounds early at the time. Meanwhile Andrews was a very good athlete, who was a key cog on the best passing game in college football, was nuts he made it to round 3.

Likely>Kolar feels like a clear case of Likely having an underwhelming combine. Of course, they only went 11 picks apart and in the same round, so I'm not sure how relevant draft spot was.

Thought Aaron Jones was clearly better than Jamaal Williams. Jones had a bad combine too but was clearly the better college player.

Thought Allen Robinson was better than Marquise Lee. Anyone who watched Penn St, knew that Robinson was a major talent, that was carrying a bum QB like Hackenburg (who I thought should have been undrafted) but instead they seemingly split the credit? As a Big Ten guy, that was an easy one to see coming.

Mike Williams fell entirely due to character concerns, but he was always a much better prospect than Benn.

I'm in the Polk>Baker crowd, but draft slot has nothing to do with it, and I kinda like both. Pats offense might be vastly underrated, and Douglas is the only other WR of consequence (sorry Bourne) so there is a chance both pay off at ADP, especially if Maye hits, which I think he will. Baker is a little more limited in his versatility in my opinion.
 
It's important to be fluid in FF and it's very difficult to trade when people aren't.

I think you have to respect the draft spot until events tell you not to.
These two statements pretty much sum up my feelings. Draft capital is important but it only takes you so far. The draft is an inexact science and NFL people know it.

I think, the higher the draft capital is, the more it matters though. Coaches and GM's don't like to admit that they whiffed on a high draft pick until they have to.

Jamaal Williams vs Aaron Jones - Both day 3 picks. The difference in draft capital hardly matters at that point.
Marquise Lee vs Robinson - Both second round picks. Jax probably had both of them ranked very closely together.

Polk vs Javon Baker - Pick 37 vs Pick 110. That's a significant difference. Could Baker beat out Polk? Absolutely. In the end, the coaches are going to play whoever they think gives them the best chance to win, but this is not something I would be betting on right now. As of today, if both players are available to me and I have to pick one, I'm taking Polk every time, until something significant happens to change my mind.
 
But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all.
There is nothing worse in trade talks during week 8 of the season and getting the "but that guy was a 2nd round pick and the other guy was a 10th round pick. No way that is a fair deal"

Once the draft is over, draft capital is meaningless. (for FF)
I've heard the bolded statement tons of times, and I know I'm in the minority, but draft capital is absolutely meaningful for FF... until something changes. Now, I'm not talking about close draft picks like WR's Brenden Rice and Cornelius Johnson, who the Chargers took 28 picks apart in round 7, or WR's Malik Washington and Tahj Washington, who were taken in rounds 6 and 7 by the Dolphins. I'm talking about gaps like WR's Emmanuel Sanders and Antonio Brown, who were taken by the Steelers 113 picks apart in 2010. In that draft, Sanders was taken as the 7th WR and Brown was the 22nd. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken Brown over Sanders right after the draft, unless Sanders got shot on his way to the podium. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken Tyreek Hill over Corey Coleman, Will Fuller, Josh Doctson, or Laquon Treadwell. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken TE Antonio Gates over TE Bennie Joppru.
 
But I'm thinking more in terms of the fantasy community that using draft capital not only as a guide but as the end all beat all.
There is nothing worse in trade talks during week 8 of the season and getting the "but that guy was a 2nd round pick and the other guy was a 10th round pick. No way that is a fair deal"

Once the draft is over, draft capital is meaningless. (for FF)
I've heard the bolded statement tons of times, and I know I'm in the minority, but draft capital is absolutely meaningful for FF... until something changes. Now, I'm not talking about close draft picks like WR's Brenden Rice and Cornelius Johnson, who the Chargers took 28 picks apart in round 7, or WR's Malik Washington and Tahj Washington, who were taken in rounds 6 and 7 by the Dolphins. I'm talking about gaps like WR's Emmanuel Sanders and Antonio Brown, who were taken by the Steelers 113 picks apart in 2010. In that draft, Sanders was taken as the 7th WR and Brown was the 22nd. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken Brown over Sanders right after the draft, unless Sanders got shot on his way to the podium. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken Tyreek Hill over Corey Coleman, Will Fuller, Josh Doctson, or Laquon Treadwell. I wouldn't believe anyone who says they would've taken TE Antonio Gates over TE Bennie Joppru.
Yeah in most cases it’d be insanity to consider the one with the lower draft capital. I do remember though in 2010 when Aaron Hernandez was universally favored in fantasy over Rob Gronkowski despite Gronk being the one taken in the 2nd and Hernandez in the 4th. This is more of a minority opinion than majority but I’ve seen plenty who prefer Javon Baker over Ja’Lynn Polk (though ADP tends to be the factor, as in managers preferring Baker at cost). But I have seen those who rank Baker overall ahead of Polk.
 
I've heard the bolded statement tons of times, and I know I'm in the minority, but draft capital is absolutely meaningful for FF..
I meant FF draft capital......not NFL draft capital with respect to FF.

Me drafting a player in the 2nd round of my FF draft has no meaning once the draft is over. Come week 2 or 7 or 9 the fact I drafted a player in round 2 is meaningless to that players trade value.
 
I've heard the bolded statement tons of times, and I know I'm in the minority, but draft capital is absolutely meaningful for FF..
I meant FF draft capital......not NFL draft capital with respect to FF.

Me drafting a player in the 2nd round of my FF draft has no meaning once the draft is over. Come week 2 or 7 or 9 the fact I drafted a player in round 2 is meaningless to that players trade value.
Totally agree, but like I said, until something changes, which you cut off my statement. For example, let's say you and I are in a redraft league together and we have our fantasy draft this year. We both draft according to standard ADP, with neither of us making crazy wild picks, like taking Austin Ekeler in the 2nd round. The minute the draft is over, I offer you my 4th round pick for your 1st. Would you take it? Of course not. Now, a minute after that, we both find out your 1st round pick tore his ACL. Would you trade then? All I am saying is draft capital matters immensely, until something changes.
 
All I am saying is draft capital matters immensely, until something changes.
Your original post referenced only NFL draft capital and that matters because it affects FF opportunity. I figured your statement was referring to that so I clarified I was referencing something else.


I would say as soon as the FF draft is over that something changed. There are things that could lead to me trading you the guy I took in the 2nd round for a guy you took in the 4th. Roster construction being one. So yes, something changed and that happened the minute the draft ended (or the next pick happened).

Once the FF draft is over the round you took someone is irrelevant. By that I mean it doesn't really have any impact to that players value anymore. That draft pick spot only matters in that you had to take someone in that spot but the spot you took a guy is irrelevant.
 
All I am saying is draft capital matters immensely, until something changes.
Your original post referenced only NFL draft capital and that matters because it affects FF opportunity. I figured your statement was referring to that so I clarified I was referencing something else.


I would say as soon as the FF draft is over that something changed. There are things that could lead to me trading you the guy I took in the 2nd round for a guy you took in the 4th. Roster construction being one. So yes, something changed and that happened the minute the draft ended (or the next pick happened).

Once the FF draft is over the round you took someone is irrelevant. By that I mean it doesn't really have any impact to that players value anymore. That draft pick spot only matters in that you had to take someone in that spot but the spot you took a guy is irrelevant.
If we are talking fantasy redraft, draft capital is even more important, until something changes. And no, the draft simply being over does not count as a change. Let's use this year's current FBG ADP as an example. Currently, the first round players would be: CMC, Lamb, Hill, JJ, Chase, Amon, Breece, Bijan, Puka, AJB, Wilson, and Gibbs. The 9th round players would be Mike Williams, McConkey, Javonte, Gus, Spears, BTJ, Chubb, Brian Robinson, Jeudy, Palmer, Watson, and Zeke. I exaggerated and used round 9 to prove a point. Is there a universe where you would trade away your 1st rounder for my 9th the minute the draft ended, assuming the only thing that happened was our draft ended? As I said, if the picks are close, sure. A late 2nd for an early 3rd, go for it. But an early 2nd for a late 4th, no way.
 
Is there a universe where you would trade away your 1st rounder for my 9th the minute the draft ended, assuming the only thing that happened was our draft ended?
No, but that really has nothing inherently tied to draft round. That has more to do with those players being better. Once the draft is over the round they were taken in is irrelevant. It is more about the actual player. Draft round does not enter the equation at all. I can turn down that offer strictly because CMC is better than Palmer. I could care less what round Palmer was taken in. That is irrelevant.
 
Is there a universe where you would trade away your 1st rounder for my 9th the minute the draft ended, assuming the only thing that happened was our draft ended?
No, but that really has nothing inherently tied to draft round. That has more to do with those players being better. Once the draft is over the round they were taken in is irrelevant. It is more about the actual player. Draft round does not enter the equation at all. I can turn down that offer strictly because CMC is better than Palmer. I could care less what round Palmer was taken in. That is irrelevant.
I could have 100,000,000 different fantasy redrafts with 100,000,000 different people, and not a single one would give me their first rounder for my 5th or later, as soon as the draft ended, assuming nothing has changed. And yes, you are one of the people too. Draft position is completely relevant, until something changes. There is a reason Palmer will not go in the 1st round of any redraft, but could he finish as WR1? Sure, anything can happen, but at the moment, he is a 9th round choice because that's where he belongs, and nothing has changed since I typed this. You are trying to separate the player from the ADP, and you can't, until something changes.
 
You are trying to separate the player from the ADP, and you can't, until something changes.
I don't care about ADP once the draft ends. I think we are splitting hairs here a bit. It's a chicken and egg thing in your example. Guys are 9th round picks because they aren't as good as the first round picks. Do I care a guy is a 9th round pick once the draft ends? Not at all. it is irrelevant to me.

If you want to say you wouldn't trade CMC for Palmer solely because CMC is a first rounder and Palmer is a 9th rounder fine. To me that is irrelevant as soon as the draft ends. What is relevant to me is that CMC is much, much better and since round drafted is related to talent level sure you can say the reason you aren't trading CMC for Palmer is because that is your first rounder for his 9th rounder. But in reality those round affiliations are ultimately irrelevant. The round assigned is just a name. Nothing else.

My main point was someone arguing trade value in week 9 saying no way I can trade my 1st rounder for your 9th rounder as the reason not to make the trade is wrong. At that point I think we can both agree that round drafted is 100% irrelevant to player value.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top