What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Top 25 Rookies 2016 (1 Viewer)

EBF

Footballguy
All of my drafts are over and I thought I'd share some of my thoughts on this group of players. Overall, this is probably the weakest rookie crop that I can remember. I think a top 4 pick guarantees you a relatively strong prospect, but everything after that is a crapshoot. Here is how I see things for the average RB/WR heavy PPR league.

First Tier

1. RB Ezekiel Elliott, Cowboys - No surprises here. Elliott looks like a safe bet to become a three down starter. I would feel good about picking him here, but don't be surprised if he ends up being merely good rather than incredible. He has good speed for a bigger back, but is otherwise average in terms of explosiveness. He was not a huge big play threat in college, ranking average to slightly below average in terms of his ability to break off long runs. Basically, he may end up being more Mark Ingram than Adrian Peterson, but his high draft slot is extremely impressive and his big name recognition ensures that he'll have enduring trade value even if he stumbles out of the blocks. I like him enough to take him with the #1 pick and feel good about it. I would not look to trade him despite the concerns I outlined.

Second Tier

2. WR Laquon Treadwell, Vikings - Ugly combine numbers, but the tape tells a somewhat different story. Treadwell is actually very fast off the snap and has quick feet in his routes for a big/tall guy. He will not be a home run hitter in the NFL, but he can make a living all day as a reliable possession target on the short-intermediate stuff. I think he will be a solid #1 WR at the next level, albeit without the home run threat that other top receivers provide. More of a chain mover. He's still very young, which is an added plus. There may be more development left in the tank.

3. WR Corey Coleman, Browns - He has the production and athleticism you want in a WR. Some will question his situation and his size, but he's a good weight for his height and being the best receiver on a bad team can lead to a huge amount of targets. He fits the Antonio Brown mold as a waterbug type of receiver who is too explosive and athletic for corners to hang with. I don't view him as a lock, but he was the first WR drafted, his game clips are impressive, and he fits the bill in terms of measurables.

4. WR Josh Doctson, Redskins - He's an explosive leaper with great ball skills, height, and production. In terms of body type and style, AJ Green and Reggie Wayne are solid comparisons. Like those two, Docston has merely average speed and will not overwhelm people after the catch with quickness, explosiveness, or power. I found his tape less convincing than that of the two WRs ranked ahead of him here. I don't know if he'll be able to separate consistently against pro corners, but you have to respect the draft process and there's enough talent here to justify a top 4 pick in this class.

Third Tier

This is where things get ugly. While I'd generally feel okay about rostering any of my top 4 at his ADP, I can't say the same for the next tier. There's not a single player in this next group that I feel great about. In my opinion the difference in value between picks 4 and 5 is big whereas the difference in value between picks 5 and 14 is negligible. This is the worst I've ever felt about picks in the 1.06-1.12 range. There's just nothing there that excites me and I've generally sought to trade down (to no avail). With that out of the way...

5. RB Derrick Henry, Titans - For better or worse, this is one of the most unique backs to come along in a while. He is unusually tall with very long legs and a high-cut frame. The consequence of this is that he struggles to operate in small windows. That's typically a problem in the NFL, but Henry has nice lateral quickness in the open field and is a runaway locomotive when he hits his stride. Assuming that his team can give him a clean running lane, he could potentially do some great things. If the blocking breaks down, he will struggle to create on his own. He's not very proven as a receiver, which could limit his upside if he's unable to learn that facet of the game. Overall, he looks like a two down pounder with above average long speed and a boom-or-bust running style that will be heavily reliant on his team's ability to block for him. He has value, but carries considerable bust risk as well.

6. WR Will Fuller, Texans - Fuller's game is all about vertical explosiveness. He uses his low 4.3 speed to terrorize defenders deep. It only takes one lapse in coverage for Fuller to break a 40+ yard touchdown. This rare big play threat was likely the reason that the Texans selected Fuller. His other traits are average at best. He is very small and is not a reliable possession WR. Optimists will compare him to other slight speedsters like T.Y Hilton and DeSean Jackson. If he pans out, that's the type of receiver he might become. Naysayers will recognize similarities with Tedd Ginn, another first round pick with blazing speed who has failed to convert those traits into consistent receiving production. I find Fuller to be a limited player, but I also respect the draft slot enough not to bump him down too far below where the generic odds dictate he be.

7. WR Sterling Shepard, Giants - I like the production, workout numbers, and draft slot. I'm not wowed by his game clips though. He looks just okay to me. Nothing special. I'm not a fan of judging players by their school, but it may be worth mentioning that the Bob Stoops era of OU football has yielded a few of these undersized stat monsters who didn't thrive in the NFL (Mark Clayon, Ryan Broyles, etc). Although he's short, Shepard has a good weight for his height and can separate on a variety of routes. When I look at the total package, the player I'm most reminded of is Golden Tate. Tate has carved out a niche as a productive NFL player and Shepard could do the same. He can run every type of route and will be useful right away. He has a nice immediate opportunity as Beckham's sidekick.

8. WR Michael Thomas, Saints - Solid is the word that comes to mind when I think of Thomas. There's nothing I love about him. There's nothing I hate. He has above average height and decent strength. His agility is pretty good for a bigger guy. Overall, he looks like a solid #2 NFL WR without any single elite trait. His speed is just average and while he moves pretty well after the catch for a bigger WR, he's not truly dynamic in my estimation. I think he is a quality player with a modest upside that may depend on his supporting cast and usage to achieve strong statistical production. He reminds me of Arizona's Michael Floyd, but is more agile with less speed. I don't see him as a #1 NFL WR in a vacuum. More of a complementary piece. .

9. WR Tyler Boyd, Bengals - Boyd is one of those classic overachiever "football player" type of guys that scouts love. By NFL standards, he's a pedestrian athlete in terms of measurables. He has a slight frame, average speed, and no quantifiable explosiveness to speak of. However, he's a "gamer' type of guy like Randall Cobb or Keenan Allen whose on-field performance is greater than the sum of his athletic parts. He has excellent ball skills and body control. He will come down with tough catches in traffic. He was a jack-of-all-trades for Pittsburgh and they leaned on him heavilty. Still, I'm not very high on the overall package. I think his lack of standout physical traits will likely relegate him to a supporting role. His lack of explosion/strength will make it much harder for him to find separation against the superior DBs in the NFL. He has a chance to become a plus version of Marvin Jones if it works out, but he is lacking some of the ingredients of a #1 pro receiver.

10. QB Jared Goff, Rams - I've gone back-and-forth on the Wentz/Goff debate throughout the last week or two. Wentz has better size and athletic ability. Goff is the more refined and instinctive passer. Neither guy appears to be the total package, but history has shown us that the NFL is prone to overrating "tools" quarterbacks who lack great passing production and instincts (i.e. Kyle Boller, Vince Young, Jake Locker). Wentz seems better than those guys and may ultimately develop into a Bortles/Roethlisberger, but most people seem to agree that Goff is more proven and developed as a passer. That gives him the edge for me right now.

11. QB Carson Wentz, Eagles - Although there are some risk factors (production, age, level of competition), he seems to have a high ceiling and could become a top 5 dynasty QB if he can achieve his full potential. I like him here instead of the remaining second tier RBs and WRs, who seem quite mediocre.

12. TE Hunter Henry, Chargers - Henry isn't quite the athlete that recent TE prospects like Tyler Eifert and Eric Ebron were, and that's likely why he slid out of the first round of the NFL draft. He doesn't quite have the same explosiveness or precision of movement. On the other hand, he's still very mobile for his size and offers strong receiving skills to go along with his other attributes. While I don't see him dominating in the NFL, he strikes me as the type of guy who can yield years of solid mid-low level TE1 production. I think his floor is Kyle Rudolph while his ceiling is Jason Witten. Owners looking to hit a solid single or double instead of swinging for the fences on a mediocre RB/WR here should look towards Henry for a safe selection.

13. RB Kenyan Drake, Dolphins - Drake is a very unconventional back who offers some clear strengths and weaknesses. On the plus side, he possesses excellent speed and is a fluid and springy runner on the edges. Despite having long and gangly legs, he shows quick feet and good lateral agility. With his height and speed, he offers a unique dimension as a pass catcher. He can flex out wide and be used as a moving chess piece by his offensive coordinator. On the downside, Drake has a tall and lean frame with very long legs that make it hard for him to generate power in tight quarters. Most of his big plays in college came around the edge. When asked to do the dirty work up the middle, Drake seems like more of a feast-or-famine proposition. He suffered some injuries in college and may not have the right body type or durability to be an every-down guy. I think he is more likely to be a committee back than a real workhorse, but there's enough compelling traits here to justify a pick at or even above his rookie draft ADP. He was the third RB chosen and goes to a team with no proven starter. A David Johnson type of rookie year is possible, albeit far from guaranteed.

14. RB CJ Prosise, Seahawks - Prosise is a lot like Drake. Both look more like WRs than RBs at times. While Drake offers more "wow" factor and is a more elastic runner, Prosise is more compact and powerful, and may ultimately have a higher ceiling if he can hone the rough edges of his game. While he flashes good quickness at times, Prosise is not consistently decisive or elusive with his movements. He can be a hesitant runner. Despite weighing 220+ pounds, Prosise is not a particularly authoritative or powerful back. I've seen him compared to Matt Forte and David Johnson, but both backs were more consistent in demonstrating loose hips and elusiveness in college. The Seahawks are a good organization and they claim to have a clear plan for Prosise, which is very intriguing. There's a lot of upside here, but when I watch his highlights I am not yet convinced that he's more than a gadget player. I would draft him, but I wouldn't reach much higher than this to do so.

15. WR Leonte Carroo, Dolphins - An efficiency stats monster who physically looks the part of an NFL WR, Carroo offers a solid blend of size and explosiveness. While he only ran a 4.50 at the combine, his game speed seems much better and he was one of the best deep threats in college football last season. A whopping 30.8% of his catches in 2015 went for 20 or more yards. On the down side, he lacks height and length. He has short arms and a somewhat small catch radius. While explosive in a straight line, his east-west quickness is just average. Overall, Carroo's game is reminiscent of someone like Pierre Garcon. I think he can be a productive pro and he may have a higher FF ceiling than Shepard or Thomas. Has some character issues.

Fourth Tier

This is what you might call the "flawed, but worth a punt tier". All of these guys have issues, but they're all players that I harbor at least some interest in and would be interested in owning for the right price.

16. RB Kenneth Dixon, Ravens - Dixon is a solid back with no glaring weaknesses and no exceptional traits. He was a productive four year player at Louisiana Tech and offers enough power and mobility to step in and produce serviceable numbers as a rookie. For better or worse, he could be the Zac Stacy of this class. I think he has all the talent needed to be competent if thrust into duty. The issue with backs like this is that they have nothing to differentiate them from competition, so they struggle to win and keep starting roles. I could see taking Dixon higher than this if you were desperate for immediate production and/or if you had the mindset to flip him the minute his stock pops like Stacy's did, but his market price is a bit too rich for my taste. He usually goes between 6-10 in my drafts, which seems too high. I don't believe that he has starter talent in a vacuum, so what you're really buying is the opportunity, and opportunity in the NFL tends not to last very long for mediocre players. What happened in St. Louis with Stacy (and later Mason) is a great example.

17. QB Paxton Lynch, Denver - I didn't spend much time evaluating QBs this year and don't have much to say about Lynch besides the obvious. Big guy with NFL caliber athletic tools and solid college production in a gimmicky system. He is regarded as a raw prospect with a high ceiling who may need years to reach a decent level. Overall, he comes across as a slightly better version of the QB Denver let walk in the offseason: Brock Osweiler. Most people think Lynch has the talent to develop into a starter and the Broncos (and Cowboys) liked him enough to spend a first round pick on him, so I feel fine taking him off the board here after all the quality RB/WR prospects are spoken for.

18. WR Moritz Boehringer, Vikings - Most of the prospects in this range are mediocre talents with low ceilings. For those seeking boom-or-bust upside, Boehringer is an intriguing proposition. The German import has never played football against high level competition and his story comes across as a bit of a publicity stunt, but the athletic parts are intriguing and his 6th round draft slot is relatively impressive given his total lack of experience. This is a big target with rare speed who shows some signs of potentially becoming a capable route runner in the future. He'll be extremely raw out of the box and may struggle to even make the roster, but...the upside here is tremendous if he happens to achieve his full potential. A 5-10% chance of a top 15 dynasty WR is worth the price of admission here to me. One way or another, we'll look back on this ranking and laugh, because he'll probably either hit big or crash out entirely.

19. RB Jonathan Williams, Bills - Williams is my favorite of this year's day three backs. He has good size at 220 pounds and shows rare foot quickness for a big back, effortlessly evading would-be tacklers with quick lateral movement. He was drafted in the same general range as players like Booker, Perkins, Washington, and Howard despite sitting out the entire college season, which says something about his talent level compared with those other players. Although he didn't catch the ball often in college, I think he has a skill set that will make him a good receiving back. So what's the catch? Well Williams is a one speed runner who struggles to break big plays. He can make people miss in a phone booth, but he lacks the north-south explosiveness to fully exploit this talent. He ran in the 4.6 range at his pro day and did not break a lot of long runs at Arkansas. He would be natural replacement for LeSean McCoy given the considerable overlap in their skill sets, but a future starting spot is far from guaranteed.

20. WR Pharoh Cooper, Rams - I love him as a football player, but I don't know if his skill set will translate into pro success. He's athletic in the same sense that guys like Jeremy Hill and Austin Seferian-Jenkins are athletic, which is to say that he has very fluid and agile lower body movement despite being a "soft body" overall. There's minimal exlosiveness here and he seems to run heavy. He's probably just a slot guy in the NFL, which limits his upside unless he gets lots and lots of looks. That being said, he's another one of those classic "football player" types that you can't completely write off. You can point to Randall Cobb and Jarvis Landry for optimistic comparisons, but those guys were 2nd round picks despite their warts whereas pro teams let Cooper slide all the way to the late 4th. I like his game, but he has to be viewed as a longshot with a modest ceiling.

Fifth Tier

The next few players tend to get picked ahead of other prospects that I like more, which is the main reason why none of them have ended up on any of my rosters. I feel that several players in this tier are among the most overrated in rookie drafts based on their ADP.

21. WR Braxton Miller, Texans - In theory he should be higher because the Texans spent a day two pick on him despite his limited experience at the position. Optimists may see a bit of Hines Ward in his build, skill set, and background. Miller is a very athletic player who can do fun things with the ball in space. However, his speed is just average and I don't know that he has the special athletic qualities required to thrive as an outside WR. I see his destiny as being in the slot, and slot WRs typically aren't premium FF assets. These factors have led me to believe that Miller's rookie draft ADP should be quite a bit lower than where his NFL draft slot and position would dictate alone.

22. RB Wendell Smallwood, Eagles - Smallwood is a graceful slasher with good quickness and agility. I think he's a better athlete than comparable NFL picks like Booker, Howard, and Perkins. He shows some nice flashes in terms of his footwork and cuts. At the same time, he lacks power and bulk. He tends to go down pretty easily on contact and will struggle to finish runs in the NFL. There are things I like about him, but I ultimately expect him to plateau as a backup at the next level.

23. RB DeAndre Washington, Raiders - I wrote a lot about this guy throughout his college career and am generally a fan of his game. He has very good cutting ability and elusiveness, which is one of the most important traits for a back trying to make the jump to the NFL. On the other hand, he's not very big or fast. The track record of sub 210 pound backs with ordinary speed and explosiveness is not great. When I look at Washington, my hunch is that he'll end up being a third down/committee back in the NFL. So while I like him and think he can produce in spurts, I'm inclined to believe that he'll end up as a complementary player in the NFL and not a long-term starter.

24. RB Paul Perkins, Giants - Perkins is the dime store Marshawn Lynch and even wears the same number as the former Cal/Seahawk great. Like Lynch, Perkins runs with springy east-west quickness. However, Perkins doesn't have Lynch's power or speed. At 5'10" and 208 pounds with 4.54 speed in the 40, Perkins falls into a "dead zone" of NFL backs, being too small to win with power and too slow to win with speed. His 5th round draft slot and lack of explosive plays in college are further testament to his mediocrity. I don't think he's a starter in the NFL, but Andre Williams has been a bust and Rashad Jennings is not an exceptional player. There's some opportunity in New York for Perkins if he can step in and surprise people. I do not think he is likely to hold much long-term FF value though.

25. RB Devontae Booker, Broncos - Booker is kind of like the poor man's version of Arian Foster. He's a versatile back who offers some quickness, power, and receiving ability. Booker was not healthy enough to work out for scouts at the combine or his pro day, but the results likely wouldn't have been amazing. Booker offers very little explosiveness and is a marginal fast-twitch athlete. Booker is similar to previous Broncos RB draft busts Montee Ball and Ronnie Hillman in the sense of being a statistical overachiever who lacks elite physical traits for the pro game. I think he's strictly a backup in the NFL, but if CJ Anderson departs Denver then he may get a chance to fill that gap and prove himself.

OTHER PLAYERS:

QB Christian Hackenberg, Jets - Dreadful college stats seem to cancel out high draft slot. Seemingly has no instincts.

QB Jacoby Brissett, Patriots - Playing the New England QB roulette hasn't worked for me in the past (Kevin O'Connell, Ryan Mallett, and Jimmy Garopollo). We're still waiting for the "next Brady" and we might be waiting forever, but Brissett comes really cheap in rookie drafts and has good character/athletic traits. Worth a shot in deep leagues where you can get him for nothing. Not worth holding in shallow leagues.

RB Alex Collins, Seahawks - Overrated in college and may struggle to make the roster.

RB Jordan Howard, Bears - Big back with sloppy movement. He's a poor man's Rashard Mendenhall, which basically makes him the same player as Jonas Gray. Gray hasn't made it as a starter in the NFL and I don't think Howard will either. I was not surprised to see Howard slip in the draft because his clips were unimpressive.

RB Darius Jackson, Cowboys - Combine freak who tests athletic, but doesn't show fluidity on the field. I'm not expecting much from him, but if you can get him for a waiver spot then there's no harm in it.

RB Daniel Lasco, Saints - I don't like his clips that much, but he doesn't look bad necessarily and the workout numbers are interesting. He's an athletic guy. Worth a last round flyer or waiver pickup.

WR Tyreek Hill, Chiefs - Peanut brain with suspect character and a tweener skill set. He's probably just a return man in the NFL if he sticks, but his speed and explosiveness are otherworldly. He may not be the same caliber of football player, but in purely athletic terms he's a better version of Tavon Austin or Brandin Cooks.

WR Kenny Lawler, Seahawks - He has great agility and his ability to adjust with the ball in the air might be the best in this WR class. He reminds me of Tyler Boyd in terms of ball skills and body control. However, he has a lean frame with just average explosiveness. He will need to battle for every reception, but there's Stevie Johnson potential if it clicks right. I don't expect him to make the team though. He should've stayed in school and tried to get bigger/faster.

WR Kolby Listenbee, Bills - Listenbee is a player with a pretty clear set of positives and negatives. On the plus side, he's one of the fastest receivers you will ever see, with times in the 10.0x range in the 100m. That speed translated into great per-target stats at the college level. Listenbee only caught 30 passes last year for TCU, but 9 of them went for 25+ yards. In 2014 he caught 41 passes, with 13 gains of 25+ yards. To put those numbers into perspective, his "big play percentage" of 31.0% over the past two seasons compares favorably to what elite deep threat Will Fuller did for Notre Dame in 2015 (Fuller had a big play % of 27.4%). Listenbee's per-target production is reminiscent of the player he most reminds me of: Mike Wallace. In his final season at Ole Miss, Wallace had 39 receptions with 10 long gains for a big play percentage of 25.6%. Wallace at Ole Miss caught 101 passes for 1910 yards (18.9 YPR) with a TD every 6.7 receptions. Listenbee at TCU caught 74 passes for 1432 yards (19.4 YPR)  and a TD every 8.2 receptions. One thing that separates him from a lot of pure sprinter types is his aggressiveness with the ball in the air. Unlike past Bills track guys like Marquise Goodwin and TJ Graham, Listenbee has real ball skills and can win in a crowd. So what's the catch? Well, Mike Wallace was a third round pick whereas Listenbee slid all the way to the sixth. Neither player is a fluid athlete or a good route runner. Listenbee has poor lateral movement, balance, and change-of-direction. His movement is flat out ugly at times. Like Wallace, he needs the right system to hide his flaws and accentuate his strengths. He will never be a complete #1 WR, but he has a skill set that could lead to FF relevance if things break right for him.

TE Thomas Duarte, Dolphins - A poor man's Jordan Reed who is nominally a TE, but will really function more like a WR. He was productive in college and has adequate athletic ability to produce good stats if the team commits to him.

TE Austin Hooper, Falcons - I'm a Stanford fan and I don't like him very much. IMO not a very good athlete. Good ball skills, but marginal size and mobility. I think he can have value in deep leagues, but I'm not very high on him.

 
I always think who you own is one of the best indicators of who you really like, so here are my ownership totals after 7 drafts:

MORITZ BOEHRINGER - 5

HUNTER HENRY - 4

CARSON WENTZ - 3
KOLBY LISTENBEE - 3

KENYAN DRAKE - 2
EZEKIEL ELLIOTT - 2
JARED GOFF - 2

PAXTON LYNCH - 1
LAQUON TREADWELL - 1
JONATHAN WILLIAMS - 1

Here are my totals from 8 drafts in 2015:

TY MONTGOMERY - 7

PHILLIP DORSETT - 6
DEANDRE SMELTER - 6

GARRETT GRAYSON - 4

KEVIN WHITE - 3

AMEER ABDULLAH - 1
AMARI COOPER - 1
STEFON DIGGS - 1
MICHAEL DYER - 1
DEVIN FUNCHESS - 1
MELVIN GORDON - 1

And 2014:

ERIC EBRON - 5

TRE MASON - 4
ALLEN ROBINSON - 4

BLAKE BORTLES - 1
MIKE EVANS - 1
JIMMY GAROPPOLO - 1
JEREMY HILL - 1
JERICK MCKINNON - 1
DONTE MONCRIEF - 1
PAUL RICHARDSON - 1
LACHE SEASTRUNK - 1
TERRANCE WEST - 1
ANDRE WILLIAMS - 1

 
I always look forward to your rankings because your approach and opinions mimic mine almost identically.  I agree with most of your list but where I mainly waiver is with Perkins.  I do like Perkins for where you can get him, but I actually drafted Tyler Ervin ahead of him (could have had Perkins) in one 16 team dynasty.  Here's my picks from that draft.  16 team ppr, non-IDP:

2.01 - Jared Goff

2.09 - Tyler Ervin

4.13 - Daniel Lasco

5.10 - Darius Jackson

5.13 - Tyreek Hill

 
Third Tier

This is where things get ugly. While I'd generally feel okay about rostering any of my top 4 at his ADP, I can't say the same for the next tier. There's not a single player in this next group that I feel great about. In my opinion the difference in value between picks 4 and 5 is big whereas the difference in value between picks 5 and 14 is negligible. This is the worst I've ever felt about picks in the 1.06-1.12 range. There's just nothing there that excites me and I've generally sought to trade down (to no avail). With that out of the way...
The more opinions I read the more I think I'm on an island, but I really like Shep and Thomas.  I don't think either of them have top 10 upside at their position, but I think both have very high floors and could easily provide WR2 numbers across several seasons.  I think they represent a tier in between the top 4 and the next group.  From a talent perspective I like Carroo more than both, but not enough to vault him over those two due to his situation.  Barring injury, it's going to be a long wait for him to be a consistent every week starter.  I'd think passing in rookie drafts then looking to buy him later is the right move.  

I have a few others in that pile of players you have ranked 6-25 (plus Listenbee) I seem to like more than most, but generally speaking I agree with you (and most others) about this class.  I'm left underwhelmed.  It's a good year to be in the top half of round 1, but if possible you want to avoid late round 1/early round 2 then see what slips.  

I'm in two idp dynasty's.  In one I got Treadwell at 1.3, Coleman at 1.4, Myles Jack at 1.6, Shep at 1.11, Fuller at 2.11 (then traded him for a 2017 #2), and H Henry at 3.8.  In the other I used 1.8, 1.10, 2.5, 2.7, and 2.10 to get picks 1.2 (Docston), 1.5 (Treadwell), and a #3 next year.

EDIT: good stuff, per usual. :thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good analysis.   This is the least excited about a draft class I have ever seen you.

I'm a Shepard fan.   Hoping for Nicks/Cruz production from ODB/Shepard.

 
Good analysis.   This is the least excited about a draft class I have ever seen you.
:yes:

I think it's objectively weak. Let's look at the number of skill players drafted in the top 100:


 


QB


RB


WR


TE


2016


7


4


9


3


2015


4


8


14


4


2014


5


8


15


7


2013


4


6


11


6


2012


7


8


15


3


2011


7


8


11


3


2010


4


7


13


5


 
Since the top 100 picks tend to be where the majority of good players come from, they'll usually be pretty representative of a draft's depth and quality. Here we see that 2016 is possibly the worst class in years at the two most important positions in most FF leagues: RB and WR. The TE group is also really lackluster, with just three day two picks and no first round guys. On paper it's a contender for worst TE class of the past 5-6 years. The only positional group that looks decent is QB.

Just thinking about it in terms of rookie picks, the 2015 class was 30 players deep with top 100 skill players. So if you held any top 30 rookie draft pick, you were guaranteed at least one skill position player who was a top 100 NFL draft pick. The 2014 class was a whopping 35 players deep with quality prospects. This year it's only 23 players deep. So even by the end of the 2nd round in a typical 12 team league, you're not guaranteed a top 100 NFL draft pick. In practice you still stand a chance to get a decent prospect there due to the widespread reaching on the 4th-5th round RBs, but generally speaking you're getting less bang for your buck with your picks this year. There's a halfway decent argument that a 3rd round rookie pick in 2014 had the same value as a 2nd round rookie pick in 2016.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you missed Malcolm Mitchell.  He belongs in tier 4 (imo).
Not really my type of guy, to be honest. Average size. Pretty good speed, but not amazing. Production was not spectacular in college. Five year college player who will be 24 as a rookie. Mediocre draft slot. Doesn't wow me from an eyeball test standpoint. I think people look at the New England offense and get excited, but they've whiffed on a lot of draft picks at WR (Tate, Price, Dobson, Boyce). This guy looks like he can play a bit, but I don't see him being a smash hit.

He has gone between 10-20 in all of my drafts. I think that's too high.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
 I think people look at the New England offense and get excited
Ben VolinVerified account@BenVolin


I’m told #Patriots WR Malcolm Mitchell declined to attend the NFLPA Rookie Premiere so he could stay home and study his playbook
Color me biased, but I like the kid. Waldman called him landing in NE, and I agree with his position, compares him to Maclin. I think give him a year and Dola will be on the outs, enter Mitchell.

Hes a kid that showed up his freshman year and was illiterate. While in college, taught himself how to read, wrote and published a book. That takes a lot of things that make good football players great.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not bad list but I don't like D-Henry I would not take him in any of my leagues over Shepard or a few of the other WR's I don't even think Henry is in my top 3 rookie backs this year.  He doesn't catch passes that kills you in PPR.

QBs are too high those guys are a dime a dozen in most of my leagues maybe you play in different formats but unless your getting a top 5 stud QB you can get guys off the waiver wire every year who are decent in the FFPC.

Agree with your top 4 but not a fan of Fuller at all reminds me too much of D-Jax and that is his upside I think and in PPR that's marginal startable player those 2 for 25's kill you week to week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really my type of guy, to be honest. Average size. Pretty good speed, but not amazing. Production was not spectacular in college. Five year college player who will be 24 as a rookie. Mediocre draft slot. Doesn't wow me from an eyeball test standpoint. I think people look at the New England offense and get excited, but they've whiffed on a lot of draft picks at WR (Tate, Price, Dobson, Boyce). This guy looks like he can play a bit, but I don't see him being a smash hit.

He has gone between 10-20 in all of my drafts. I think that's too high.
Fwiw, I took him at 1.27 in a recent draft, 8 idp went before him, so 19th offensive player.  Obviously I think that's decent value.  I actually like Pharoh Cooper a lot but his upside seems a lot lower than Mitchel. 

 
Not bad list but I don't like D-Henry I would not take him in any of my leagues over Shepard or a few of the other WR's I don't even think Henry is in my top 3 rookie backs this year.  He doesn't catch passes that kills you in PPR.

QBs are too high those guys are a dime a dozen in most of my leagues maybe you play in different formats but unless your getting a top 5 stud QB you can get guys off the waiver wire every year who are decent in the FFPC.
I don't like Henry very much either, but he was a 2nd round pick, has a big brand name, and will get opportunities. If I had faith that he would succeed then he would be in my second tier, but I also view him as a risk. He will really struggle if they can pressure the backfield and force him to improvise in small windows, because he's really limited in tight quarters. If they block well for him, he can do some good things. That sounds like Andre Williams and so far Andre has been a big bust, but you have to trust in the NFL draft process to a certain extent and they said Henry was worth a top 60 pick. Part of the reason why I put him so high is because I'm very lukewarm on these 2nd-3rd round WRs. I don't see a player that I really like in that whole Shepard/Thomas/Boyd/Carroo cluster. I would be happy to own any of them, but my confidence in their likelihood of becoming prime FF assets is quite low. They mostly look like complementary guys.

The QB thing is something that I wrestle with every year in my drafts. Do you take a guy like Goff or Wentz, knowing that he might never be more than a fringe FF starter, or do you take guys like Booker and Perkins who are likely to be out of football in 3-4 years? A lot of the QBs who have become FF standouts weren't necessarily hailed as such when they were rookies. Rodgers and Newton come to mind right off the bat. Both would've fallen to the 2nd round of most rookie drafts and would've been tremendous value in hindsight. Russell Wilson was a tremendous value in rookie drafts in hindsight. This has happened with highly-drafted QBs before and it will happen again. League dynamics are a big factor, but overall I think at some point you have to bite the bullet and draft the best player available, even if it's at a non-premium position. Since I'm not very high on this year's 2nd-3rd+ round RB/WR, that could be as high as around #8 for me or as low as #15-16 for Goff/Wentz depending on team needs and league format. What I said about Henry also applies to these guys: although I don't love them, I don't love the guys behind them either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not bad list but I don't like D-Henry I would not take him in any of my leagues over Shepard or a few of the other WR's I don't even think Henry is in my top 3 rookie backs this year.  He doesn't catch passes that kills you in PPR.
I like Henry a lot for the Titans but your point about ppr is spot on.  Even Eddie George (Henry's upside) wouldn't have been a stud in ppr.

 
Fwiw, I took him at 1.27 in a recent draft, 8 idp went before him, so 19th offensive player.  Obviously I think that's decent value.  I actually like Pharoh Cooper a lot but his upside seems a lot lower than Mitchel. 
FWIW, I didn't end up with Cooper on any teams either. He goes higher than where I'd feel good about picking him, and tends to be picked ahead of players that I like more. He stands out to me more in his highlights than Mitchell does. Cooper is strictly a slot WR though. He doesn't project well outside and thus will require a truckload of targets to be a strong FF option. It could happen, but I don't view it as likely. He's a guy that I like more as a real life player than as a fantasy football commodity.

 
Correct on Rodgers and Newton.  Newton was kind of a shock to me blew up from his 1st NFL game ever.  Rodgers on the other hand would have only worked in leagues with bigger rosters or leagues with taxi squads because he did nothing for like 3 years or whatever it was.  In the FFPC dyno's you only have 20 man rosters and have to cut down to 14 position players every Feb 28th so A-Rodgers would not even have been on rosters for years.  FFPC was not around back when he was a rookie and I was only in 1 dyno back then and we have taxi squads so he was a steal in the 3rd round for sure.  Sometimes you get lucky though when picking guys you don't know they are going to be a Foster, Bradshaw, Vincent Jackson, Brandon Marshall ect until you draft them sit on them a year or two then they do well for a long time.  Those guys I just listed were all 3rd round or later picks in my rookie draft back in the day.  Many others like that as well so taking a QB deprives you of those chances on the flip side I took Bortles in 2 leagues in 3rd as well and pretty happy about that now.

 
Mobo certainly getting a lot of love in the boards. "5-10% chance of a top 15 wr" forgot the decimals- .05-.10% maybe. No xp, and plays in pass unhappy Minnesota. If rather take undrafted keyarris Garrett on a Carolina team that has questionable wr depth. He was the leading wr last year and you left him completely off- i understand the "drafted vs undrafted" arguement but but sometimes guys land in good situations and are worth a flier. 

Any thoughts on tahje sharpe? On the surface he struck me as a guy with an nfl skill set but needs to add 15-20 lbs, but runs good routes and good hands. A year in an nfl weight room and maybe there's something there?

 
I'm going to post my non ppr list, which couldn't be much further from EBF's.  Whereas his primary thoughts are talent and will he still be in the league in 5 years, I put a much bigger emphasis than he does on situation, especially for running backs because their shelf lives are so short and their success is so dependent on immediate opportunity.   I'm also more interested in upside - can this guy be the number one receiver on his team?   Can this guy be a 3 down back? 

Lastly I put an emphasis on rbs and wrs over qb/te - I generally prefer to trade for veteran qbs and tight ends that are already successful instead of paying almost as much for guys who might be successful long term. If you're going to spend five first round picks looking for the next Aaron Rodgers,  just spend four first round picks to get Aaron Rodgers. 

1. Elliott - consensus 1.1, no discussion needed. 

2. Derrick Henry - remember these are non ppr rankings.  His combination of physical talent and skill is probably better than Elliott's.  His situation isn't nearly as good and he might not start right away but when you have a chance to get an elite talent at a scarce position you do it. 

3. Coleman - could be a legitimate fantasy star this year.  His quickness is as elite as Treadwell's receiving talent but his speed is a slight edge over Treadwell's size 

4. Treadwell - should be the top receiver for the Vikings for years,  and will be a red zone machine.  No reason for him to ever come off the field in any package. 

5. Doctson - leaping and catching ability are outstanding and the team clearly thought he was bpa considering they were already heavily invested at wr. 

6. Kenneth Dixon - has better burst than long speed,  but ran a 4.46 at the combine.  Unfortunately he also ran a 4.56 and 4.66.  Outstanding receiving ability.  Finishes runs strong and always falls forward.  Immediate opportunity to start for trestman, who is a near perfect fit for his skills.   

7. Michael Thomas - he has an immediate opportunity to become the number one receiver in New Orleans.  Cooks is very good but he struggled when asked to be their number one.  Thomas has more receiving talent than Colston and probably more than graham - if he develops his receiving skills to go along with that talent he could be a stud. 

8. Paul Perkins - immediate opportunity to start for a top NFL offense.  Seems like a good fit for mcadoo.  Elite elusiveness - got the highest grade from pff.  Power and long speed aren't elite but not bad.   Good receiving and while he's not big,  he's not too small to be used in the red area. 

9. Hunter Henry - I don't like taking tight ends early,  and Henry is going to be the number two on his own team while gates pursues nfl records. But Henry is going to learn from one of the best,  in a plus situation,  and has very low bust potential with good upside.  Consider that the big debate about him before the draft was whether or not he dropped a single ball this year, he ran the 40 faster than gronk, and he landed in a top situation for tight ends. 

10. Prosise - the upside of being the top rb for Seattle is enticing,  and he was drafted early.  Should have a role right away as a receiving option.   But I'm not sold  Yes he was drafted fairly early compared to the other backs.  But he wasn't drafted early per se - he was a 3rd round pick,  and a unique hybrid player who Carroll envisions using to go from 5 wide to pro set.  He's very raw,  and probably won't be a quality nfl runner until he gets more experience, but he's going to be spending valuable practice time at wide receiver.  I think he is good enough to stay in the NFL longterm but he might never be a top fantasy back in non ppr.

11. Booker - I had him 4th predraft, after elliot Henry and Dixon, but it was a fairly big step down.  He's a banger who can catch - if he gets the volume he could be a stud.  The problem is I'm not convinced he will get the volume and he's an old enough rookie that you're investing more in immediate success than you are with guys like Perkins and Dixon. The upside is obviously that you could get the Denver running back - but i think something like 200 carries at 4.5 ypc with 30 receptions for 250 and 7 tds would be a really successful season for him in a committee but it's really mediocre as a fantasy upside. 

12. Howard - he's probably the best rb for the bears.  There's a good chance he will lead the team in carries and touchdowns this year or next.  He isn't really dynamic and not much of a receiver, but he could be a rb2 as soon as this year.  In October he could be considered one of the top backs in this class, or he could be Alfred blue. 

13. Drake - If he didn't have a chance to start I would rank him lower.  Not a fan of his game at the nfl level and I don't see him as a long term starter.  But ajayi is hardly entrenched, the dolphins did try to bring in other backs to ostensibly start ahead of Ajayi, and the dolphins took him relatively high among rbs in this class.  Unfortunately,  I think they settled on replacing Lamar miller with a lesser version of Lamar miller and seeing what happens.  And with their efforts to get a rb this off season,  I think the odds are higher than most other teams that they will pursue another rb next year unless one of these guys really breaks out. 

14. Sterling shepard. This will ruffle feathers I'm sure,  but in non ppr, I see him as a potential wr2, not a potential wr1.  He looks like a very good receiver and might be more talented than Thomas,  who I have ranked much higher, but he's not going to be the wr1 on his own team now or in the foreseeable future.  If Cruz comes back strong - which people seem to have written off a little too much imo - he might not even be the wr2 on his own team for a while.  I think he will have a much bigger impact in the nfl and in ppr leagues than non ppr.

15. Fuller - if you're not going to be the wr1, being the deep threat is a good route to fantasy success.   65 catches at 17 ypc with 9 tds would be a borderline wr1 in non ppr.  Would feel better with a better qb.

16. Boyd - I like boyd more than most.  I like Dalton more than most.  But aj green,  eifert, gio, hill... there are too many options for him to establish himself as a fantasy wr1 when he's the team's wr2.  

17. Wentz - he's ok. It's hard to see him as a top 5 fantasy qb right away.  They have OK receivers and no picks to improve them.  He does run ok and they ostensibly have a qb friendly coach but I'm not really excited to draft the next OK fantasy starter at qb.  There's just too much supply.  Ok.

18. DeAndre Washington - If I had been high on him at all predraft, I might like him here.  He has an opportunity to play and to compete with a guy who isn't setting the world on fire.   He's on a good, improving, young team.  He can catch the ball and could be a yardage guy if he gets the volume but probably won't be the td guy.   Good flyer at this point. 

19. Keith Marshall - speed and opportunity.  If he seemed like a good running back I'd rank him higher.  It's certainly possible he carves out a significant role or even takes over as starter for Washington, and that's not a bad offense to own a part of.   I'm just not sold on him as a player. 

20. Austin hooper - good receiving tight end, bad blocker,  and ended up in a spot with a good qb where they need a receiving option and they have had success at tight end.  I hate drafting tight ends or I'd probably move him up a couple spots.

21. Goff - the number one pick and he has a good running game which should protect him enough to get qb2 production early.  I'm not scared of fisher, I'm scared of Gurley.  Name some elite running backs.  Peterson,  Charles, Mccoy, Lynch, Tomlinson, Foster, lj, priest, Terrell Davis, Faulk, Martin,  Shaun Alexander, Emmitt, Barry... now name the qbs they played with.  How many had top 5 seasons?   Rivers was borderline. Hasselbeck with Alexander for a little bit.  Warner,  but Faulk was contributing to Warner's numbers more than Gurley will for goff. I just don't see elite upside unless he is an absolutely outstanding player who just flew under the radar. 

22. Lynch - I like the immediate upside of playing with good receivers and a qb friendly team, it's just a case of when he is ready to start and whether he's good enough.   The Browns,  jets,  and almost every qb needy team passed on him in the first, which isn't necessarily an indictment,  but it might be a while before this project pans out. 

23. Pharoah cooper - there's an opening for a wr1. I don't particularly like cooper or the rams passing game,  and I don't think he's cut out for wr1 workload, but he has an opportunity to be a contributor. 

24. Tyler Ervin - I guess I'll take a backup running back.  I don't see him unseating the guy they just spent big money on but betting against a smaller rb staying healthy isn't a bad bet. 

25. Wendell smallwood - I had no idea who this guy was going into the draft.  Now it looks like he might be the backup to Ryan Mathews.  The good news is Mathews doesn't have the best track record for health.  The bad news is Smallwood and the Eagles both probably suck.  If ebf had only listed 24 players I would have gladly left him off. 

Honorable mentions

Higbee (I hate drafting tight ends)

Braxton miller (I hate athletic project wrs and hate everything about his situation)

Carroo (parker good,  Landry good,  tannehill bad.  Awful situation,  no interest in buying and holding)

Alex Collins (maybe he can take half the starting job away from rawls.  More likely he's the backup to rawls' role, whatever that is,  and he would still split time with prosise if rawls went down)

Jonathan Williams  (probably very talented but you have to wait for mccoy to retire so he can back up Karlos Williams.  Yuck.)

Daniel lasco - unheralded running backs have had success with Payton before

Josh Ferguson - undrafted, but only has to beat out the ghost of Frank Gore and turbin. Worth a flyer. 

Rashard Higgins - outside shot that he develops into a starting wr in Cleveland.  Might even be the wr1.  He's like a suckier version of Treadwell - good production, bad speed.   

Not mentioned on purpose - the receivers in Kansas City and New England and the German guy.  Would be surprised if the 3 of them combine for 1000 yards in their first 2 years.   

 
I think I'm a lot higher on Derrick Henry than most people, which is surprising to me considering how I felt about him generally going in to researching the top guys for this draft. I was definitely of the mind that Henry was overrated when people were arguing that he might be the best back in the class (which was always a minority, but there were discussions to be had), but I think the feelings on Henry have swung too far into the negative. I had to laugh at the articles that popped up in the last few days that have been railing on Henry for having "bad footwork" due to some viral videos of him failing at his first attempts at a RB drill at minicamp. Chad Spann via Matt Waldman's site explains how little that means better than I ever could. Henry is somewhat of a unique case in terms of size and talent (as EBF alluded to) which can be a scary proposition when trying to evaluate a player's future fantasy value, but I'm a believer in his talent as a RB rather than just a large athlete playing RB. 

I think we'd all have preferred that he landed in a spot where he was likely to be the unquestioned lead back, but I think he's got a very good chance to contribute this year in a meaningful way and I think Murray will be on the outs before next season. I think his floor is similar to Brandon Jacobs, but I think he's much better at the skills of being a RB than Jacobs was and is built more like a LB rather than a DE, so I see a higher upside fantasy-wise. However, as EBF said with Elliot, he very well might just be "OK" rather than great, but given the overall weakness of this class, I'm OK with that. Overall, I'd put Henry solidly in the second tier of EBF's rankings and as high as #2 depending on roster needs. 

 
After looking for this thread again, keyarris Garrett probably doesn't apply to "top 25 rookies" but maybe honorable mention. Thanks for the reading material fellas 

 
I don't like Henry very much either, but he was a 2nd round pick, has a big brand name, and will get opportunities. If I had faith that he would succeed then he would be in my second tier, but I also view him as a risk. He will really struggle if they can pressure the backfield and force him to improvise in small windows, because he's really limited in tight quarters. If they block well for him, he can do some good things. That sounds like Andre Williams and so far Andre has been a big bust, but you have to trust in the NFL draft process to a certain extent and they said Henry was worth a top 60 pick. Part of the reason why I put him so high is because I'm very lukewarm on these 2nd-3rd round WRs. I don't see a player that I really like in that whole Shepard/Thomas/Boyd/Carroo cluster. I would be happy to own any of them, but my confidence in their likelihood of becoming prime FF assets is quite low. They mostly look like complementary guys.

The QB thing is something that I wrestle with every year in my drafts. Do you take a guy like Goff or Wentz, knowing that he might never be more than a fringe FF starter, or do you take guys like Booker and Perkins who are likely to be out of football in 3-4 years? A lot of the QBs who have become FF standouts weren't necessarily hailed as such when they were rookies. Rodgers and Newton come to mind right off the bat. Both would've fallen to the 2nd round of most rookie drafts and would've been tremendous value in hindsight. Russell Wilson was a tremendous value in rookie drafts in hindsight. This has happened with highly-drafted QBs before and it will happen again. League dynamics are a big factor, but overall I think at some point you have to bite the bullet and draft the best player available, even if it's at a non-premium position. Since I'm not very high on this year's 2nd-3rd+ round RB/WR, that could be as high as around #8 for me or as low as #15-16 for Goff/Wentz depending on team needs and league format. What I said about Henry also applies to these guys: although I don't love them, I don't love the guys behind them either.
I wonder if Henry is Andre Williams, Part II.

 
bostonfred said:
Would be interested in hearing which ones.  That's where the good stuff is. 
I think we have already talked about some of them such as Booker and Dixon. I don't think Perkins, Prosise, Howard or Drake should be in a similar tier as these two RB are, and that is the way I read your rankings of them and you have expressed this perspective before, that you thought all of these RB were similar talent/value. I think Booker and Dixon are clearly more skilled than these other RB and I think Shephard is in the same tier with Booker and Dixon, while the other RB are not.

I like your ranking of Washington and he is guy that I think I like more than my last ranking reflects. I consider him the same tier as Howard, Perkins, Prosise. I don't think Drake is in the same tier as those guys.

I wouldn't take Henry over Coleman, Doctson, Treadwell.

That's basically the difference I think. Of all the guys you ranked the one that bothers me the most is Drake being so high.You and EBF have him 13th overall. I don't think he could crack top 30 for me although he would be a tier 3 guy in the chance that he develops into a player I haven't seen yet.

 
I'm going to post my non ppr list, which couldn't be much further from EBF's.  Whereas his primary thoughts are talent and will he still be in the league in 5 years, I put a much bigger emphasis than he does on situation, especially for running backs because their shelf lives are so short and their success is so dependent on immediate opportunity.  

6. Dixon - has better burst than long speed,  but ran a 4.46 at the combine.  Unfortunately he also ran a 4.56 and 4.66.  Outstanding receiving ability.  Finishes runs strong and always falls forward.  Immediate opportunity to start for trestman, who is a near perfect fit for his skills.   

8. Paul Perkins - immediate opportunity to start for a top NFL offense.  Seems like a good fit for mcadoo.  Elite elusiveness - got the highest grade from pff.  Power and long speed aren't elite but not bad.   Good receiving and while he's not big,  he's not too small to be used in the red area. 

11. Booker - I had him 4th predraft, after elliot Henry and Dixon, but it was a fairly big step down.  He's a banger who can catch - if he gets the volume he could be a stud.  The problem is I'm not convinced he will get the volume and he's an old enough rookie that you're investing more in immediate success than you are with guys like Perkins and Dixon. The upside is obviously that you could get the Denver running back - but i think something like 200 carries at 4.5 ypc with 30 receptions for 250 and 7 tds would be a really successful season for him in a committee but it's really mediocre as a fantasy upside. 

12. Howard - he's probably the best rb for the bears.  There's a good chance he will lead the team in carries and touchdowns this year or next.  He isn't really dynamic and not much of a receiver, but he could be a rb2 as soon as this year.  In October he could be considered one of the top backs in this class, or he could be Alfred blue. 


You could say that again. I think most of these guys will be lucky to have any relevance in another 1-2 years. I understand the appeal of trying to hit that Alfred Morris or Zac Stacy type of rookie year and I think 1-2 of these guys have that potential, but they're so utterly pedestrian and expendable that I'd be reluctant to roster them at their market price. Jonathan Williams might be better than all of these backs and you don't have him in your top 25. Too much emphasis on the immediate returns, IMO. I do best when I play the long game and not when I look for the payday advance. 

That being said, this class is so weak that opportunity cost of passing on anyone outside the obvious top 4-5 guys doesn't seem that huge. 

 
Too much emphasis on the immediate returns, IMO. 
I don't think i could play your way.   You mentioned Jonathan Williams.   What good is he going to do me this year?   He's the backup to the backup on an uninspiring offense.  If he makes the team - which is no lock - I'll have to hold a roster spot for him for a couple years until mccoy is gone,  and then hope he ascends to real playing time before they draft another guy.  He might be more talented than Perkins,  but I'm certain that Perkins will get an opportunity to compete for a starting job.  I don't know if Williams ever will.   Being slightly more talented won't overcome that.  

I'd also differ slightly in that I don't only look for immediate returns.  I think Treadwell will take a couple years to pay dividends.   His value goes way up when Peterson retires  I think both Henrys are very talented - and I'm willing enough to wait for them to produce that I've got them both ranked even higher than you do.  I'm confident that they will get an opportunity when the time comes.  I'm not as confident in guys like Carroo or Williams, and I don't want to pay valuable draft capital hoping they ever get a chance to start. 

I think you might overestimate your ability to identify talent, although I respect it, but you definitely overestimate the importance of it imo.  That's how you end up with Toby Gerhart.

 
bostonfred said:
I think you might overestimate your ability to identify talent, although I respect it, but you definitely overestimate the importance of it imo.  


If anything, my rankings are more closely-aligned with NFL draft position than yours. You have guys like Howard and Perkins in your top 15 even though their NFL draft position indicates that they're extreme longshots. 

Different strokes for different folks. The "What can you do for me now?" mindset prevails in rookie drafts, but the NFL's list of active rushing leaders is dominated by high picks, not late round longshots:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_yds_active.htm

I don't think gambling on low round lottery tickets year in and year out when you can get day 1-2 players at other positions is an ideal long term strategy. Your question of "What can he do for me this year?" illustrates our different approaches. I never really ask that question of my rookie picks. 

 
Biabreakable said:
I think we have already talked about some of them such as Booker and Dixon. I don't think Perkins, Prosise, Howard or Drake should be in a similar tier as these two RB are, and that is the way I read your rankings of them and you have expressed this perspective before, that you thought all of these RB were similar talent/value. I think Booker and Dixon are clearly more skilled than these other RB and I think Shephard is in the same tier with Booker and Dixon, while the other RB are not.

I like your ranking of Washington and he is guy that I think I like more than my last ranking reflects. I consider him the same tier as Howard, Perkins, Prosise. I don't think Drake is in the same tier as those guys.

I wouldn't take Henry over Coleman, Doctson, Treadwell.

That's basically the difference I think. Of all the guys you ranked the one that bothers me the most is Drake being so high.You and EBF have him 13th overall. I don't think he could crack top 30 for me although he would be a tier 3 guy in the chance that he develops into a player I haven't seen yet.
I agree with you for the most part.  I liked booker more than perkins before the draft. I just prefer the situation in the Giants to Denver by more than I prefer booker to perkins.

I have booker higher than both Howard and drake.  I am not really high on drake,  but Miami was high enough on him to take him early and he seems to have a legit opportunity.  

On "talent" alone I agree i would probably go elliot/Henry,  then Dixon/booker,  then perkins/Howard/prosise.  I'd move Washington down. I might put williams higher.  I'm not so enamored with washington so much as he seems like a good enough player to have a chance.

Good stuff thanks.  

 
I don't think gambling on low round lottery tickets year in and year out when you can get day 1-2 players at other positions is an ideal long term strategy. Your question of "What can he do for me this year?" illustrates our different approaches. I never really ask that question of my rookie picks. 
Part of what I'm looking for when I draft a guy like perkins over a guy like Washington is trade value. If perkins becomes the starter and looks credible,  he will be easy to trade for a big return.  He's generally available for an early second and I may be able to use him and then flip him for a future first.  Plus I actually think he's good. 

If Williams is credible,  and stuck behind mccoy and Karlos, he will be difficult to trade for serious value.  If you took him 19th how much can his trade value increase if he isn't starting and isn't even second on the depth chart?   If you draft him,  you're committed to keeping him and hoping he gets a chance - even though the odds of him getting a chance go down each year after he's drafted.

Which brings me to your statistics about how first round picks play rb longer.  I think there's a lot of confirmation bias in there.  

Let's ask two questions - how often does a guy who gets drafted to be the starter start,  and how often does a team draft someone to be the starter in each round.  The answers might be that guys who were drafted to start tend to start,  and when teams draft guys to start,  they tend to draft them earlier.   That's totally different than how you're interpreting the same data, but it seems pretty valid. 

But there were only two backs taken in the top 50 this year,  and they're the consensus top two.  You have guys like drake and prosise much higher than Dixon and perkins,  but how often do third and fourth round picks do well?   Is their earlier draft position relative to Dixon and perkins actually more valuable?  Or is it just an indication that there were more big backs (for example) than receiving backs,  so the next 4 backs after elliot/Henry were all the guys who catch really well. 

Another thing not accounted for - you perceive williams as more talented than perkins, so you effectively "bump up" his draft slot to where you think he would have been taken without injury.  Makes sense.  But do you have a study that shows rbs who start out buried on the depth chart tend to get a chance eventually?  I haven't seen anything like that,  but empirically it seems all wrong to me.  I can think of lots of guys who were fairly talented and didn't get a chance right away and then the team drafted a better guy and they never got their shot.   I can't think of nearly as many who were drafted to the bench and became good.   

I think you look at draft talent like madden - Peterson is a 98, elliot is a 92, Henry is an 88, Washington is a 79, perkins is a 70, and so on.   That's reasonable enough.   But running back is a different position.   I think most teams would love to have a 90+ guy,  but anything over a 65 is good enough.  So when the Giants get perkins (who I would argue is better than a 70, but let's call him a 70), if he performs better than jennings (68) and vereen (60), he will start,  and there's no reason to upgrade him to a 75.  If an 85 was available,  sure.  But it would have to be a legitimate upgrade.  And when the bills take Williams, who is a 79, but they already have mccoy (90) and Karlos (83), he's not going to get to play.  The goal isn't to get the slightly more talented player, it's to get the guy who scores the most points, and you have to get the ball to score points.   

 
I agree with you for the most part.  I liked booker more than perkins before the draft. I just prefer the situation in the Giants to Denver by more than I prefer booker to perkins.

I have booker higher than both Howard and drake.  I am not really high on drake,  but Miami was high enough on him to take him early and he seems to have a legit opportunity.  

On "talent" alone I agree i would probably go elliot/Henry,  then Dixon/booker,  then perkins/Howard/prosise.  I'd move Washington down. I might put williams higher.  I'm not so enamored with washington so much as he seems like a good enough player to have a chance.

Good stuff thanks.  
I kind of like where you have Washington and as I mentioned I think I like him a bit higher than I have him ranked. Doesn't matter as I still consider him tier 3 but I think I would draft him a few spots higher than I have him on my list right now.

 
I think you look at draft talent like madden - Peterson is a 98, elliot is a 92, Henry is an 88, Washington is a 79, perkins is a 70, and so on.   That's reasonable enough.   But running back is a different position.   I think most teams would love to have a 90+ guy,  but anything over a 65 is good enough.  So when the Giants get perkins (who I would argue is better than a 70, but let's call him a 70), if he performs better than jennings (68) and vereen (60), he will start,  and there's no reason to upgrade him to a 75.  If an 85 was available,  sure.  But it would have to be a legitimate upgrade.  And when the bills take Williams, who is a 79, but they already have mccoy (90) and Karlos (83), he's not going to get to play.  The goal isn't to get the slightly more talented player, it's to get the guy who scores the most points, and you have to get the ball to score points.   


This really gets at the heart of the matter. You are absolutely right that a guy like Perkins or Dixon could be the best back on his team, and that merely being so would give him value. But...you're looking at a one year window. This is a dynasty thread. Dynasty leagues go for multiple years. That means you don't just have to consider how your player fits into his immediate situation, but also how he might fare in a variety of future situations. So, using the Madden analogy, what happens in the next draft cycle when these players enter the draft pool?

Chubb - 95

Fournette - 85

Cook - 80

Freeman - 80

Perine - 75

McCaffrey - 75

Mixon - 70

Hood - 65

Hunt - 65

That's a lot of bullets to dodge. Any RB drafted in the top 100 would probably spell calamity for a situationally-dependent mediocrity like Perkins or Booker. This is exactly what happened with Zac Stacy, who was overdrafted a few years ago the same way that so many of this year's backs have been. He had a nice rookie year, but...the Rams found a more talented back the very next year in Tre Mason. Tre Mason had a nice rookie year, but...the Rams found a more talented back the very next year in Todd Gurley. That's life in the NFL. That's why the active rushing leaders list is populated by talent monsters and not short-term opportunity benefaciaries. To have any staying power whatsoever in the league, a RB basically has to be among the top 15-25 players in the entire league at his position. Some of the guys we've talked about are barely locks for the top 15 just within their draft class alone. 

The less talented the player, the more at-risk he'll be of getting Pipped. So why would I use a high rookie pick in a dynasty league on a player like Paul Perkins or Jordan Howard who is a dime-a-dozen talent in the NFL? The only justification for me is if there's nobody better on the board, you desperately need that instant production (which is far from guaranteed), and/or you plan to trade if/when he pops (which is also far from guaranteed). 

You don't pay Mercedes prices for a Honda. I wouldn't say that a 2nd round rookie pick qualifies as "Mercedes prices", but you get the idea. If you are passing on quality prospects like Jared Goff and Hunter Henry to roll the dice on Booker or Howard, you aren't filling holes in your lineup - you are just creating holes in your future lineup by passing on guys who could be multi-year starters for players who will be out of the league in three years. 

Having said all that, I understand that in some formats a 10% chance at Alfred Morris might be worth more than a 50% chance at Heath Miller or Matt Ryan. I get that. I also get that some people look at these players purely as trade commodities, and that a mediocre RB is more likely to pop immediately, as Stacy did a couple years ago. 

All the same, I have a tough time justifying the ADP for most of these guys. If you want a crappy and imminently-replaceable RB, you can get one much later than where Booker/Howard/Perkins are going. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you look at draft talent like madden - Peterson is a 98, elliot is a 92, Henry is an 88, Washington is a 79, perkins is a 70, and so on.   That's reasonable enough.   But running back is a different position.   I think most teams would love to have a 90+ guy,  but anything over a 65 is good enough.  So when the Giants get perkins (who I would argue is better than a 70, but let's call him a 70), if he performs better than jennings (68) and vereen (60), he will start,  and there's no reason to upgrade him to a 75.  If an 85 was available,  sure.  But it would have to be a legitimate upgrade.  And when the bills take Williams, who is a 79, but they already have mccoy (90) and Karlos (83), he's not going to get to play.  The goal isn't to get the slightly more talented player, it's to get the guy who scores the most points, and you have to get the ball to score points.   
What you are describing is why I would like to develop my evaluation process into a form of ratings. To be able to compare players across draft classes with the same process that is detailed enough to be able to differentiate between players in the exact manner that you describe.

I try to do that with tiers. But ranking players within the tiers is something I need a more detailed method like this to accomplish that, and to sort the larger groups of players when you are combining 3 or more draft classes together.

The reason I have not moved to a more detailed rating process is that I still haven't pinned down the categories that are important to form ratings or grades of, and how to assign the grades. I am still learning about how to watch players, what to look for and how I might assign a rating to these categories from my observation.

ZWK does some really nice things with looking at yards after contact, an elusiveness ranking (counting missed tackles forced) which are two categories I think are very important for a RBs success. The characteristic that I think is the most important for a RB to have is vision. This is also the most difficult skill for me to evaluate. I think Booker has excellent vision.I would rate him higher in this category than Henry or any of the other RB of 2016 besides Elliot.

 
I.don't think you can quantify talent as a single number and use it as a predictor for success.   You have to look at situation.   And you can't rank situation in a vacuum either. Put Howard in Dallas and I'd love him.  Put him in Baltimore and I'll pass because it's a bad situation for him.    But Dixon in Baltimore is a plus situation because he has the quickness and speed to the edge and receiving ability trestman wants.  

You can't just use draft position.  Or at least I don't think you should.  Prosise went earlier than he should have based on running skill but he's such a good fit for the role they envision for him that they made sure they got him.  

I'm pretty convinced that Newsome would have taken Booker or Perkins if Dixon wasn't available,  and with 5 4th round picks he was able to get a bargain on a tier of guys he might have valued much higher.  When he finally took a rb, he got his first choice of the group and took dixon.  If ebf adjusts Williams based on where he "would have gone" if not for the injury,  then I think you have to do the same for dixon, booker, et al.  

Which means there are a lot of subjective factors involved.  You think Denver is a good situation for booker, I don't like the competition.   Have to factor that in somehow.  

If I were trying to put a single number on it,  though,  I'd categorize situation like this.  I would say clear path to 3 down work is the best. Elliott has this. I think dixon and Perkins might too. Maybe that's a 90;100.  

A clear path to all the work he can handle is next best (maybe Perkins belongs here if you don't think he will get true 3 down workload).  Call that an 80-90

Then a clear path to the better half of a split for a role player - think how rawls owners see his situation after the draft.   That's more like a 70-80

Then a delayed path to all the work you can handle,  like Henry.  Also a 70-80, I guess. 

Then a murky path to all the work you can handle  like booker.  Maybe a 60-70.

Then a clear path to a role, like DeAndre Washington or Howard.  I'd weight that lower, like 50-60, but I can understand someone preferring the bird in the hand. 

Then a murky path to a role, like Alex Collins.   That's borderline worthless.  

 
There is something to be said for the roster space you eat up waiting for your more talented 3rd stringer to get a shot. You can draft a guy like Perkins and see what you have yr 1, if you like what you see you can hold. If you don't, there is still some residual value. A guy like Williams can eat a spot on your roster for a couple years, preventing a fa add who may actually do something. The thing is, you don't know who is going to be good in the nfl, udfas make waves in the ffl community all the time. I'd hate to not add Donald driver because I'm holding onto a 3rd string rb who may be talented but has no opportunity.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You don't pay Mercedes prices for a Honda. I wouldn't say that a 2nd round rookie pick qualifies as "Mercedes prices", but you get the idea. If you are passing on quality prospects like Jared Goff and Hunter Henry to roll the dice on Booker or Howard, you aren't filling holes in your lineup - you are just creating holes in your future lineup by passing on guys who could be multi-year starters for players who will be out of the league in three years. 
I think it's worth noting that I had Hunter Henry above booker.  It kind of feels like you looked at my rankings,  saw that I liked Dixon and Perkins too high, and gave your standard answer.  

I did not,  however, have goff above booker.  Because I don't want Goff.  I think he's going to be a mediocre fantasy qb for s long time, and loading up my roster with mediocre players I can't drop and can't trade for more than I paid is a bad practice.  What kind of fantasy upside do you see from. I hope the answer is more nuanced than "he went 1.1".  

You mention Mercedes prices.  I think passing on Paul Perkins - who the Giants seem to think was a steal and a three down back - for an overpriced German import is kind if the definition of paying the Mercedes price.   "MoBo" never played football at any meaningful level and went late in the NFL draft, but he ran a fast .40.  How deep are your rosters that you can hang on to a player with virtually no chance of producing anything for years,  and probably ever?

I agree that i systemically overvalue mediocre running backs.  You seem to systemically overvalue mediocre fantasy prospects and long term, keep and hold type players.  Draft and hold prospects are fine if roster space isn't an issue,  but how many MoBos and Goffs can you keep?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My list is based on 14 team, 24 man rosters, qrwwtfkd lineups,  and no starters at any position but kicker on the waiver wire, I generally keep 2 or maybe 3 qbs, 2 to 4 tight ends,  1 kicker and 2 defenses.   That leaves me 14-17 spots for wr and rb.  In ppr, I'd skew towards having more receivers,  but in non ppr I'd rather have 5-7 receivers and a ton of rb depth.  If I followed EBFs list every year,  I feel like I'd have 4 or 5 qbs, 8-10 receivers, 4-5 tight ends, a kicker,  two defenses,  and only have room for a couple running backs.  So every year my season depends on rb health or my ability to trade receivers and picks for rbs once they go down.   Even with my relatively large roster to line up size,  I'm sitting on multiple prospects at qb, te and especially rb who will likely never start for me, in the hopes that the first German receiver ever drafted not only beat all odds to make an NFL roster,  but was so good he became an NFL starter, but not only that he was so good he was worth putting in my fantasy lineup,  and not only that but he was so good that he was worth the opportunity cost of eating a dead roster spot for years until he finally developed.  

I literally cannot comprehend a draft strategy where you'd rather take MoBo than Paul Perkins because Perkins might not be a starter and even if he is it would probably only be for a couple years.   

 
Last post while I sit here waiting for my kid.  

Here are the top 20 running backs in non ppr ppg last year:

1. Devonta freeman - 4th round 

2. Jamaal charles- 3rd round

3. Leveon bell- 2nd round

4. Todd Gurley - 1st round

5. Adrian Peterson - 1st round

6. Arian foster - undrafted

7. Matt forte - 2nd round

8. Mark Ingram - 1st round

9. LeSean Mccoy - 2nd round

10. Doug Martin - 1st round

11. Dion Lewis - 5th round 

12. Deangelo Williams - 1st round

13. Lamar miller - 4th round

14. Chris ivory - undrafted

15. Jonathan Stewart - 1st round

16. David Johnson - 3rd round

17. Joseph Randle - 5th round 

18. Karlos Williams - 5th round

19. Danny Woodhead - undrafted 

20. Latavius Murray 6th round

That's 6 first round picks,  3 2nd round picks,  and 2 3rd round picks.   Which means 9 of the top 20 guys were drafted in the 4th round or later.  

And of those later round guys,  freeman looks entrenched. Foster obviously had a nice career,  dion Lewis got reupped immediately last year but got hurt so who knows,  Lamar Miller just got a big contract, Chris ivory a big contract, Randle had mental stability issues,  Karlos Williams looks like a long term player,  Woodhead has been a nice role player for a few years,  and Murray is going into his second year as starter.  

When you say every 4th round or later pick who succeeds is at risk of losing his job like Zac Stacy or tre mason,  it's a little disingenuous.  None of these guys got wally pipped. A couple of them had late round backs added or signed big contracts elsewhere.   

Now let's look at the top 20 non ppr ppg receivers.   9 first round picks, 2 seconds and 3 thirds.  More of the top receivers were early picks than the top running backs,  and heavily skewed towards first round picks. With each new class there seem to be multiple stud receivers coming out.  

So let me turn this back on you - why are you fishing for third round receivers when there are running backs who could start right away,  and even if they don't,  may be valuable rb depth if the guy ahead of them gets hurt? 

 
bostonfred said:
That's how you end up with Toby Gerhart.
I LOVE IT!

The problem here is this is coming from ROSTER POISON. 

Still shining my Championship Trophy Jeremy Hill won me two years ago!

 
bostonfred said:
Hill has literally done exactly what I said he would - one season of good production as gio's backup when gio got hurt but otherwise a frustrating and inconsistent start - and the guy I advocated ahead of him was devonta freeman.  Congratulations on your championship.  
You labled Jeremy Hill "Roster Poison" - Your specific argument was that Gio would start forever in front of him and harm his value (this is why he was not worth a first round pick).  You were wrong and wrong!

Using the term Roster Poison just made it more laughable!

 
bostonfred said:
14. Sterling shepard. This will ruffle feathers I'm sure,  but in non ppr, I see him as a potential wr2, not a potential wr1.  He looks like a very good receiver and might be more talented than Thomas,  who I have ranked much higher, but he's not going to be the wr1 on his own team now or in the foreseeable future.  If Cruz comes back strong - which people seem to have written off a little too much imo - he might not even be the wr2 on his own team for a while.  I think he will have a much bigger impact in the nfl and in ppr leagues than non ppr.
I don't see being only a WR2 on his team as a valid argument to overlook talent. Is there something he can't do that Sanders, Brown, Decker, Hurns, Crabtree, James Jones, and other NFL WR2 who were fantasy WR2 or better can do? Include Baldwin in there too except for the fact there is no NFL WR1 on his team ATM. I think NYG is a great situation for a NFL WR2 given their depth chart is decimated. Eli + McAdoo has been a good combo for fantasy, and they don't have an elite TE. Add no strong RB. If his upside is Sanders with the other Manning why would you pass. If the concern is you don't want to flex a WR in non-PPR, I don't know if that is valid. If you look at season long stats fantasy WR2's outscored all but 17 RB. I saw a good owner trade away Jarvis Landry last year in a non-PPR below value because it's non-PPR and I think this is the same sort of logic. Thomas may have more of a chance to lead his team in targets, but he also could be diluted by a strong showing from Fleener, Coleman continuing to develop, etc. Saying Thomas is more talented than Colston and maybe even Graham is a bit odd. Colston as the guy who ran 4.5 at 6'5 and made an immediate impact as a rookie? And Graham? If you are this hyperbolic on Thomas he should be even higher.

 
I'm not really interested in going back over the hill/freeman debate in its entirety,  but I think it's worth revisiting.  My argument for freeman over hill was that freeman had a chance to be a 3 down starter.  He was a good receiver,  didn't have elite speed,  and while he isn't big, he could run both inside and outside and was a decent td scorer.  

That's exactly how I feel about both Dixon and Perkins this year.  They're both guys who can run inside and out,  although they're better outside runners, they can both catch the ball,  and both are capable td scorers.  They're both elusive players with good vision and better quickness than long speed.  In short,  very similar to what I liked about freeman.  Booker is similar,  too, although he's got more competition and is a little older. 

Hill was a talented player who would be more of a runner than a receiver, and he was going to spend the first half of his career with gio, who had already shown to be a decent runner,  plus receiver and a capable red zone guy.   He was also on a team that had a lot of other options, so the team would rarely gamelan to feed him the ball.  Which meant that you would be looking at a touchdown dependent guy whose end of year stats would look better than his week to week prospects, and whose main value was as a backup to gio in the sense that unless gio was hurt,  it would be difficult to start him.  I still feel that way. 

To some extent,  that's why I'm lower on Howard than the other backs in this class.   Howard isn't as talented as hill, but Langford probably isn't as good as gio, either.  I'm not as down on Howard as a prospect as I would be if he had been drafted in Cincinnati,  because the bears could easily make him the starter if Langford doesn't improve.   There's some upside there. If I thought he was going to be relegated to committee work for his career,  I would drop him significantly.   

 
I don't see being only a WR2 on his team as a valid argument to overlook talent. Is there something he can't do that Sanders, Brown, Decker, Hurns, Crabtree, James Jones, and other NFL WR2 who were fantasy WR2 or better can do? Include Baldwin in there too except for the fact there is no NFL WR1 on his team ATM. I think NYG is a great situation for a NFL WR2 given their depth chart is decimated. Eli + McAdoo has been a good combo for fantasy, and they don't have an elite TE. Add no strong RB. If his upside is Sanders with the other Manning why would you pass. If the concern is you don't want to flex a WR in non-PPR, I don't know if that is valid. If you look at season long stats fantasy WR2's outscored all but 17 RB. I saw a good owner trade away Jarvis Landry last year in a non-PPR below value because it's non-PPR and I think this is the same sort of logic. Thomas may have more of a chance to lead his team in targets, but he also could be diluted by a strong showing from Fleener, Coleman continuing to develop, etc. Saying Thomas is more talented than Colston and maybe even Graham is a bit odd. Colston as the guy who ran 4.5 at 6'5 and made an immediate impact as a rookie? And Graham? If you are this hyperbolic on Thomas he should be even higher.
I'm not opposed to ever having WR2's or slot guys.  I've owned plenty of good ones like decker and Edelman and Sanders.  I actually like Shepard.  I just would rather have other guys.   There are a lot of really good young receivers right now and not many good young running backs.  I'm willing to pay more for the upside of getting a rare commodity.  

And I don't think I'm being hyperbolic when I say Thomas is probably more talented coming out than Colston or graham.  Colston was drafted in the late 7th round and was a tweener wr/te who became Brees's favorite target.    Graham was drafted in the third and was a project tight end.   Thomas was drafted in the early second and while not  quite as tall,  is a similar player - good but not elite speed,  bigger target,  starting across from a speed guy.  That formula has been pretty good for brees in the past and if Thomas is the beneficiary he could do better than his individual ability would have led him to on another team. 

 
You labled Jeremy Hill "Roster Poison" - Your specific argument was that Gio would start forever in front of him and harm his value (this is why he was not worth a first round pick).  You were wrong and wrong!

Using the term Roster Poison just made it more laughable!
Jermey Hill was better RB than Bernard last season?

I recall the conversation you are talking about. Fred took a beating for the roster poison comment. The point he was trying to make however is that people may be over valuing Hill because they are not giving proper respect and consideration for Bernards role in the offense limiting Hill's potential to be used as a receiver and just splitting time in general.

When Bernard was injured Hill had some very good games and they stuck with Hill for the most part at the important end of the FF season which certainly helped owners of him at that time. He became over valued going into last year and did not play well for most of it.

In that same conversation Fred was arguing that Freeman was worth about the same or more than Hill in PPR formats. Look at the two players now in PPR.

 
You mention Mercedes prices.  I think passing on Paul Perkins - who the Giants seem to think was a steal and a three down back - for an overpriced German import is kind if the definition of paying the Mercedes price.   "MoBo" never played football at any meaningful level and went late in the NFL draft, but he ran a fast .40.  How deep are your rosters that you can hang on to a player with virtually no chance of producing anything for years,  and probably ever?

I agree that i systemically overvalue mediocre running backs.  You seem to systemically overvalue mediocre fantasy prospects and long term, keep and hold type players.  Draft and hold prospects are fine if roster space isn't an issue,  but how many MoBos and Goffs can you keep?  
I think you are the one overvaluing mediocre fantasy prospects. Guys like Paul Perkins and Devontae Booker are just David Cobb and Johnathan Franklin with new jerseys. They are the definition of mediocre. Average players who can be replaced at any moment. People are overpaying based on the idea that they have a chance to win the job immediately and produce this season. There's still a good chance that neither is the best back on his own roster and never will be. And just because your competition sucks doesn't mean you're any good. You keep using one year window arguments (citing last year's top 20 backs) without looking long-term, which is what distinguishes dynasty from redraft. Zac Stacy was good for one year. Not so much now. The players with staying power almost always have special talent, and that's almost always reflected in a top 100-120 draft slot.

Boehringer is a boom-or-bust proposition, but his skill set gives him a much higher ceiling than those backs you mentioned. Citing that he "went late in the NFL draft" is a bit inconsistent with your hyping of Perkins. Perkins was a two year starter at a major D1 program. He had two seasons of excellent production and still couldn't convince a team to take him higher than 149th overall. Boehringer didn't even play college football and still went 180th overall. If I'm not mistaken, he is the first European ever drafted without college experience. I think it's much more impressive to get picked in the early 6th as a guy with no real high-level playing experience than it is to get picked in the 5th round as a guy who has a strong track record against quality competition. There's less mystery around Perkins. Teams were able to assess him against strong opposition and apparently decided that he was not a very good prospect.

Most of my leagues have rosters between 22-26 players. In most cases, I can afford to keep my projects as long as I need to, so my decisions aren't really driven by the need to find out what I have immediately. I just try to get the player who will have the most valuable overall career.

 
Most of my leagues have rosters between 22-26 players. In most cases, I can afford to keep my projects as long as I need to, so my decisions aren't really driven by the need to find out what I have immediately. I just try to get the player who will have the most valuable overall career.
12x26 is not really that deep. I think you still run into roster crunch. It's possible, even likely, Boehringer is a cut candidate after next year's rookie draft. I have a 14x30 league where I just drafted him at 3.12 and have that fear. Ideally he gets hurt so I can IR him.

 
12x26 is not really that deep. I think you still run into roster crunch. It's possible, even likely, Boehringer is a cut candidate after next year's rookie draft. I have a 14x30 league where I just drafted him at 3.12 and have that fear. Ideally he gets hurt so I can IR him.
Boehringer might not even be in the league in another year, but that's kind beside the point. I can only think of one or two of my leagues where roster space has become a big problem, and those are devy leagues where the "waiting game" takes on a whole new dimension. That's just me though. I know some formats like FFPC make it very hard to keep projects for more than a year or two without getting a payoff. I know those leagues are out there, but I prefer to play in leagues where I can safely wait 2-3 years on guys like Jordy Nelson and Aaron Rodgers if needed.

 
12x26 is not really that deep. I think you still run into roster crunch. It's possible, even likely, Boehringer is a cut candidate after next year's rookie draft. I have a 14x30 league where I just drafted him at 3.12 and have that fear. Ideally he gets hurt so I can IR him.
It isn't, but he never works the waiver wire during the season, which is why he can keep his projects "as long as I need to."

Like Bloom, I devote one or two roster spots for waiver wire picks which prevents me from stashing more than a couple of project players.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you are the one overvaluing mediocre fantasy prospects. Guys like Paul Perkins and Devontae Booker are just David Cobb and Johnathan Franklin with new jerseys. They are the definition of mediocre. Average players who can be replaced at any moment. People are overpaying based on the idea that they have a chance to win the job immediately and produce this season. There's still a good chance that neither is the best back on his own roster and never will be. And just because your competition sucks doesn't mean you're any good. You keep using one year window arguments (citing last year's top 20 backs) without looking long-term, which is what distinguishes dynasty from redraft. Zac Stacy was good for one year. Not so much now. The players with staying power almost always have special talent, and that's almost always reflected in a top 100-120 draft slot.
You keep bringing up Zac Stacy while ignoring that Alfred Morris had 3 seasons as RB 5, 13 and 15 in standard scoring leagues.

This is why I keep bringing up that the average number of top 12 seasons for all RB is two seasons.

Your odds improve to have more than one top 12 season by being a higher draft pick, but even the first round picks drafted in the top 13 averaged 2.9 top 12 seasons. Which is the same as what Morris provided before a coaching change (perhaps age? or other things?) closed his opportunity. Picks 14-24 averaged 2.5 top 12 seasons. Picks 25-46 averaged 1.6 top 12 seasons. Picks 47-73 averaged 2.3 top 12 seasons, which is actually higher than the preceding group. Picks 74-114 averaged 1.7 top 12 seasons, about the same as picks 25-46 did slightly better. Picks 115-187 averaged .94 top 12 seasons, a bit less than one. 

So while what you are saying is true, the actual number of top 12 seasons one should expect based on historical data (using the best of the best) is only two seasons. So it isn't realistic to expect any RB to do much more than that.

Zac Stacy providing one top 12 season for the price people were able to acquire him is a win. Just as Morris and the many other RB who provided some good seasons wins for their prices.

Does Elliot have a better chance to provide a longer more valuable career than the RB drafted lower then him? Of course, much better odds of having six really good seasons than the other RB. That is why he costs so much more than these other RB do. But anyone should be happy to get just one top 12 seasons out of any of these RB because there are so many who will never do that.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top