Was last year bad for RBs taken early? (1 Viewer)

[twistd]

Last year seemed like a bad year for first round RBs in fantasy. I wondered if last year was actually worse than recent years. And I wondered how RBs compared in consistency to WRs and QBs drafted early. I decided to look at the first three rounds of drafts. I took stats from a 12 team league I’ve been in for the last five years. It is a PPR league. Starting line ups are 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 flex, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 DT. Scoring is 1/20 passing, 1/10 rec/rush, 4 TD pass, 6 rec/rush TD, and of course 1 pt per reception. I found some interesting things. I’m going to give you all the data. The percentages are what I called a success ratio. I defined that as a player drafted in the first 36 finishing in the first 36.

2007

17 RBs taken in first three rounds-5 finish in the top 36-29%

11 RBs taken in the first round-4 in the top 36-36%

6 RBs taken in first half half of the first round-3 in the top 36-50%

5 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-1 in the top 36-20%

13 WRs taken in the first three rounds-7 in the top 36-54%

5 QBs taken in the first three rounds-4 in the top 17-80%

2006

19 RBs in the first three rounds-7 in the top 36-37%

11 RBs in round 1-4 in the top 36-36%

6 RBs taken in the first half half of the first round-3 in the top 36-50%

5 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-1 in the top 36-20%

15 WRs in the first three rounds-9 in the top 36-60%

1 TE in the first three rounds-none in the top 36

1 QB in three-1 in top 4

2005

21 RBs in the first three rounds-8 in the top 36-38%

10 RBs in the first round-4 in the top 36-40%

6 RBs taken in the first half of the first round-4 in the top 36-67%

4 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-0%

10 WR in the first three rounds-3 in the top 36-30%

3 QBs in the first three rounds-1 in the top 12-33%

2 TEs in the first three rounds-1 in the top 36-50%

2004

22 RBs in the first three rounds-5 in the top 36-23%

10 RBs in first round-3 in the top 36-30%

5 RBs taken in first half half of the first round-2 in the top 36-40%

5 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-1 in the top 36-20%

11 WRs in the first three rounds-4 in the top 36-36%

2 QBs in the three rounds-2 in the top 36-100%

1 TE-1 in the top 36-100%

2003

19 RBs in the first three rounds-10 in the top 36-53%

10 RBs in the first round-7 in the top 36-70%

6 RBs taken in first half of the first round-5 in the top 36-83%

4 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-2 in the top 36-50%

12 WRs taken in first three rounds-4 in the top 36-33%

3 QBs taken in the first three rounds-3 in the top 36-100%

2 TEs taken in the first three rounds-0 in the top 36-0%

Observations

I thought a few things stood out. 2003 was a stellar year for early RBs. No other year even comes close to that success.

Since 2004 fewer RBs are being selected in the first three rounds. The number has gone down each year.

The success ratio of RBs in the first round has been pretty consistent for the last three years.

The success ratio of RBs in the first three rounds has gone down the last three years.

The success ratio of RBs in the first half of the first round is significantly higher than the second half of the first round.

The last two years the success ratio of WRs has really jumped up.

Conclusions

I was surprised that last year was no worse than the two prior years for RB success. It seemed worse to me.

Obviously RBs drafted early in the first round are safer, but I had no idea how risky RBs taken in the second half of the first round are. In the last three years only 2 out of 14 RBs taken in the second half of the first round were successful. It would lead me to believe you would be much safer taking a QB or a WR.

It would seem that early WRs are becoming more consistent now. While the success ratio of RBs is going down. It would lead me to believe that taking 2 WRs in the first three rounds is a much safer approach. And it seems more QBs, WRs and TEs are being taken early. The days of the RB-RB-RB draft may have passed.

I know this isn’t some wide-ranging study. I’m only looking at one league. But I think this is probably representative of other leagues. I don’t think this is too far off of what other leagues are probably seeing. I’m curious if anyone has any thoughts.

 

[sjdogs]

great info, this topic deserves some discussion

thanks

 

[Routilla]

Agreed. RBs are becoming more and more of a crapshoot IMO.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

It might be better to take a look at RBs in Rd 1 instead of 1-3

 

[The Kansas Comet]

It might be better to take a look at RBs in Rd 1 instead of 1-3

The second, third, and fourth lines for each year examine first round RB's.Interesting stuff, twistd. Your info has me looking at my league to see if it has similar results. I know that I drafted RB in the second half of the first round the last 3 seasons and definitely experienced the lack of success your numbers suggest.

 

[twistd]

It might be better to take a look at RBs in Rd 1 instead of 1-3

I did. Not only just in round one, but also looked at RBs taken in the first half of the first round as compared to the RBs taken in the second half of the first round. I just noticed that all the successful RBs in the first round seemed to be taken early. Obviously you want the early picks, but it surprised me how bad the second half RBs were.

 

[twistd]

It might be better to take a look at RBs in Rd 1 instead of 1-3

The second, third, and fourth lines for each year examine first round RB's.Interesting stuff, twistd. Your info has me looking at my league to see if it has similar results. I know that I drafted RB in the second half of the first round the last 3 seasons and definitely experienced the lack of success your numbers suggest.

It is surprising how bad those second half RBs have been. Here have been my first round picks in this league the last five years:2003-Ahman Green-picked 12th-finished 3rd overall2004-Deuce McAllister-picked 3rd-finished 59th2005-Priest Holmes-picked 8th-finished 159th2006-Ronnie Brown-picked 6th-finished 73rd2007-Travis Henry-picked 12th-finished 193rdI didn't realize how bad my first round picks have worked out these last five years, ouch! It appears that it doesn't matter if I pick early or late in the first round my picks still suck. I'd be curious if your league had similar results. I believe that this was a reasonable reflection of what happened in other leagues.

 

[crnerblitz]

Very interesting read twistd. I would be very curious to know how the historical data would look vs adp for a start 2 RB league with say FBG or WCOFF scoring. Someone has to have a back list of players adp for say 5 years.

The fact that your league is a start 1 Rb may be massaging the data. However definatly worth a look. Good job.

 

[twistd]

Very interesting read twistd. I would be very curious to know how the historical data would look vs adp for a start 2 RB league with say FBG or WCOFF scoring. Someone has to have a back list of players adp for say 5 years. The fact that your league is a start 1 Rb may be massaging the data. However definatly worth a look. Good job.

Here is the last three years of a $1000 Ants league with scoring as a WCOFF league. So it is 2 RBs and 3 WRs with a flex.200720 RBs in the first three-6 in the top 36-30%12 RBs in the first round-4 in the top 36-33%6 RBs in the first half of round one-4 in the top 36-66%6 RBs in the second half of round one-0 in the top 36-0%1 QB in the first three-1 in the top 36-100%14 WRs in the first three-8 in the top 36-57%1 TE in the first three-0 in the top 36-0%200621 RBs taken in the first three-7 in the top 36-33%11 RBs taken in first round-5 in the top 36-45%6 RBs in the first half of round one-4 in the top 36-66%5 RBS in the second half-1 in the top 36-20%1 QB taken in the first three-1 in the top 36-100%13 WRs taken in the first three-7 in the top 36-54%1 TE taken in the first three-0 in the top 36-0%200519 RBs taken in the first three-9 in the top 36-47%11 RBs in the first round-4 in the top 36-36%6 RBs in the first half of the first round-3 in the top 36-50%5 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-1 in the top 36-20%3 QBs taken in the first three-1 in the top 36-33%12 WRs taken in the first three-4 in the top 36-33%2 TEs in the first three-1 in the top 36-50%The only difference I can see is that this league continued to draft the same number of RBs in the first three rounds during the three years. Everything else seems to be pretty much the same as in my league. They draft more RBs in the first three rounds, but the success ratio stays the same.

 

[crnerblitz]

We have to look deeper into the numbers here. Most top 36 scorers lists are very QB heavy. Im not saying in this case but in alot of cases. Also the drop of in WR's would be much smoother as we get at the bottom of the list. So VBD will still trump what we are seeing by these numbers. That being said, I do agree that in general WR value is creeping steadily upward. To the point where taking two WR's in the first three rounds can be a strong play if your able to gain value over the field.

 

[benbadman]

We have to look deeper into the numbers here. Most top 36 scorers lists are very QB heavy. Im not saying in this case but in alot of cases. Also the drop of in WR's would be much smoother as we get at the bottom of the list. So VBD will still trump what we are seeing by these numbers. That being said, I do agree that in general WR value is creeping steadily upward. To the point where taking two WR's in the first three rounds can be a strong play if your able to gain value over the field.

is this top 36 OVERALL?or TOP36 RBs? top36 WRs??I think a positional rankings analysis has something to say... if I draft a RB1 and he finishes as RB15, but isnt a top36 scorer.. he underperformed but isnt a total waste of a pick.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

It wasn't that bad.

LT struggled early and then was a beast throughout.

Westbrook was great the entire season.

Addai was great in the first half then faded some later on.

Gore was poor early then played well late in the season.

Jackson was bad early then got hurt and played great after returning from injury.

Parker scored few tds but ran for a lot of yards.

Mcgahee was pretty consistent throughout the season.

The only real bust rbs who gave you nothing or close to it were Henry, Alexander and Johnsonx2 and those guys were injured. More than likely if you drafted an rb in the 1st round you got an impact player.

 

[twistd]

We have to look deeper into the numbers here. Most top 36 scorers lists are very QB heavy. Im not saying in this case but in alot of cases. Also the drop of in WR's would be much smoother as we get at the bottom of the list. So VBD will still trump what we are seeing by these numbers. That being said, I do agree that in general WR value is creeping steadily upward. To the point where taking two WR's in the first three rounds can be a strong play if your able to gain value over the field.

I agree that these leagues end up QB top heavy in the final stats. And certainly the value is relevant here. My original idea was just to see if this past year was unusual as far as RBs under-performing. And this is far from a comprehensive analysis. Here is a positional breakdown of the first league top 36 for 2007:QB-13RB-10WR-11TE-2the top 10 were:QB-6RB-2WR-2The 2006 numbers were:top36QB-12RB-10WR-14TE-0top10QB-5RB-5WR-0TE-0The 2005 numbers were:top36QB-13RB-9WR-13TE-1top10QB-2RB-5WR-3TE-0The numbers are QB top heavy, particularly in the top 10. An in depth study, looking at say the gap between the 10th RB and the 25th RB, versus the 10th WR and the 25th WR. Or particularly the 10th QB versus the 20th QB. I think your value suggestion definitely has merit. But I still think it is valid to look at the number of RBs selected early that disappoint.

 

[DropKick]

... I had no idea how risky RBs taken in the second half of the first round are. In the last three years only 2 out of 14 RBs taken in the second half of the first round were successful. It would lead me to believe you would be much safer taking a QB or a WR.

This is the flaw in the "Stud RB" theory. I've always felt the herd mentality in grabbing RBs early led to marginal backs going late in the first when blue chip talent at other positions was available. Sometimes the contradictory approach is mislabeled "Stud WR" but it is simply taking the best available player.

 

[twistd]

It wasn't that bad.LT struggled early and then was a beast throughout.Westbrook was great the entire season.Addai was great in the first half then faded some later on.Gore was poor early then played well late in the season.Jackson was bad early then got hurt and played great after returning from injury.Parker scored few tds but ran for a lot of yards.Mcgahee was pretty consistent throughout the season.The only real bust rbs who gave you nothing or close to it were Henry, Alexander and Johnsonx2 and those guys were injured. More than likely if you drafted an rb in the 1st round 1.Tomlinson2.Jackson3.Bush4.Addai5.Westbrook6.Johnson7.Gore8.Alexander9.Parker10.Chad Johnson11.Maroney12 Henryyou got an impact player.

Here was the first round in that league:1.Tomlinson2.Jackson3.Bush4.Addai5.Westbrook6.Johnson7.Gore8.Alexander9.Parker10.Chad Johnson11.Maroney12 HenryHere is where, overall, these players finished:1.Tomlinson-52.Jackson-523.Bush-494.Addai-165.Westbrook-26.Johnson-1407.Gore-368.Alexander-1789.Parker-6710.Chad Johnson-1911.Maroney-16612 Henry-193I would only define Henry, Maroney, Johnson, and Alexander as complete busts, but when Parker, Bush and Jackson were drafted teams expected more then they got.These are all general ideas. Had you replaced any of these weaker backs with Owens or Manning you'd have been a lot better off.

 

[beto]

Great work here twistd. Thanks for posting in the jeter thread because I missed this last year.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Very interesting read twistd. I would be very curious to know how the historical data would look vs adp for a start 2 RB league with say FBG or WCOFF scoring. Someone has to have a back list of players adp for say 5 years. The fact that your league is a start 1 Rb may be massaging the data. However definatly worth a look. Good job.

Here is the last three years of a $1000 Ants league with scoring as a WCOFF league. So it is 2 RBs and 3 WRs with a flex.200720 RBs in the first three-6 in the top 36-30%12 RBs in the first round-4 in the top 36-33%6 RBs in the first half of round one-4 in the top 36-66%6 RBs in the second half of round one-0 in the top 36-0%1 QB in the first three-1 in the top 36-100%14 WRs in the first three-8 in the top 36-57%1 TE in the first three-0 in the top 36-0%200621 RBs taken in the first three-7 in the top 36-33%11 RBs taken in first round-5 in the top 36-45%6 RBs in the first half of round one-4 in the top 36-66%5 RBS in the second half-1 in the top 36-20%1 QB taken in the first three-1 in the top 36-100%13 WRs taken in the first three-7 in the top 36-54%1 TE taken in the first three-0 in the top 36-0%200519 RBs taken in the first three-9 in the top 36-47%11 RBs in the first round-4 in the top 36-36%6 RBs in the first half of the first round-3 in the top 36-50%5 RBs taken in the second half of the first round-1 in the top 36-20%3 QBs taken in the first three-1 in the top 36-33%12 WRs taken in the first three-4 in the top 36-33%2 TEs in the first three-1 in the top 36-50%

Wow, only 2 RBs taken in the 2nd half of the draft in the past 3 yrs performed... :mental note:But in general, since theres more Opp to perform to standards, WRs 5 - 20 WRs are "safer" than RB 5 - 20 in PPR; which is why your seeing that Data that more WRs are performing than RBs