Value of DE vs LB with True Position (1 Viewer)

[J Giles Band]

Now that Gary Davenport has gotten MFL on board with True Position (with few exceptions the short version as I understand it is: 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB = DE / all 3-4 DL = DT)... I thought it would be a good time for the IDP forum vets to discuss how it changes the relative values of DE's vs LB's in tackle heavy leagues (I'll defer to others on big play leagues).

It has been posted already, but Gary's article explaining True Position can be found here: https://www.fantasysharks.com/fantasy-football-idp-player-position-changes-2023/

My initial glance leads me to the following conclusions for tackle heavy leagues:

1) The depth at DE is significantly improved
2) The value of an elite DE takes a hit - still valuable but scarcity is greatly reduced with all of the rush LB's getting the DE designation
3) Rush LB's (now DE's) value takes a major leap
4) The depth at LB takes a hit
5) Every down LB's (already scare) become even more of a commodity and take an even greater leap
6) The depth at DT is improved
7) Elite DT value take a hit in DT required leagues?
8) Elite every down LB value now > elite DE value?

Appreciate hearing any other conclusions you guys can draw... or anything I've missed.

Just looking at the MFL rookie draft list it jumps out that ALL of the Edge players (DE and OLB) received the DE designation. Except for DE in a 3-4 defense which get DT. This significantly increases the number of DE and cuts the number of LB in the rookie player pool. Looks like the depth at DT will be improved as well. (This will also be true for the veteran player pool... but just commenting on my initial observation after beginning my rookie draft prep).

I understand with the big nickel and dime packages teams are in most of the time now, rarely playing base defenses, the every down LB was already becoming more and more scarce... but the True Position appears to exacerbate this even more.

One of the questions I have for the group... does this mean that the relative value of the every down LB now takes a major leap due to increased scarcity as well as the increase in the depth at DE, in comparison to the elite DE?

I think there is no question the value of the every down LB increases... but I guess what I'm really asking, is should we now prioritize the every down LB over the elite DE the way we used to the other way around when the elite DE was more scarce?
Look forward to the discussion with you guys... hopefully we are ahead of the curve on this.

 

[Gally]

I think there is no question the value of the every down LB increases... but I guess what I'm really asking, is should we now prioritize the every down LB over the elite DE the way we used to the other way around when the elite DE was more scarce?

The short answer is yes. There is a lot more quality at DE now. Not only has the depth gotten better the top end depth has gotten a lot deeper. Tj Watt, Parsons, etc really help to the point that position can be de-prioritized because of it. The market has been flooded.

Every down off ball LB's are critical now. They jump to the top of the priority list for me.

 

[rockaction]

What you and what Gally said, and it's something I've also been watching and waiting on for a bit of time now. A lot of people lucked into DE paydays and stand to benefit from their own incompetence, sadly. For instance, there's a guy in a league I'm in that didn't seem to care that in a tackle-heavy league that most of his LBs were outside pass rushing LBs. He just got a windfall with the true position designation. In contrast, you had a risk-averse guy like me that avoided those guys like the plague. So I got a bit ganked because I wouldn't roster guys if there was even a question about them being DE/LBs. But that's the nature of the beast. And I knew this day was coming eventually so I should have stocked up accordingly.

(And I know there are defensive coordinator changes and therefore, scheme changes, and there are guys you couldn't necessarily have known were turning into LBs from college EDGE players, but I generally stayed within a two-year window, taking only 4-3 teams' draftees on DE, and never fooling around with pass rushers going to traditionally 3-4 teams. So my risk aversion hurt me.)

But yeah, like you guys said. DE is devalued a touch and off-ball linebackers and three-down linebackers just soared in tackle-heavy leagues. OLBs got a nice jump in big play leagues if they're classified as DEs, and pretty much everything you guys point out about scarcity is spot-on.

 

[trader jake]

8) Elite every down LB value now > elite DE value?

This is the real question. In past years I've leaned heavily toward drafting an elite DE as my team's first IDP selection. Get that anchor at a tough position to fill and generally attempt to out grind other managers everywhere else for IDP production. Also, there were very few deals that made sense to move off of Myles Garrett, Maxx Crosby, Nick Bosa, etc. It was a solid strategy that generally paid off.

Now I'm fine drafting those type players but it's not a "must have". Much more inclined to select a top 2-3 LB and take an elite DE at the end of a tier or play the value slide game during a draft if that opportunity presents itself. Very rarely will a 2nd DE selection be made early now as well.

There are just so many very inexpensive DE options to choose from, it seems foolish to spend real draft capital on depth there. The quantity of DEs available now will also open up much better in-season streaming opportunities via the waiver wire. In past years that was mainly a depth LB strategy.

As a result I've also paid up to land Derwin James in multiple leagues this offseason. With less capital needed to secure production along the defensive line I've felt comfortable enough to overpay for an anchor at safety. Formerly unheard of territory for me (and I suspect most others here).

Final note - if a fellow manager is still willing to pay top dollar for an elite DE, I'd now be much more willing to send those formerly "almost untradeable" DEs packing.

 

[Gally]

As a result I've also paid up to land Derwin James in multiple leagues this offseason. With less capital needed to secure production along the defensive line I've felt comfortable enough to overpay for an anchor at safety. Formerly unheard of territory for me (and I suspect most others here).

I don't know if I could do this. It's still very easy to find top 10 DB production on the waiver wire every week. This was made more strong when I saw a study done by Tom Kislingbury showing that the top 10 DB's from year to year repeat about 40% of the time and it hasn't been the guys you expected to do so. It just solidified my belief not to spend capital on DB's.

I do wonder if DE's will get closer to that with the influx of solid to great edge rushers getting that designation with the true position. I see that as an interesting situation to monitor and try and exploit moving forward. I am planning to hit the off ball, 3-down tackle LB's early and hard in drafts as I think that will be the best bang for your buck.

 

[J Giles Band]

As a result I've also paid up to land Derwin James in multiple leagues this offseason. With less capital needed to secure production along the defensive line I've felt comfortable enough to overpay for an anchor at safety. Formerly unheard of territory for me (and I suspect most others here).

I don't know if I could do this. It's still very easy to find top 10 DB production on the waiver wire every week. This was made more strong when I saw a study done by Tom Kislingbury showing that the top 10 DB's from year to year repeat about 40% of the time and it hasn't been the guys you expected to do so. It just solidified my belief not to spend capital on DB's.

I do wonder if DE's will get closer to that with the influx of solid to great edge rushers getting that designation with the true position. I see that as an interesting situation to monitor and try and exploit moving forward. I am planning to hit the off ball, 3-down tackle LB's early and hard in drafts as I think that will be the best bang for your buck.

First off... this is exactly what I was hoping for. I've missed these discussions with you guys.

Like Trader Jake now, I've always been more willing than most to target a potentially elite S (Deone Bucannon, Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, Landon Collins, Karl Joseph, Derwin James, Jeremy Chinn, Brian Branch, etc.) earlier in rookie drafts because I thought their likelihood of consistent production was a relative advantage at a position that lacks consistency. Particularly in the elite tier.

On the other hand, the continued increase in passing has increased the value and depth of CB's as they post higher tackle #'s than ever before for tackle heavy leagues. Of course the rookie corner rule and CB opposite an elite corner still apply... but I've never seen so many CB's post the consistent tackle #'s like I've witnessed the last year or two. Our league does not separate CB + S. And historically, I would not touch CB's because of their weekly volatility. I've had to adjust my view on this... although I still prefer that anchor at S. In line with Gally's view on DB's: last year, I picked up L'Jarius Sneed off the waiver wire during the season. Had never heard of the guy before and he finishes the season the #1 scoring CB and #2 scoring DB overall in our tackle heavy league.

In addition, the slot corner phenomenon has created its own position tier in a way as well. As those guys who used to be useless in a nickel or dime role only are now on the field almost every down. They get targeted often and tend to play closer to the box resulting in solid tackle production.

All this said, I will likely still reach a bit higher than most would for Brian Branch in our rookie draft this year. Having that elite S anchor at DB has served me well. But Jack Campbell will likely be my priority over Will Anderson if both are on the board in the 2nd round when I'll be targeting them.

 

[Flying Elvis]

I have the same opinion as others have already noted. DE value dips as there is a much deeper talent pool now. LB becomes more scarce and therefore increases in value. I drafted Campbell at 13 overall which is something I would never have done in prior years. I've always viewed LB as plentiful enough (and volatile enough year-to-year) that the late 1st, early 2nd round picks were too high because the Fred Warner's of the league were always just as effective at a fraction of the price. Along with that, I though league mates were foolish to let stud DEs fall to round 3 because the position was so tough to fill (and trade for) in any given year.

As always, scoring system and lineup requirements matter here, but I see the DE/LB values as having flipped completely now.

Side note, it's clear from the 2 orphans I picked up this year how many FF managers had no real foresight on this. Lots of rosters out there with a sudden, rather large hole at the LB spot. I know I'll be looking to deal my LBs in my 2 quiet leagues when they start up in August. Several teams in those that will find 2 LBs on their rosters now.

 

[Gally]

Side note, it's clear from the 2 orphans I picked up this year how many FF managers had no real foresight on this. Lots of rosters out there with a sudden, rather large hole at the LB spot. I know I'll be looking to deal my LBs in my 2 quiet leagues when they start up in August. Several teams in those that will find 2 LBs on their rosters now.

I thought I did a good job of preparing for this and went heavy ILB to try and be ready for this change. It never hurt my overall situation but I was also never able to make a profit off those guys as one of my leagues is not heavy into trading especially on the IDP side (as @rockaction can attest). I will be curious to see if the trade market changes this year as those teams realize they have some large holes in their roster.

 

[trader jake]

I don't know if I could do this. It's still very easy to find top 10 DB production on the waiver wire every week. This was made more strong when I saw a study done by Tom Kislingbury showing that the top 10 DB's from year to year repeat about 40% of the time and it hasn't been the guys you expected to do so. It just solidified my belief not to spend capital on DB's.

I hear ya. Took a few calculated gambles where the cost was reasonable.

It's astute of you to mention CBs in this. For the better part of the last 25 years I've avoided cornerbacks in general. Leaned toward more consistent production from IDPs, so that meant starting safeties. The last 3-4 years that has slowly been changing. I'm now much more open to investing in one anchor safety or punting on the position altogether in DB (S+CB) leagues. Especially where the cost to acquire waiver wire players is low and the options abundant.

All this said, I will likely still reach a bit higher than most would for Brian Branch in our rookie draft this year. Having that elite S anchor at DB has served me well. But Jack Campbell will likely be my priority over Will Anderson if both are on the board in the 2nd round when I'll be targeting them.

Can't say I see much value in drafting DBs. Until the last year or so I barely saw value in DBs at all. Anytime one had real value relative to DE, LB, or the offensive positions I'd move em'.

Every league is different, but even in larger roster leagues I'd prefer to churn a roster spot looking for spot starters at RB that could pop with an injury, weekly IDP matchup starts, or to take high upside IDP rolls around midseason (after bye weeks, when some NFL teams start giving young players more playing time).

Just see more value in that use of the final 1-2 roster spots than "burning" one on any rookie DB. Same with TEs in anything but large roster league that also have bonuses for TEs or start 2 requirements. Just my 2 cents.

 

[zaner75]

My league on Fantrax gives multiple position eligibility (DE/LB, DE/DT, etc). How does multi-position eligibility affect rankings vs true position? Does it just make it easier to roster construct by providing greater versatility?
I see advantages in getting starting S with CB/S eligibility to start at CB and maybe DEs at DTs. Are the 3 down LBs still king in this configuration?

 

[massraider]

I have the same opinion as others have already noted. DE value dips as there is a much deeper talent pool now.

I think that the DE pool was getting deeper anyway.

The last few years have seen a bunch of athletes come out, EDGE was deep this year, and last year.

There's soooo many young talents out there right now.

 

[massraider]

My league on Fantrax gives multiple position eligibility (DE/LB, DE/DT, etc). How does multi-position eligibility affect rankings vs true position? Does it just make it easier to roster construct by providing greater versatility?
I see advantages in getting starting S with CB/S eligibility to start at CB and maybe DEs at DTs. Are the 3 down LBs still king in this configuration?

Yes, you have it right. I feel like almost every year, there is a CB who winds up putting up nice numbers as a safety.

 

[tripp]

Great convo. Sorry to be late to it! 5-position IDP lineups are typically DT-DE-DE-LB-LB-LB-CB-CB-S-S. This had a lot to do with player availability. Roughly half of NFL teams ran 4-3, and most of your fantasy-relevant DTs and DEs came from them. Now, every team's pass rushers are in play. I think it's really important to rebalance position requirements to DT-DT-DE-DE-LB-LB-CB-CB-S-S. If your scoring leans big-play and you have a flex spot, then your optimal flex is another DE. In this scenario, you have really nice balance between positions. If your league keeps the old lineup requirements that date back 25 years, when the fifth leading tight end had 400 yards receiving, then LBs really jump in value at the expense of DT and DE as y'all discussed. Just look at this 2023 NFL draft class. An abundance of DTs and DEs but skimpy LB class. I've been surprised by how many I know who don't want to make the lineup change. They seem to want LB scarcity to hurt or enjoy chasing them on weekly waivers.

 

[Crippler]

Why rebalance like that though. Why not have some flexibility on lineups like the NFL does

my league now has LB worth a lot but hard to change since some teams built rocking LB cores before this new change. But LB value is due usually to being good scorer but scarcity of more than 2 per team with any use or really less than that now. Whereas DE is plentiful now

but we allow 4-1-6, 4-2-5, 4-3-4, 3-4-4, 3-3-5, 3-2-6 in our alignments. Basically all used in NFL at points of time as no team is true 3-4 or 4-3 anymore. Nickel and dime lead most formations used

 

[lsutigers]

Agreed on the flexibility across the other positions. I play in one league where the only D position you can no longer use a flex is DE.

So 2-3 DT, 2 DE, 1-3 LB, 2-3 CB, 2-3 S. Balanced scoring across positions (top 10 IDP in PPG in 2022 were 3 LB, 3 DE, 2 DT, 1 S, 1 CB) so a 5-3-1-2 goaline isn't out of the question if you've got the hosses.

 

[Crippler]

Agreed on the flexibility across the other positions. I play in one league where the only D position you can no longer use a flex is DE.

So 2-3 DT, 2 DE, 1-3 LB, 2-3 CB, 2-3 S. Balanced scoring across positions (top 10 IDP in PPG in 2022 were 3 LB, 3 DE, 2 DT, 1 S, 1 CB) so a 5-3-1-2 goaline isn't out of the question if you've got the hosses.

What kind of scoring. Because looking at my league with 2 pts per tackle(2.5 for DL), 1 per assist, 4 for sack plus 1 for less, 4 for Int plus 1 for PD Has

top 10. 9 LB, 1 S
top 25 23 LB, 1 S, 1 DE
Top 50. 32 LB, 11 S, 5 DE, 2 CB
Top 100. 46 LB, 27 S, 15 DE, 7 DT, 6 CB. That is 5 DE being LB last year.
Top 165(full starters for league). 55 LB, 48 S, 26 DE, 22CB, 14 DT,still 10 DE where LB last year

so best lineup is 3-4-4 but next best is 3-3-5 going with 3 S as not enough LB for 15 teams. And that is with the new rule change.

 

[Gally]

What kind of scoring. Because looking at my league with 2 pts per tackle(2.5 for DL), 1 per assist, 4 for sack plus 1 for less, 4 for Int plus 1 for PD Has

In order to get scoring balanced across positions you need different points totals by position. Tough to get it if every position gets the same points for a category. Every position has different strong categories so using differing totals by position allows you to prop up positions by what they do best.

 

[lsutigers]

	DT	DE	LB	CB	S
Tackle	3	3	2.4	3	2.7
Asst. Tackle	2	1	0.8	1	0.9
Tackle for Loss	12	3.5	3.5	4	4
INT	12	12	12	12	12
Sack	1.75 per 0.5	6 per 0.5	6 per 0.5	6 per 0.5	4 per 0.5
Forced Fumbles	6	6	6	6	6
Passes Defended	5	5	5	7	7

Exactly Gally.