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!

Waldman's dynasty rankings (1 Viewer)

Trump Tight

Footballguy
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.

5 QB's in the top 5 spots?

Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.

Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.

Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?

The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.

 
I don't bother with the overall rankings cuz they seem broken. For example, Britt isn't even listed, but in the position rankings, he's ahead of a handful of guys who are listed in the overall.

 
I don't bother with the overall rankings cuz they seem broken. For example, Britt isn't even listed, but in the position rankings, he's ahead of a handful of guys who are listed in the overall.
It's early, still refining them. But the overall dynasty rankings do need to be refined a bit. I did purposely begin with tiers of positional blocks with some other positions interspersed as necessary. As with everyone doing these, I'm going to forget a player or two. Britt is one of them, although I'm sure he'll be lower as well. While I believe Leshoure has raw ability, I'm not as big of a fan of him as others and I don't think his situation is as promising for him as an individual as it is for the Lions overall.
 
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.5 QB's in the top 5 spots? Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
 
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.5 QB's in the top 5 spots? Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
Cool, thanks. Figure Leshoure-Best are either-or for this year, but if you think both will see a value decline in 2012, the rankings make sense. That's what I was trying to discern. ETA-By higher than anyone I meant the other FBG staffers that have rankings up. Thought that if you were that much cooler on Leshoure, you'd be at least a little higher on Best, if just for this season.I have read the dynasty articles and generally agree with the upward adjustment of stud WRs. I think the value of QBs depends fairly heavily on the number that need to be started. If I remember the research I've done on the value of QBs for some of my leagues, the VoRP curve is higher for QB's. A start-1 8-man league places a lot less of a value on the quarterback position than a 12-man start 2 league. The Draft Dominator does a great job of adjusting these values, but for the rankings you posted (positing the hypothetical 1/2/3 starting requirements in a 12 man league), I think the VoRP for the WRs (if not the RB's as well) exceed the VoRP for some of the quarterbacks (especially Manning and Brady who will score well, but don't have much exit value left.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.5 QB's in the top 5 spots? Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
Cool, thanks. Figure Leshoure-Best are either-or for this year, but if you think both will see a value decline in 2012, the rankings make sense. That's what I was trying to discern. ETA-By higher than anyone I meant the other FBG staffers that have rankings up. Thought that if you were that much cooler on Leshoure, you'd be at least a little higher on Best, if just for this season.I have read the dynasty articles and generally agree with the upward adjustment of stud WRs. I think the value of QBs depends fairly heavily on the number that need to be started. If I remember the research I've done on the value of QBs for some of my leagues, the VoRP curve is higher for QB's. A start-1 8-man league places a lot less of a value on the quarterback position than a 12-man start 2 league. The Draft Dominator does a great job of adjusting these values, but for the rankings you posted (positing the hypothetical 1/2/3 starting requirements in a 12 man league), I think the VoRP for the WRs (if not the RB's as well) exceed the VoRP for some of the quarterbacks (especially Manning and Brady who will score well, but don't have much exit value left.)
And I am probably a little too low on Best for my liking and that will probably be a good place for me to adjust (thanks for pointing it out), but playing it a little close to the vest.
 
I don't bother with the overall rankings cuz they seem broken. For example, Britt isn't even listed, but in the position rankings, he's ahead of a handful of guys who are listed in the overall.
It's early, still refining them. But the overall dynasty rankings do need to be refined a bit. I did purposely begin with tiers of positional blocks with some other positions interspersed as necessary. As with everyone doing these, I'm going to forget a player or two. Britt is one of them, although I'm sure he'll be lower as well. While I believe Leshoure has raw ability, I'm not as big of a fan of him as others and I don't think his situation is as promising for him as an individual as it is for the Lions overall.
Cool, I think the positional rankings are far more important and thank you very much for adding comments. I appreciate the insight/thinking behind your ranking.
 
I don't bother with the overall rankings cuz they seem broken. For example, Britt isn't even listed, but in the position rankings, he's ahead of a handful of guys who are listed in the overall.
It's early, still refining them. But the overall dynasty rankings do need to be refined a bit. I did purposely begin with tiers of positional blocks with some other positions interspersed as necessary. As with everyone doing these, I'm going to forget a player or two. Britt is one of them, although I'm sure he'll be lower as well. While I believe Leshoure has raw ability, I'm not as big of a fan of him as others and I don't think his situation is as promising for him as an individual as it is for the Lions overall.
Cool, I think the positional rankings are far more important and thank you very much for adding comments. I appreciate the insight/thinking behind your ranking.
:goodposting: I agree, greatly appreciate the comments Matt, thanks and keep up the good work!

 
Great job on the rankings Matt. i dont know where you get your time, but just the work you put into the rookie scouting report looks like something that would take me a year to do. How you found the time to comment on every player you ranked on top of everything else you do around here is incredible.

Like anyones elses rankings there is stuff i disagree with, but overall a good job.

Just one thing i noticed upon quick glance. I know im a Britt fan, so i migfht be biased, but i dont see how you can have guys like Ocho, Owens and Garcon higher than him.

Keep up the good work. :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm still working on navigating through the site and can't seem to find Matt's rankings. I have the RSP. Please help if you have a moment.

 
Great job on the rankings Matt. i dont know where you get your time, but just the work you put into the rookie scouting report looks like something that would take me a year to do. How you found the time to comment on every player you ranked on top of everything else you do around here is incredible.Like anyones elses rankings there is stuff i disagree with, but overall a good job. Just one thing i noticed upon quick glance. I know im a Britt fan, so i migfht be biased, but i dont see how you can have guys like Ocho, Owens and Garcon higher than him. Keep up the good work. :thumbup:
Glad for the positive feedback. Not trying to be different to be different, but trying to think and analyze in a way to hopefully be a step ahead while embracing certain concepts that might seem risky. I know there are other writers here trying to do the same. I'll probably take a second pass at the rankings sometime this week with this thread's feedback in mind about players although I'm just not a believer that Britt has his life together to maintain any impact on the field. I may not judge character in the RSP, but when a guy shows chronic issues with the law and/or work ethic within a year, it makes me wary. The RSP is definitely turning into year-round work. Actually spent most of this weekend (between cutting down fallen branches from a tree in my front yard) working on some RSP-related tasks for 2012. Appreciate the positive vibes :)
 
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.5 QB's in the top 5 spots? Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
If you believe that a RB is the most important, or even equally important in re-draft, what about dynasty leagues changes that? Assuming your rankings are based on Value Over Replacement, wouldn't the RB turnover only make elite options more valuable? It seems like even 2nd tier guys are being thrown in RBBCs left and right. Wouldn't' that suggest that those with elite talent, who have no threat of RBBC (ADP,CJ) or who can produce in RBBCs (Charles, Rice, McCoy) are worth more, based on the difference in value between an elite RB and a good RB?I have a hard time believing that the difference between your QB1 and QB12 is greater than that of your RB1 and RB12. Most leagues start 2 RBs, so the value gap would actually need to be bigger than that of RB1 and RB24. That it is only if we assume no flex spots. In this draft alone, 5+ guys who looked to be starters took a hit in value and had their starter status challenged, based simply on the fact that they were not elite. As an owner who has invested in ADP, McCoy, Charles, et cetera, I am happy I don't have to worry about that at my RB1 spot. My league mates who waited on RB, who invested in 2nd tier talents at the position are now scrambling, and in many cases, don't even have 2 guys on their roster with more that a 50/50 shot to start on their NFL teams, let alone a 12 team fantasy league. I am fine using guys like Austin and Bowe as opposed to Calvin, Nicks and Fitzgerald (Romo/Brady instead of Rodgers/Rivers), if it means I have one or two top end RBs and the other owners in my league don't even have reliable starters at two spots in their starting lineup. In dynasty, that value is magnified as every April, more and more good RBs are being replaced and inserted into RBBCs. Even a 4 year run in which you are immune from that gives you more advantage than most QBs will ever offer, even with their extended careers. Thanks for your thoughts on the above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.

5 QB's in the top 5 spots?

Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.

Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.

Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?

The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
If you believe that a RB is the most important, or even equally important in re-draft, what about dynasty leagues changes that? Assuming your rankings are based on Value Over Replacement, wouldn't the RB turnover only make elite options more valuable? It seems like even 2nd tier guys are being thrown in RBBCs left and right. Wouldn't' that suggest that those with elite talent, who have no threat of RBBC (ADP,CJ) or who can produce in RBBCs (Charles, Rice, McCoy) are worth more, based on the difference in value between an elite RB and a good RB?I have a hard time believing that the difference between your QB1 and QB12 is greater than that of your RB1 and RB12. Most leagues start 2 RBs, so the value gap would actually need to be bigger than that of RB1 and RB24. That it is only if we assume no flex spots.

In this draft alone, 5+ guys who looked to be starters took a hit in value and had their starter status challenged, based simply on the fact that they were not elite. As an owner who has invested in ADP, McCoy, Charles, et cetera, I am happy I don't have to worry about that at my RB1 spot. My league mates who waited on RB, who invested in 2nd tier talents at the position are now scrambling, and in many cases, don't even have 2 guys on their roster with more that a 50/50 shot to start on their NFL teams, let alone a 12 team fantasy league.

I am fine using guys like Austin and Bowe as opposed to Calvin, Nicks and Fitzgerald (Romo/Brady instead of Rodgers/Rivers), if it means I have one or two top end RBs and the other owners in my league don't even have reliable starters at two spots in their starting lineup. In dynasty, that value is magnified as every April, more and more good RBs are being replaced and inserted into RBBCs. Even a 4 year run in which you are immune from that gives you more advantage than most QBs will ever offer, even with their extended careers.

Thanks for your thoughts on the above.
I don't find RBs more important in redraft. In fact, I find them less important. Based on the data for the past 5-7 years, I believe on average, nearly 70 percent of the RBs who were top 12 backs last year aren't so the next. I'd rather pick other positions first unless I have one of the top 3-4 picks then I'll pick one RB because I'll have a better chance to pick a good one rather than settle for whatever "RB1-RB2" is projected to me by the herd mentality that ADP creates. However, while most people are trying to get "sure things" that aren't at RB between rounds 1-5, I'm loading my roster with my first choices at QB, 3 WRs and top TE. It's a higher risk strategy for those who follow convention but IMO once something becomes conventional, it's no longer safe or as viable as advertised. It depends on your league and league concept, but that's my re-draft strategy. As for dynasty leagues, I'd rather have early-round WRs and a top QB because they are more consistent year to year and generally have longer tenures as productive starters than RBs.

Details here.

 
I don't find RBs more important in redraft. In fact, I find them less important. Based on the data for the past 5-7 years, I believe on average, nearly 70 percent of the RBs who were top 12 backs last year aren't so the next. I'd rather pick other positions first unless I have one of the top 3-4 picks then I'll pick one RB because I'll have a better chance to pick a good one rather than settle for whatever "RB1-RB2" is projected to me by the herd mentality that ADP creates. However, while most people are trying to get "sure things" that aren't at RB between rounds 1-5, I'm loading my roster with my first choices at QB, 3 WRs and top TE. It's a higher risk strategy for those who follow convention but IMO once something becomes conventional, it's no longer safe or as viable as advertised.

It depends on your league and league concept, but that's my re-draft strategy. As for dynasty leagues, I'd rather have early-round WRs and a top QB because they are more consistent year to year and generally have longer tenures as productive starters than RBs.

Details here.
Thank you for the article. I have read and appreciate it, while I don't agree with it. The concept of VORP, as I understand it, is to compare each player to others only in their position. Then discover which offers the best advantage over their peers. So the fact that, universally, WRs and QBs last longer does nothing to create a wider gap, within their respective positions. But, that fact does create a wider gap between the top RBs and the 2nd tier of RBs. Based on the principles of VORP or VBD, this gives added value to the top RBs in comparison to the top QBs and Wrs. As an example, the % totals are the likelihood that a player is fantasy relevant in 3 years. This does not take productivity into account, although the number do suggest that the top RBs average MUCH more VORP than the top QBs, per season, using only points.

Aaron Rodgers - 99%

Eli Manning - 90%

Adrian Peterson - 80%

Matt Forte - 50%

Based on the reasons you provided for valuing a RB less (turnover, et cetera), even though Rodgers is a much safer bet than Peterson, because Peterson is safer in comparison to other RBs, he offers more VORP. Assuming you agreed with teh %s, Peterson is more valuable than Rodgers, if we were only to measure turnover.

And, in this example, we are comparing a 1st round RB with a 3rd round RB, and a 1st round QB with a 9th round QB. If we used a 3rd round QB, using ADP, the gap is even smaller.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.

5 QB's in the top 5 spots?

Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.

Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.

Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?

The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
If you believe that a RB is the most important, or even equally important in re-draft, what about dynasty leagues changes that? Assuming your rankings are based on Value Over Replacement, wouldn't the RB turnover only make elite options more valuable? It seems like even 2nd tier guys are being thrown in RBBCs left and right. Wouldn't' that suggest that those with elite talent, who have no threat of RBBC (ADP,CJ) or who can produce in RBBCs (Charles, Rice, McCoy) are worth more, based on the difference in value between an elite RB and a good RB?I have a hard time believing that the difference between your QB1 and QB12 is greater than that of your RB1 and RB12. Most leagues start 2 RBs, so the value gap would actually need to be bigger than that of RB1 and RB24. That it is only if we assume no flex spots.

In this draft alone, 5+ guys who looked to be starters took a hit in value and had their starter status challenged, based simply on the fact that they were not elite. As an owner who has invested in ADP, McCoy, Charles, et cetera, I am happy I don't have to worry about that at my RB1 spot. My league mates who waited on RB, who invested in 2nd tier talents at the position are now scrambling, and in many cases, don't even have 2 guys on their roster with more that a 50/50 shot to start on their NFL teams, let alone a 12 team fantasy league.

I am fine using guys like Austin and Bowe as opposed to Calvin, Nicks and Fitzgerald (Romo/Brady instead of Rodgers/Rivers), if it means I have one or two top end RBs and the other owners in my league don't even have reliable starters at two spots in their starting lineup. In dynasty, that value is magnified as every April, more and more good RBs are being replaced and inserted into RBBCs. Even a 4 year run in which you are immune from that gives you more advantage than most QBs will ever offer, even with their extended careers.

Thanks for your thoughts on the above.
I don't find RBs more important in redraft. In fact, I find them less important. Based on the data for the past 5-7 years, I believe on average, nearly 70 percent of the RBs who were top 12 backs last year aren't so the next. I'd rather pick other positions first unless I have one of the top 3-4 picks then I'll pick one RB because I'll have a better chance to pick a good one rather than settle for whatever "RB1-RB2" is projected to me by the herd mentality that ADP creates. However, while most people are trying to get "sure things" that aren't at RB between rounds 1-5, I'm loading my roster with my first choices at QB, 3 WRs and top TE. It's a higher risk strategy for those who follow convention but IMO once something becomes conventional, it's no longer safe or as viable as advertised. It depends on your league and league concept, but that's my re-draft strategy. As for dynasty leagues, I'd rather have early-round WRs and a top QB because they are more consistent year to year and generally have longer tenures as productive starters than RBs.

Details here.
Don't want to speak on his behalf but my interpretation isn't that there is a disagreement as to whether RB's or WR's have more VORP. The difference is that we as a collective seem to do a better job of predicting WR vorp. In particular his example of ~70% of RB's not repeating top 12 performances (stressing the importance of prior results in our projections of the future). If a person was able to better predict RB's better than Wr's for whatever reason, then that combined with the net vorp would have to be factored in, and they should draft RB's earlier.
 
Here we go again :shock:
It's a very valuable converastion to have. I asked Waldman his opinion and responded with mine. I understand you have shared your opinion on that matter, which is why I didn't ask you for it. So I don't know who this we you mention consists of.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like these rankings are just blocs of guys. Not bad perhaps, but there are some issues.

5 QB's in the top 5 spots?

Peyton and Brady in the top 5 of dynasty overall.

Next five picks are WRs. In a 10 team league a RB wouldn't go until the second round.

Has Leshoure as a major outlier, 18 spots lower than the other three guys with RB rankings up. But, Waldman doesn't have Best higher than anyone. Will the Lions ground game offer no value? Is the future RB of the Lions not there yet?

The positional rankings seem well done, but the overall rankings don't mesh as well.
If you read my draft strategy articles and my study on RB turnover, you'll get more insight into why I value QBs and WRs a little more - especially in dynasty leagues. As for Best-Leshoure, not sure I follow your logic on Best needing to be higher than anyone else if I have Leshoure lower. The future of the Lions running game isn't here yet - still needs to see the line get better than Stafford to stay healthy. Might happen this year, but my expectations are starting lower rather than higher.
If you believe that a RB is the most important, or even equally important in re-draft, what about dynasty leagues changes that? Assuming your rankings are based on Value Over Replacement, wouldn't the RB turnover only make elite options more valuable? It seems like even 2nd tier guys are being thrown in RBBCs left and right. Wouldn't' that suggest that those with elite talent, who have no threat of RBBC (ADP,CJ) or who can produce in RBBCs (Charles, Rice, McCoy) are worth more, based on the difference in value between an elite RB and a good RB?I have a hard time believing that the difference between your QB1 and QB12 is greater than that of your RB1 and RB12. Most leagues start 2 RBs, so the value gap would actually need to be bigger than that of RB1 and RB24. That it is only if we assume no flex spots.

In this draft alone, 5+ guys who looked to be starters took a hit in value and had their starter status challenged, based simply on the fact that they were not elite. As an owner who has invested in ADP, McCoy, Charles, et cetera, I am happy I don't have to worry about that at my RB1 spot. My league mates who waited on RB, who invested in 2nd tier talents at the position are now scrambling, and in many cases, don't even have 2 guys on their roster with more that a 50/50 shot to start on their NFL teams, let alone a 12 team fantasy league.

I am fine using guys like Austin and Bowe as opposed to Calvin, Nicks and Fitzgerald (Romo/Brady instead of Rodgers/Rivers), if it means I have one or two top end RBs and the other owners in my league don't even have reliable starters at two spots in their starting lineup. In dynasty, that value is magnified as every April, more and more good RBs are being replaced and inserted into RBBCs. Even a 4 year run in which you are immune from that gives you more advantage than most QBs will ever offer, even with their extended careers.

Thanks for your thoughts on the above.
I don't find RBs more important in redraft. In fact, I find them less important. Based on the data for the past 5-7 years, I believe on average, nearly 70 percent of the RBs who were top 12 backs last year aren't so the next. I'd rather pick other positions first unless I have one of the top 3-4 picks then I'll pick one RB because I'll have a better chance to pick a good one rather than settle for whatever "RB1-RB2" is projected to me by the herd mentality that ADP creates. However, while most people are trying to get "sure things" that aren't at RB between rounds 1-5, I'm loading my roster with my first choices at QB, 3 WRs and top TE. It's a higher risk strategy for those who follow convention but IMO once something becomes conventional, it's no longer safe or as viable as advertised. It depends on your league and league concept, but that's my re-draft strategy. As for dynasty leagues, I'd rather have early-round WRs and a top QB because they are more consistent year to year and generally have longer tenures as productive starters than RBs.

Details here.
Don't want to speak on his behalf but my interpretation isn't that there is a disagreement as to whether RB's or WR's have more VORP. The difference is that we as a collective seem to do a better job of predicting WR vorp. In particular his example of ~70% of RB's not repeating top 12 performances (stressing the importance of prior results in our projections of the future). If a person was able to better predict RB's better than Wr's for whatever reason, then that combined with the net vorp would have to be factored in, and they should draft RB's earlier.
I think he can speak for me on this one. That's essentially my point.
 
The bottom line is that leagues are so different in roster size, starting lineup reqs, and scoring, that you MUST make your own comprehensive ranking. Plus, the culture of the league affects things. For example, I play in a PPR league that starts 1QB, 2-3 RB, 3-4 WR, 1 TE. There are 12 owners and almost everyone has a top 10 QB. You simply cannot trade a top notch QB for much. Our league culture is part of the reason too. But also, the need to come up with 5 positions starters between RB/WR is a challenge. WRs are probably prized the most because of the PPR and also the fact that you can start 4. But our top picks are usually RBs because IF you can start 3 top 15 RBs, you are golden, especially if the RBs catch the ball well. TEs tend to be drafted on an as need basis, and the top guys like Gates and Finley have a lot of value, but the 5-12 range guys, not so much.

Anyway, you need to rank players according to your own league or you will make a lot of mistakes.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top