Zealots 2008 Rookie ADP (1 Viewer)

[Illegal Pants Downfield]

Every year it gets voted on and every year it gets denied. It's here to stay.

I understand why, tho. Changing such a major rule would be the same as taking away th flex. It's not PPR, and it wasn't when I joined. The great thing about Zealots is that you have a bunch of leagues, all with the same rules, so looking at ADP and so forth really helpful. As opposed to say, leagues with 15 roster spots, and no flex. Links to those rookie drafts aren't useful at all.

The only way to do it would be to create new syndicates, just for PPR. Which I am surprised they haven' done, I know I would go out of my way to grab a team in that league.

Not to steer this too off course, but anyone (in Zealots) is free to do just that. Write down the rules for the league (can copy most of it from the main rules) modify the scoring how you want and post it in the Test Leagues thread. The main problems with creating new leagues is getting someone to run them (commishes, vices, czars) and then filling the leagues. I don't doubt there would be real interest in it and if you are ambitious enough start it up. I would happily participate, but running the league(s) is really beyond my time constraints.

Though that might the more likely option, I don't think it a good one. Too many Z leagues already is watering down the owners. Of course, many of the Z owners have other leagues they are in and then add all the Z leagues they are in...and he have an owner just occupying a seat and not putting their ALL into it.The major problem is that people in Z land are scared of change. Though many can see the reasoning to why PPR would be better, there are many that just don't like any change. Thus, they vote NO to everything. PPR, even if it's a small change would enhance the classic leagues GREATLY. Then again, you don't need me to tell you because clearly those of us in z leagues that are posting here...seem to all agree on this basic matter.

I'm in the "Z" league and I can speak to what I feel is the biggest reason at least some of the leagues haven't changed to PPR. It's the "I've built this team on the basis of the rules as they currently stand" that is the obstacle.And I can see the reasoning of it.

You've built your team over time and you picked the team and made acquisitions based on those rules. If there are different rules, you'd be (in essense) starting over again. People don't want to "chuck it and start over".

Exactly. And I agree that teams that have been built over a few years could be dramatically changed by such a rule change. It would ruin everything. I think entire leagues would disband, they'd lose a lot of owners.

I'm not in the Zealots leagues, but as was mentioned before, this is where phasing in a change like this is the way to go.In one dynasty league, we've implemented a change over the course of 5 seasons. This way, there is enough player turnover & time to start to readjust your strategy to the new scoring system. It doesn't completely eliminate the "I built my team based on the original scoring" issue, but it definitely reduces the impact.

In our case, the league as a whole agreed the scoring needed to change. But, as a compromise for those who would be affected more negatively by our change, we spread the change out over 5 years, implementing 20% of the change value each season.

 

[massraider]

Every year it gets voted on and every year it gets denied. It's here to stay.

I understand why, tho. Changing such a major rule would be the same as taking away th flex. It's not PPR, and it wasn't when I joined. The great thing about Zealots is that you have a bunch of leagues, all with the same rules, so looking at ADP and so forth really helpful. As opposed to say, leagues with 15 roster spots, and no flex. Links to those rookie drafts aren't useful at all.

The only way to do it would be to create new syndicates, just for PPR. Which I am surprised they haven' done, I know I would go out of my way to grab a team in that league.

Not to steer this too off course, but anyone (in Zealots) is free to do just that. Write down the rules for the league (can copy most of it from the main rules) modify the scoring how you want and post it in the Test Leagues thread. The main problems with creating new leagues is getting someone to run them (commishes, vices, czars) and then filling the leagues. I don't doubt there would be real interest in it and if you are ambitious enough start it up. I would happily participate, but running the league(s) is really beyond my time constraints.

Though that might the more likely option, I don't think it a good one. Too many Z leagues already is watering down the owners. Of course, many of the Z owners have other leagues they are in and then add all the Z leagues they are in...and he have an owner just occupying a seat and not putting their ALL into it.The major problem is that people in Z land are scared of change. Though many can see the reasoning to why PPR would be better, there are many that just don't like any change. Thus, they vote NO to everything. PPR, even if it's a small change would enhance the classic leagues GREATLY. Then again, you don't need me to tell you because clearly those of us in z leagues that are posting here...seem to all agree on this basic matter.

I'm in the "Z" league and I can speak to what I feel is the biggest reason at least some of the leagues haven't changed to PPR. It's the "I've built this team on the basis of the rules as they currently stand" that is the obstacle.And I can see the reasoning of it.

You've built your team over time and you picked the team and made acquisitions based on those rules. If there are different rules, you'd be (in essense) starting over again. People don't want to "chuck it and start over".

Exactly. And I agree that teams that have been built over a few years could be dramatically changed by such a rule change. It would ruin everything. I think entire leagues would disband, they'd lose a lot of owners.

I'm not in the Zealots leagues, but as was mentioned before, this is where phasing in a change like this is the way to go.In one dynasty league, we've implemented a change over the course of 5 seasons. This way, there is enough player turnover & time to start to readjust your strategy to the new scoring system. It doesn't completely eliminate the "I built my team based on the original scoring" issue, but it definitely reduces the impact.

In our case, the league as a whole agreed the scoring needed to change. But, as a compromise for those who would be affected more negatively by our change, we spread the change out over 5 years, implementing 20% of the change value each season.

Interesting.Thing about Zealots is, it's mostly just for fun, for owners to run a dynasty team with other serious owners, and the cost is minimal. They add new leagues every year, and many owners own several teams.

I think the league is fun the way it is, even though it's not my ideal setup. I really dislike the RB flex option, there's something not quite right about Ryan Torain being a 1st round rookie pick, you know?

But I was also aware of the rules going in, and for a lot of people, it's the best way to have a (relatively) serious dynasty league. I know I don't know 11 other guys dweeby enough to want to participate seriously. So I'm not complaining. Zealots is great. It's just a mild annoyance that trading for a starting RB is difficult, and you feel the pressure to draft RBs so early.

But if Zealots had leagues with different rules, I'd jump on it. I haven't really considered getting a second team, but if they had leagues with PPR, and an initial auction, I'd sign up for at LEAST another team.

 

[massraider]

BTW, props to the OP for updating.

Some real bargains there, thus far.

 

[Warhogs]

I'm entering my 2nd year in zealots and my biggest wish would be to expand to requiring more IDP starters. I think the key is good depth in all positions but there are not enough required starters on defense.

 

[Bizkiteer]

I'm entering my 2nd year in zealots and my biggest wish would be to expand to requiring more IDP starters. I think the key is good depth in all positions but there are not enough required starters on defense.

Best is playing FULL IDP...play a 4-3, 3-4 or nickle formation. For those that are asking, it does break out the positions of DT, DE, LB, CB, & S.

 

[AKComic]

BTW, props to the OP for updating. Some real bargains there, thus far.

Thanks - it's been a lot of work!Now that the first drafts are completing, the mathmatical abberations will quickly start falling into line, as you can see in the last update.

 

[RaiderBones]

I'm entering my 2nd year in zealots and my biggest wish would be to expand to requiring more IDP starters. I think the key is good depth in all positions but there are not enough required starters on defense.

I agree Warhogs, I am entering my 4th year at Zealots and I would like to see them expanding the IDP starters as well. For the most part defensive players are taken so late in Zealots drafts expect for the occasional stud that comes out because not enough guys are started so a person can find quality players every year in free agency.

 

[BoneYardDog]

Bump because my Z24 Rookie Draft will start soon and I need the opinion of the masses of the other lousy teams that pick at the 1.01, 1.02 and 1.03 positions...

 

[Nugget]

 

[Penguin]

I'm entering my 2nd year in zealots and my biggest wish would be to expand to requiring more IDP starters. I think the key is good depth in all positions but there are not enough required starters on defense.

I agree Warhogs, I am entering my 4th year at Zealots and I would like to see them expanding the IDP starters as well. For the most part defensive players are taken so late in Zealots drafts expect for the occasional stud that comes out because not enough guys are started so a person can find quality players every year in free agency.

I think it has more to do with the scoring system minimizing defensive players. The number of defensive starters is equal to that of the offense, seven each. I'm in five leagues that use IDP and the Zealots scoring system for defensive players is by far the most conservative.

 

[kylechoffman]

Z16 just started:

1.1 - McDaddy

1.2 - Stewart

1.3 - Forte

1.4 - Mendenhall

1.5 - On Clock

 

[AKComic]

Just ran another big update on this. The data is pretty solid now; I'll probably only update it once or twice more, as there shouldn't be much more in the way of major changes. Guys may move around by a spot or two (especially in the 6th round), but the list should give us the basic picture now.

Hope it's been a help!

 

[bro1ncos]

 

[-OZ-]

I'm entering my 2nd year in zealots and my biggest wish would be to expand to requiring more IDP starters. I think the key is good depth in all positions but there are not enough required starters on defense.

I agree Warhogs, I am entering my 4th year at Zealots and I would like to see them expanding the IDP starters as well. For the most part defensive players are taken so late in Zealots drafts expect for the occasional stud that comes out because not enough guys are started so a person can find quality players every year in free agency.

I think it has more to do with the scoring system minimizing defensive players. The number of defensive starters is equal to that of the offense, seven each. I'm in five leagues that use IDP and the Zealots scoring system for defensive players is by far the most conservative.

If you're starting 7 on offense, you're starting more skill position players than would be on the field for any NFL team.With 7 IDPs starting, you're starting 4 less IDPs.I'm not in zealots, but from other leagues I've been in, I'd say a 7/11 balance is close to ideal. Scoring system would make a difference too of course, but starting lineups are usually the biggest impact on values.

 

[reg]

As an FYI, Z5 had to restart most of the draft this past weekend.

 

[Chachi]

I'm surprised McKelvin isn't on the list with getting points for return yards. Maybe the decision in Buffalo was made to keep McGee and Parish as the returners? I think McGee and Parish are the best return tandem in the league but at some point age catches up.

 

[Bizkiteer]

I'm surprised McKelvin isn't on the list with getting points for return yards. Maybe the decision in Buffalo was made to keep McGee and Parish as the returners? I think McGee and Parish are the best return tandem in the league but at some point age catches up.

Uhhh....McGee and Parish are both not old, if not somewhat still considered young. I assume the thought by them is that you can never have enough talent or depth.

 

[12345678]

 

[cpstorm]

when are the next round of drafts? this is a very useful thread - so thanks to all who are contributing

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Z58 rookie draft is under way.

 

[MAC_32]

Nice to see the 4th and 5th best RB options are going 7th and 8th on average

Slaton in the 2nd seems a bit...off.

I like Torain, but the top of the 2nd? Really?

Jordy Nelson and Curtis Lofton are looking like bargains.

Surprised to see some later round guys listed and other ommitted. I don't think Finley, Monk, and Fred Davis are draftable.

Glad to see a few later round favorites of mine are missing from this list. Looks like trading down for multiple 5th and 6th round picks may be a good move.

 

[massraider]

Nice to see the 4th and 5th best RB options are going 7th and 8th on average Slaton in the 2nd seems a bit...off. I like Torain, but the top of the 2nd? Really?Jordy Nelson and Curtis Lofton are looking like bargains.Surprised to see some later round guys listed and other ommitted. I don't think Finley, Monk, and Fred Davis are draftable.Glad to see a few later round favorites of mine are missing from this list. Looks like trading down for multiple 5th and 6th round picks may be a good move.

Slaton and Torain are both classic Zealot reaches. I think Torain's ADP will actually wind up being in the first round.I think there is real value in the late 2nd, all the way to the mid 3rd.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Nice to see the 4th and 5th best RB options are going 7th and 8th on average Slaton in the 2nd seems a bit...off. I like Torain, but the top of the 2nd? Really?Jordy Nelson and Curtis Lofton are looking like bargains.Surprised to see some later round guys listed and other ommitted. I don't think Finley, Monk, and Fred Davis are draftable.Glad to see a few later round favorites of mine are missing from this list. Looks like trading down for multiple 5th and 6th round picks may be a good move.

Slaton and Torain are both classic Zealot reaches. I think Torain's ADP will actually wind up being in the first round.I think there is real value in the late 2nd, all the way to the mid 3rd.

Torain went at 3.08 and Slaton at 4.02 in Z30. Of course, we have smart owners.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

It sure is hard to know which WR to pick at the bottom 1st/top 2nd.

Kelly/Avery/Thomas/Hardy are all really close in talent and potential ability.

 

[MAC_32]

I think there is real value in the late 2nd, all the way to the mid 3rd.

Why take a guess on a WR at the beginning of the 2nd when you can take the guy that falls 10 picks later while adding additional pick(s) later. Besides, my #1 WR (Nelson, Hardy's close but he's going a round earlier) is falling anyway. I traded out of 2.06 in a recent rookie draft (I would have taken Nelson), added a 3rd rounder in 2009 and a late 5th rounder in 2008 (Omon), and then drafted Nelson at 3.02.I am trying to get rid of any pick between #10 and #22 unless I am targetting a stud LB and move up into the top 8 or back into the late 2nd/early 3rd range and add more picks.

 

[BoneYardDog]

I am struggling to find value at the 2.03...

All the good or good situation running backs are gone and even the 2nd tier COP backs are long gone...

Best QB - Ryan is gone and the WRs are just not all that good... I grabbed Devin Thomas as 1.11 but after Thomas and Hardy and maybe Kelly and Sweed there just isn't much out there...

The Linebackers are not as good as last year and the next 10 wide receivers you can throw in a hat and pick one and be just as lucky at 1 as 10...

Could reach for a running back but already have 5 of the rookies so that is really a reach for me...

Our Z24 draft is following almost exactly to the letter the ADP listed. The top 12 ADP were the first 12 taken... That disturbs me and shows that the top value is the top value and after round 1 it is all a guess for a 2nd level player that most likely will not even start for your team...

It is a deep but mediocre draft...

You talk about value in the mid to late 2nd round and 3rd round but value depends on what these players will accomplish and most of the WRs left may be value to their ADP but not much value to your fantasy roster...

 

[MAC_32]

You talk about value in the mid to late 2nd round and 3rd round but value depends on what these players will accomplish and most of the WRs left may be value to their ADP but not much value to your fantasy roster...

I talk about value because those players I am targetting I believe will have a meaningful impact sometme in the next few years. Trying to get as many of them as possible increase my chances of netting a player who will pan out, or several of them. If you don't believe in any of them then, no, there isn't value in those picks.

 

[massraider]

It is a deep but mediocre draft...You talk about value in the mid to late 2nd round and 3rd round but value depends on what these players will accomplish and most of the WRs left may be value to their ADP but not much value to your fantasy roster...

Your first comment actually is what I would say to your second comment.It's kind of a crapshoot right at the spot you are at right now, and I think a lot of people could see players at the end of this round, and into the mid-third outplaying these early 2nd rounders. That's what I mean by value. I think there is a drop off at about 1.5, than at 1.11, give or take, and then there is a bunch of guys in a group. There's draftable players there at the end of the 3rd, that I like almost as much as these 2nd rounders.

 

[Biabreakable]

It is a deep but mediocre draft...You talk about value in the mid to late 2nd round and 3rd round but value depends on what these players will accomplish and most of the WRs left may be value to their ADP but not much value to your fantasy roster...

Your first comment actually is what I would say to your second comment.It's kind of a crapshoot right at the spot you are at right now, and I think a lot of people could see players at the end of this round, and into the mid-third outplaying these early 2nd rounders. That's what I mean by value. I think there is a drop off at about 1.5, than at 1.11, give or take, and then there is a bunch of guys in a group. There's draftable players there at the end of the 3rd, that I like almost as much as these 2nd rounders.

I agree with this tiering and that is what I have been observing as well.I think there may be a WR or 2 who end up being startable players out of this group. But which WR that is is anybodys guess. Even the scouts and the NFL teams couldn't sort them out. I think it is very telling about the low level of talent at the WR position this year that ZERO WR were drafted in the 1st round. That has not happened in a long, long time. It has never happened before as long as I have been playing FF and following drafts which has been almost 20 years now.So I think drafters need to look at this situation with a grain of salt. Yes there are some really good prospects at RB this year and thier talent is above average (combine numbers) compared to most years. However the value of the RB is inflated due to the lack of talent at the WR and QB positions. Don't get it twisted. Some of these RB getting taken picks 6-12 would fall to the 2nd round in a typical draft that had high level WR talent, more talent at QB and possible elite TE or LB. This draft does not offer that. While I agree this year looks like a good one to trade down from the early 2nd round slots and gather extra picks you have to find a trade partner. With no stand out talents justifying clear seperation between the early 2nd round and the mid to late 3rd round, finding trade partners willing to do this may not be so easy.

 

[cstu]

Some pretty smart people in this thread still fail to see the delicate balance of power/value of different positions in Zealots.

It is NOT all about RBs. If you have a solid team but weakness at RB you have a very good chance to win often and win it all. Just not against a team that is solid AND had good RBs.

QBs dominate scoring. This is a position you will be hard pressed to overcome if it is a weakness on your team. This does get offset by only having to start one. Still hard to climb out of a 20pt hole and win with any consistency if your QB sucks.

You must start 3 WR and you can start 4. Doing so is a viable strategy for winning championships. Position scarcity at WR especially elite WR makes them very valuable. People crying for PPR dont seem to realize how valuable the WR allready are. And changing the scoring to PPR will not really change that. It will just devalue the IDPs and QBs.

The scoring and roster requirements are what they are for a reason. It is no accident. It is the most fair, equitable and balanced system I have ever played in. Anyone who does not realize this really doesen't know what they are talking about. The proof is in the VBD #s.

Thanks for the ADP data.

Based on the bolded comment, I'm not sure it's worth responding to you since you probably aren't going to listen to anything other than your own opinion. But I'll try.WR are very valuable in the Zealots setup. But the fact that you are allowed to start three RB makes them much more valuable than any other position. Anyone that is using a WR in that flex position instead of a good starting RB is more likely to be at a disadvantage unless you have four of the top 10 or so WR. If WR scoring were equitable and balanced compared to the RB position then you would not see 20 of the first 23 picks or so of every draft be RB.

PPR is not the answer to balance out WR and TE with the RB. If you want to do that, you need to allow players to only start a maximum of 2 RB and force them to start 3 WR or maybe even 4 WR. That will increase the value of the WR, IMO.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I have long abhored PPR scoring. It does not accomplish what proponents of it say it will. Create balance between RB and WR value.

I have looked at this over and over again and always come to the same conclushion that you have stated in the bolded portion above. Even after reading and listening to some of the strongest and most convincing studies and arguments in favor of PPR scoring.

It does irk me that posters in this thread who are fairly experienced and knowledgable still have not understood this and think that PPR will be a solition.

Fact is that PPR will allow teams to use lesser WR who get high targets/catches to make up for the deficiency they have compared to elite WR. Thus allowing their teams to be more competitive with less talented WR and focus their resources even more on RB as a viable strategy. This is even without RB getting the PPR benifits. If the RB are getting the PPR then it does even less to help the value of WR.

Several years ago I dropped a couple of decent dynasty leagues I was in that had PPR scoring and kept my leagues that did not (including a league that was very much a part of the foundation of the Zealots leagues) have PPR. I have participated in Zealots leagues from the begining because of how I believe in and enjoy the balance of value between players in the system. A dramatic change such as PPR would cause me to have to rethink my commitment and enjoyment participating in them. Not something I take lightly considering that I have been commited to these leagues for over 7 seasons now.

This issue cuts at the very root of dynamics in Fantasy Football.

A happy compromise - Point Per First Down Reception.

I like it and wish I had seen it earlier, seems like a great idea. Are any leagues actually using this?

 

[cstu]

It is a deep but mediocre draft...You talk about value in the mid to late 2nd round and 3rd round but value depends on what these players will accomplish and most of the WRs left may be value to their ADP but not much value to your fantasy roster...

Your first comment actually is what I would say to your second comment.It's kind of a crapshoot right at the spot you are at right now, and I think a lot of people could see players at the end of this round, and into the mid-third outplaying these early 2nd rounders. That's what I mean by value. I think there is a drop off at about 1.5, than at 1.11, give or take, and then there is a bunch of guys in a group. There's draftable players there at the end of the 3rd, that I like almost as much as these 2nd rounders.

I agree with this tiering and that is what I have been observing as well.I think there may be a WR or 2 who end up being startable players out of this group. But which WR that is is anybodys guess. Even the scouts and the NFL teams couldn't sort them out. I think it is very telling about the low level of talent at the WR position this year that ZERO WR were drafted in the 1st round. That has not happened in a long, long time. It has never happened before as long as I have been playing FF and following drafts which has been almost 20 years now.So I think drafters need to look at this situation with a grain of salt. Yes there are some really good prospects at RB this year and thier talent is above average (combine numbers) compared to most years. However the value of the RB is inflated due to the lack of talent at the WR and QB positions. Don't get it twisted. Some of these RB getting taken picks 6-12 would fall to the 2nd round in a typical draft that had high level WR talent, more talent at QB and possible elite TE or LB. This draft does not offer that. While I agree this year looks like a good one to trade down from the early 2nd round slots and gather extra picks you have to find a trade partner. With no stand out talents justifying clear seperation between the early 2nd round and the mid to late 3rd round, finding trade partners willing to do this may not be so easy.

I personally like the WR talent in the draft and while it's a crapshoot I think there could be at least a couple of 2nd round guys who end up becoming good fantasy WRs. You wouldn't see 10 WR's picked in the 2nd round if teams didn't see them as potential starters. Most of them will bust but for the price of a 2nd round fantasy pick it won't break your team.

 

[Jedimaster21]

Some pretty smart people in this thread still fail to see the delicate balance of power/value of different positions in Zealots.

It is NOT all about RBs. If you have a solid team but weakness at RB you have a very good chance to win often and win it all. Just not against a team that is solid AND had good RBs.

QBs dominate scoring. This is a position you will be hard pressed to overcome if it is a weakness on your team. This does get offset by only having to start one. Still hard to climb out of a 20pt hole and win with any consistency if your QB sucks.

You must start 3 WR and you can start 4. Doing so is a viable strategy for winning championships. Position scarcity at WR especially elite WR makes them very valuable. People crying for PPR dont seem to realize how valuable the WR allready are. And changing the scoring to PPR will not really change that. It will just devalue the IDPs and QBs.

The scoring and roster requirements are what they are for a reason. It is no accident. It is the most fair, equitable and balanced system I have ever played in. Anyone who does not realize this really doesen't know what they are talking about. The proof is in the VBD #s.

Thanks for the ADP data.

Based on the bolded comment, I'm not sure it's worth responding to you since you probably aren't going to listen to anything other than your own opinion. But I'll try.WR are very valuable in the Zealots setup. But the fact that you are allowed to start three RB makes them much more valuable than any other position. Anyone that is using a WR in that flex position instead of a good starting RB is more likely to be at a disadvantage unless you have four of the top 10 or so WR. If WR scoring were equitable and balanced compared to the RB position then you would not see 20 of the first 23 picks or so of every draft be RB.

PPR is not the answer to balance out WR and TE with the RB. If you want to do that, you need to allow players to only start a maximum of 2 RB and force them to start 3 WR or maybe even 4 WR. That will increase the value of the WR, IMO.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I have long abhored PPR scoring. It does not accomplish what proponents of it say it will. Create balance between RB and WR value.

I have looked at this over and over again and always come to the same conclushion that you have stated in the bolded portion above. Even after reading and listening to some of the strongest and most convincing studies and arguments in favor of PPR scoring.

It does irk me that posters in this thread who are fairly experienced and knowledgable still have not understood this and think that PPR will be a solition.

Fact is that PPR will allow teams to use lesser WR who get high targets/catches to make up for the deficiency they have compared to elite WR. Thus allowing their teams to be more competitive with less talented WR and focus their resources even more on RB as a viable strategy. This is even without RB getting the PPR benifits. If the RB are getting the PPR then it does even less to help the value of WR.

Several years ago I dropped a couple of decent dynasty leagues I was in that had PPR scoring and kept my leagues that did not (including a league that was very much a part of the foundation of the Zealots leagues) have PPR. I have participated in Zealots leagues from the begining because of how I believe in and enjoy the balance of value between players in the system. A dramatic change such as PPR would cause me to have to rethink my commitment and enjoyment participating in them. Not something I take lightly considering that I have been commited to these leagues for over 7 seasons now.

This issue cuts at the very root of dynamics in Fantasy Football.

This is exactly the kind of discussion that makes the Shark Pool the excellent resource that it is. These are issues/questions that always arise, and scoring system and lineup requirements have a dramatic effect on your fantasy league.

 

[Lord Lucan]

[i think there may be a WR or 2 who end up being startable players out of this group. But which WR that is is anybodys guess. Even the scouts and the NFL teams couldn't sort them out. I think it is very telling about the low level of talent at the WR position this year that ZERO WR were drafted in the 1st round. That has not happened in a long, long time. It has never happened before as long as I have been playing FF and following drafts which has been almost 20 years now.

I think part of the reason why no WRs were taken in the first round was that there were so many who seemed to be at that second- or third-round level. The teams that needed help at WR saw no reason to reach for one in the first, given there were no obvious elite receivers, but any number of talented second or third round types, ensuring those teams would be able to have a shot at one of a number of guys with appraently similar talent levels.

 

[odon]

DUDE!!!!!!!, how about an update?

 

[Kirby]

DUDE!!!!!!!, how about an update?

 

[bro1ncos]

DUDE!!!!!!!, how about an update?

 

[massraider]

DUDE!!!!!!!, how about an update?

It's a lot of work. You guys feel free to do it yourself. Go to MFL, search "Zealots".Soon as you have entered in the info from all 50+ leagues, let me know. I'll buy you a beer.

 

[spec1alk]

I finally produced the HTML versions of the sheets and uploaded them. They are linked in my sig.

I have 2008 Rookie & Veteran ADP stats.

The rookie stats are for Zealots 1 through 60 (plus 2 Zealots Auction Contract leagues I am in). The veteran stats are for Zealots 49 through 60 (this years expansion leagues).

 

[PranksterJD]

I finally produced the HTML versions of the sheets and uploaded them. They are linked in my sig. I have 2008 Rookie & Veteran ADP stats.The rookie stats are for Zealots 1 through 60 (plus 2 Zealots Auction Contract leagues I am in). The veteran stats are for Zealots 49 through 60 (this years expansion leagues).

Awesome work man. Thanks!

 

[Burning Sensation]

Great job Spec, thanks for sharing.

 

[citsalp]

Great job Spec, thanks for sharing.

Likewise

 

[Tick]

Part of the problem is that the perception that RBs are gold outstrips their actual value. Try trading for a top RB in a Z league. So while I agree that winning is possible without be loaded at RB, the position still dominates from a value-to-acquire perspective - either trading for, or drafting, them. Both startup drafts & rookie drafts are top heavy with RBs.

And actually that is part of the beauty of this dynamic.Which position is most viotile and has the most turnover in football?Running Backs.Owners are constantly chasing after fools gold and take great risks in total value trying to aquire them every year even with the odds stacked against them. Even when it is well known that the key to long term success is in quality QB and WR who last much longer.The dynamics of the scoring/starting positions in Zealots encourages trading and a shift in the balance of power between teams every year. I cannot think of a more challeging dynamic to remain a DYNASTY and be competitive team with a realistic shot at the title year in year out than this format offers.

Stellar post there.I've had good success building my Z teams through WRs and QBs. They're valuable for far longer and easier to get in the startup. RBs are valuable, but you can certainly win without good RBs.A team in one of my Z leagues went undefeated last season. His RBs at the beginning of the season were Westbrook and a bunch of scrubs. Still, he pieced together RBs every week from a group of castoffs who somehow found themselves in starting jobs: Tatum Bell, Ron Dayne, Sam Gado, Earnest Graham, Sammy Morris, Pierre Thomas, Darius Walker, and Selvin Young. That's a load of crap at the beginning of last season, but things worked out. I know he just as easily could have had Duckett, Chris Taylor, Ricky Williams, Ken Darby, Kevin Faulk, Aaron Stecker, and Andre Hall, but I see this happen all the time - I needed starters in a league where I'm RB poor last season and poof, strange guys became starters for me - Chester Taylor, Darius Walker, and Kevin Jones. This season, I'll have to hope that Brandon Jacobs stays healthy and avoids RBBC, DeAngelo Williams holds off Stewart, Chester Taylor gets some injury starts or TD vultures, Jason Wright gets some starts due to injury, Chris Brown fills in when Ahman Green is hurt, etc. The thing is, it always seems to work out. Pair that crap with Brady, Moss, Chad Johnson, Todd Heap (all from the initial draft four years ago and looking like they'll be valuable for the next three years still) plus a strong defense collected through the startup and waiver wire, and I should have a solid team again despite no reliable RBs.In another Z league, I had great RBs - top 10s Gore, Portis, and JLewis, backed by JJones and Cadillac, but when things didn't go well at other positions, I finished second-to-last.I'm sorry to bring in so much team-specific stuff here, but these are examples of a pattern I've seen in Zealots. RBs do not dominate as much as their price would make you think. If you can move RB11-24 for Larry Fitzgerald or Braylon Edwards, do it.At WR, there are more guys who score than at RB. However, they're harder to predict - starting at WR isn't much of a guarantee of point generation. At RB, if you can dig up a guy who's starting, you've got a very good shot at 10 points. At WR, if you get stuck choosing between Wade, Hilliard, Williamson, Porter, and Reggie Williams, you've got a very good shot at missing the one guy with a TD that week and ending up with 3 points. Get three good WRs (four if you can swing it), then fight to get cheap RBs who should produce if things fall right - they do more than people think, and at times they hold their value long-term (Graham, Grant).

 

[cpstorm]

any recent updates? drafting tomorrow...

 

[PewterFan]

any recent updates? drafting tomorrow...

I would check out the ADP shown here and adjust accordingly. For example, you might want to bump up Tim Hightower and drop Devin Thomas a bit.