Which would you rather have? (1 Viewer)

[switz]

We see alot in the NFL, potential stars at RB, that play backup to starters...

i.e. MJD/Taylor, MBIII/Jones, Norwood/Dunn, Bush/McAllister, Washington/Jones, etc.

We also see WRs that seem poised for a breakout...

i.e. Santonio Holmes, Reggie Brown, etc.

When you are drafting, which do you prefer? I've been debating this, in my dynasty league, because a large percentage seem to grab backup RBs, even though there are great WRs available, and yet it seems to me that backup/secondary RBs have a harder time breaking into the starting lineup than WRs do.

I've even sen backup RBs taken over bona fide STUD WRs... (Harrison, TO)

Thoughts?

 

[B Maverick]

Maybe I am wrong but there are more WR spots out there for someone to break into, thus more potential breakout wrs available. You can always find another wr later then you can find at RB. People are looking for the next Lamont Jordan (backup to starter), Rudi Johnson, Chester Taylor, M turner (potentially) to change the face of their dynasty team.

I dont see as many WRs doing that. Kevin Curtis? Maybe. DJ Hackett? Probably. I am sure I am missing others but I cant seem to think of any.

Also, maybe its just me but WRs seem to be playing longer. Older WRs are still going strong. RBs have a shorter shelf life. Their backup is closer to playing.

Then again, maybe these are all misconceptions and you are on to something?!

 

[beto]

RB probably 90% of the time for me. WRs seem to have an extra level of complication that I can't grasp.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

Maverick pretty much summed it up very well. I think its really just basic supply/demand and the potential for high productivity/fantasy points.

Young RB's are fewer and yet they also have greater % chance of becoming stud worthy and a top fantasy point scorer. WR's are so many and the odds of a youngster surprising everyone and being a top fantasy performer is much more of a crapshoot. That's why fantasy owners will pick backup RB's (young ones generally) fairly high in the draft but if they are smart, will wait and take a flyer on rookie WR's till the last few rounds or a journeyman WR in a late round.

 

[hephner]

Personally, I think it's just a case of the demand for RBs being so high, that their price tends to be inflated, even for these committee shares, or high-profile backups. Usually in a dynasty draft, I'm willing to spend a slightly earlier pick on one of these promising RBs who may emerge, cause I know that later in the draft (ie. 7th-8th), I still have a good chance of being able to snag one of those WRs on the rise as well, like Clayton, Holmes, Hackett, etc.

Of course, things have to progress the right way for this situation to play out, but I think you can usually grab one from each group, even if you sometimes have to settle for your 2nd or 3rd choice of that tier of players.

 

[BroadwayG]

In a dynasty I'll give perference to a WR.

 

[The Carnage]

In a dynasty I'll give perference to a WR.

This is what I was thinking. A WR has a much longer FF life than a RB. You're still going to look for that 'next' RB every year anyway.

 

[Jason Wood]

We see alot in the NFL, potential stars at RB, that play backup to starters...i.e. MJD/Taylor, MBIII/Jones, Norwood/Dunn, Bush/McAllister, Washington/Jones, etc.We also see WRs that seem poised for a breakout...i.e. Santonio Holmes, Reggie Brown, etc.When you are drafting, which do you prefer? I've been debating this, in my dynasty league, because a large percentage seem to grab backup RBs, even though there are great WRs available, and yet it seems to me that backup/secondary RBs have a harder time breaking into the starting lineup than WRs do.I've even sen backup RBs taken over bona fide STUD WRs... (Harrison, TO)Thoughts?

I think generally I'm in the "breakout WR" camp because I seem to convince myself that I can wait on WRs until later in my draft. Sometimes it works out, other times so much.