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.

Quality WR shortage? RB's to rule the near future? (1 Viewer)

H

hoffman0001

Footballguy
It used to be that we could count on a few rookie's to be productive at the position, and we would see others grow over year 2-3 to become viable starters. I look at the top 30 WR's last year and this year and the youth are not really making themselves a factor. I'm feeling this is just another effect of the College game, and the lack to true NFL ready players. 

This leaves me with a few realizations: 

A. the trade of a rookie pick that will likely be a WR pick for a quality (if older) WR is going to be the smart move 90% of the time. 

B. Could be be looking at a future where fantasy WR play is going to become more of a WRBC/match-up situation vs. us having our set of plug and play WR's most weeks? 

C. Are we going to see a return to the RB being king in fantasy for skill position players? Even with PPR if we start having to run WRBC to fill our rosters, it's going to be hard for WR's to keep pace. 

Thoughts? 

 
hoffman0001 said:
It used to be that we could count on a few rookie's to be productive at the position, and we would see others grow over year 2-3 to become viable starters. I look at the top 30 WR's last year and this year and the youth are not really making themselves a factor. I'm feeling this is just another effect of the College game, and the lack to true NFL ready players. 

This leaves me with a few realizations: 

A. the trade of a rookie pick that will likely be a WR pick for a quality (if older) WR is going to be the smart move 90% of the time. 

B. Could be be looking at a future where fantasy WR play is going to become more of a WRBC/match-up situation vs. us having our set of plug and play WR's most weeks? 

C. Are we going to see a return to the RB being king in fantasy for skill position players? Even with PPR if we start having to run WRBC to fill our rosters, it's going to be hard for WR's to keep pace. 

Thoughts? 
Click to expand...
I think a few of the young* WRs were either out injured (Allen Robinson, Quincy Enunwa, Cameron Meredith) all season or battled injuries in season (Mike Williams, Corey Davis, Kelvin Benjamin, Will Fuller) so that's why perhaps many didn't finish top 30.

While I get your overall premise (and agree) that the RB is about to become king again in dynasty rookie drafts I guess it depends on how you are defining "young" if I am going to agree that there just isn't enough young WR talent out there. I can list: OBJ, Hopkins, M. Thomas, Amari Cooper, Tyreeke Hill, Stefon Diggs, Ju Ju Smith-Shuster, Sammy Watkins, Devin Funchess, Cooper Kupp, Nelson Agholor, Jamison Crowder among many others that have broken out last year and/or the year before.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
I think a few of the young* WRs were either out injured (Allen Robinson, Quincy Enunwa, Cameron Meredith) all season or battled injuries in season (Mike Williams, Corey Davis, Kelvin Benjamin, Will Fuller) so that's why perhaps many didn't finish top 30.

While I get your overall premise (and agree) that the RB is about to become king again in dynasty rookie drafts I guess it depends on how you are defining "young" if I am going to agree that there just isn't enough young WR talent out there. I can list: OBJ, Hopkins, M. Thomas, Amari Cooper, Tyreeke Hill, Stefon Diggs, Ju Ju Smith-Shuster, Sammy Watkins, Devin Funchess, Cooper Kupp, Nelson Agholor, Jamison Crowder among many others that have broken out last year and/or the year before.
Click to expand...
My biggest concern here is that we all know on Dynasty roster spots are very valuable. We cannot afford to see young WR's we draft just sit on our benches, especially when you see RB's show production much quicker. Generally speaking if you don't have a player that can at least play in the flex by year three you really have to cut bait. Remember the time when "year three" usually for a receiver meant that they were going to become a impact player? Far too often year three for receivers has become "do something this year or your on waivers",. 

The last 2 years, I have been trying to trade rookie picks that clearly look like they will be spent on a rookie WR to get something else (a future rookie pick, a quality veteran, etc.). This has always proven to be the better move then having another rookie WR sitting on my bench. 

 
RB's tend to keep their value when they don't come out of the gates firing on all cylinders.  WR's tend to lose value if they aren't starters right away.  So not that the quality is bad, but everyone wants the stud RB, while only some want the stud WR's.  

 
Zyphros said:
RB's tend to keep their value when they don't come out of the gates firing on all cylinders.  WR's tend to lose value if they aren't starters right away.  So not that the quality is bad, but everyone wants the stud RB, while only some want the stud WR's.  
Click to expand...
Who would not want a stud WR? We just can't waste a roster spot for 4-5 years waiting for one to develop. 

 
hoffman0001 said:
Who would not want a stud WR? We just can't waste a roster spot for 4-5 years waiting for one to develop. 
Click to expand...
I'm just saying that some tend to build around RB's and fill rosters with ok WR's.  That happens more often it seems, than people getting stud WR's and then fill at RB these days.  The zero RB strategy is completely out the window now.  

 
-OZ- said:
Which somewhat ironically makes it a better strategy.
Click to expand...
And it works - depending on starting roster requirements. Start 3 WRS, 2RBs, TE, flex. Went WR heavy.  Ertz TE, Brady QB, streamed Ds. All you need is one decent RB and it works nicely. 

 
-OZ- said:
Which somewhat ironically makes it a better strategy.
Click to expand...
Worked for me last year. Not sure how well the pro/anti - zero RB arguments work or translate to dynasty. But in redraft the zero RB worked wonderfully for me last year. I even had more startable RBs than I could start. 

However, I tend to agree that the landscape may be changing (or already has). Indeed if the 1st two rounds (of a snake redraft) are going to be filled with more RBs than in the recent past, then other players are going to slip. 

As for rookie drafts, since I mostly play in FFPC style leagues, I tend to agree with the OP regarding not wanting to wait for these WRs to develop, and to clog up my rosters. Plus most of my teams are strongish at WR already and am looking to pickup the *presumably and hopefully* stud RBs. 

Currently I am debating on my late 1st round picks as to whether I want to draft BPA or try to grab a future 1st instead. Over someone like Ridley or Sutton or St James. If there is still a RB in the late 1st I like then that is my preference. 

 
Hankmoody said:
2014 was an anomaly, RB's have always been better immediate investments.  That's not going to change.
Click to expand...
Ironically the rookie season is usually the worst of a RBs first 6 seasons for fantasy but yeah they have always been able to make an instant impact while few WR do as rookies.

 
2019 draft class looks to be pretty loaded at WR and weak at RB so we may see things shift back a bit then 

 
Raback said:
2019 draft class looks to be pretty loaded at WR and weak at RB so we may see things shift back a bit then 
Click to expand...
Thats another thing just the strength of rookie drafts. Each one is different.

You want to draft the talent of any specific draft class. If that strength is at the RB position, and not WR for a couple years you still want to draft the best players, regardless of your strategy.

 
College offenses.    Mostly RPOs that have a limited passing routes.    A lot of the wrs coming in don't have an expansive route tree yet.

 
hoffman0001 said:
Generally speaking if you don't have a player that can at least play in the flex by year three you really have to cut bait. Remember the time when "year three" usually for a receiver meant that they were going to become a impact player? Far too often year three for receivers has become "do something this year or your on waivers",. 
Click to expand...
I think you're mischaracterizing this.  It wasn't "ok it's year 3 this guy is going to follow the routine and blow up now".  It was "we're going to have to wait until year 3 to see if this guy is any good because obviously WRs are useless in years 1 and 2.".  There were still plenty of guys who went all the way through year 3 with a resounding dud.

The hit rate on 1st round WRs isn't really any lower right now than it has been historically.  Take a look at the 1st round WRs in the decade preceeding the 2014 class.

Tavon Auston
DeAndre Hopkins
Cordarrelle Patterson
Justin Blackmon
Kendall Wright
Michael Floyd
AJ Jenkins
AJ Green
Julio Jones
Jonathan Baldwin
Demaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
Darrius Heyward Bey
Michael Crabtree
Jeremy Maclin
Percy Harvin
Hakeem Nicks
Kenny Britt
Calvin Johnson
Ted Ginn
Dwayne Bowe
Robert Meachem
Craig Davis
Anthony Gonzalez
Santonio Holmes
Braylon Edwards
Troy Williamson
Mike Williams
Matt Jones
Mark Clayton
Roddy White
Larry Fitzgerald
Roy Williams
Reggie Williams
Lee Evans
Michael Clayton
Michael Jenkins
Rashaun Woods
 

There is certainly no shortage of players on that list for whom you were sitting through the end of year 3 still wondering "man, is this guy EVER going to be good?".

 
FreeBaGeL said:
I think you're mischaracterizing this.  It wasn't "ok it's year 3 this guy is going to follow the routine and blow up now".  It was "we're going to have to wait until year 3 to see if this guy is any good because obviously WRs are useless in years 1 and 2.".  There were still plenty of guys who went all the way through year 3 with a resounding dud.

The hit rate on 1st round WRs isn't really any lower right now than it has been historically.  Take a look at the 1st round WRs in the decade preceeding the 2014 class.

Tavon Auston
DeAndre Hopkins
Cordarrelle Patterson
Justin Blackmon
Kendall Wright
Michael Floyd
AJ Jenkins
AJ Green
Julio Jones
Jonathan Baldwin
Demaryius Thomas
Dez Bryant
Darrius Heyward Bey
Michael Crabtree
Jeremy Maclin
Percy Harvin
Hakeem Nicks
Kenny Britt
Calvin Johnson
Ted Ginn
Dwayne Bowe
Robert Meachem
Craig Davis
Anthony Gonzalez
Santonio Holmes
Braylon Edwards
Troy Williamson
Mike Williams
Matt Jones
Mark Clayton
Roddy White
Larry Fitzgerald
Roy Williams
Reggie Williams
Lee Evans
Michael Clayton
Michael Jenkins
Rashaun Woods
 

There is certainly no shortage of players on that list for whom you were sitting through the end of year 3 still wondering "man, is this guy EVER going to be good?".
Click to expand...
Ummmm that's kinda my point. In Dynasty you can wait 4-5 Years for a player to develop. You just can't

 
hoffman0001 said:
Ummmm that's kinda my point. In Dynasty you can wait 4-5 Years for a player to develop. You just can't
Click to expand...
Well then either I was misreading your quote or it was malformed because it reads like you were pining for the time when you could count on WRs becoming impact players in year 3 whereas now the problem is that you get to year 3 and they're still a question mark.  The reality is that they've always been a question mark in year 3.

But if the issue is that you don't want to 3 years then the obvious solution seems to be, don't.

Look at all the WRs who became great over the last 15 years or so.  How many of them waited to year 3 to be startable players?

Evans
Beckham
Hopkins
Demaryius
Dez
AJG
Julio
Megatron
Fitzgerald
White

I believe every one of those guys other than Demaryius (who tore his achilles) had at minimum a WR2 season within their first two years.  Most had a WR1 season.

So while waiting out year 3 may have you miss out on the occasional Michael Crabtree's of the world, in reality if a WR is going to be great they're probably going to be at least startable by year 2.  Maybe the 3 year rule was always flawed, at least in terms of not expecting a startable player before then.

The other nice advantage is that people somewhat expect the 3 year rule still so sometimes these guys still end up with value even after a few years of doing nothing.  You could have traded DaVante Parker for little less than you spent on him in the rookie draft prior to this year.  You can still move Corey Coleman for a late 1st if you've got him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL said:
Well then either I was misreading your quote or it was malformed because it reads like you were pining for the time when you could count on WRs becoming impact players in year 3 whereas now the problem is that you get to year 3 and they're still a question mark.  The reality is that they've always been a question mark in year 3.

But if the issue is that you don't want to 3 years then the obvious solution seems to be, don't.

Look at all the WRs who became great over the last 15 years or so.  How many of them waited to year 3 to be startable players?

Evans
Beckham
Hopkins
Demaryius
Dez
AJG
Julio
Megatron
Fitzgerald
White

I believe every one of those guys other than Demaryius (who tore his achilles) had at minimum a WR2 season within their first two years.  Most had a WR1 season.

So while waiting out year 3 may have you miss out on the occasional Michael Crabtree's of the world, in reality if a WR is going to be great they're probably going to be at least startable by year 2.  Maybe the 3 year rule was always flawed, at least in terms of not expecting a startable player before then.

The other nice advantage is that people somewhat expect the 3 year rule still so sometimes these guys still end up with value even after a few years of doing nothing.  You could have traded DaVante Parker for little less than you spent on him in the rookie draft prior to this year.  You can still move Corey Coleman for a late 1st if you've got him.
Click to expand...
The issue is they Dynasty format does not allow a WR to "develop" for 4-5 years. In the past you could risk a #1 pick and have a 50/50 shot that by year 3 you'd have at least a flex player.  We have seen the "bust" rate for receivers selected high going up and up and the value of other options (QB, RB, TE) making these far better picks. 

 
hoffman0001 said:
The issue is they Dynasty format does not allow a WR to "develop" for 4-5 years. In the past you could risk a #1 pick and have a 50/50 shot that by year 3 you'd have at least a flex player.  We have seen the "bust" rate for receivers selected high going up and up and the value of other options (QB, RB, TE) making these far better picks. 
Click to expand...
The problem with this post is that empirically none of it is even remotely true. Over the last 5 years (starting with the guys who just completed their 3rd year), the percentage of 1st round WRs with a flex finish by the end of their 3rd year is higher than the 10 years prior, not lower. And that's not even accounting for the terrible luck the guys in the recent 5 year bucket have had with major recurring injuries (IE Kevin White is probably no stud but he'd likely have been a startable player the last two years were it not for the injuries). 

It's just your perception that things used to be different for WRs based on two recent bad classes, one of which hasn't even had their 3rd year yet to determine if any of them are going to be startable by then.  

Now if you want to say the dynasty landscape  is refocusing on running backs then I agree with you. But it's not because WR development is slower than ever before. It's because it was way above the normal curve for a short spell and now you (and others) are confusing a return to the norms with a drop way below the norms. Combine that with a RB class that is doing for RBs what the 2014 class did for WRs and we once again have people chasing trends. 

And really, while I've always been a RB guy even in this brief WRs-are-everything era, maybe this refocus on RBs from the community is a chance to zig while everyone else is zagging. Remember last time we had an era like this was back when the consensus was that Mark Ingram should be drafted over Julio/AJG, that Jahvid Best was more valuable than Dez, Montario Hardesty moreso than Demaryius, Gio/Lacy over Hopkins, etc. 

This year we will likely see some RBs taken in the 2nd or even 3rd round of the NFL draft with higher rookie adp than WRs taken in the 1st round, maybe even the top half of the first round. Not unlike some of the examples I was referring to above. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
hoffman0001 said:
Really teach? How many impact rookies and 2nd year players have we seen at the position recently?
Click to expand...
How recently? over the last 3-4 years:

Hopkins

OBJ

Evans

Thomas

Cooks

Robinson

Landry

Smith-Shuster

Kupp

Fuller

Shepard

last year seemed to be a very down year, but the three top drafted guys Ross, Williams and Davis all had injury issues

 
Dr. Octopus said:
How recently? over the last 3-4 years:

Hopkins

OBJ

Evans

Thomas

Cooks

Robinson

Landry

Smith-Shuster

Kupp

Fuller

Shepard

last year seemed to be a very down year, but the three top drafted guys Ross, Williams and Davis all had injury issues
Click to expand...
Yes, and for every guy on your list we have 3-4 that are out of the NFL or are waiver wire fodder. My point is you can't really build a fantasy team by drafting rookie WR's. You can throw darts and pray. The quality of the prospect WR's has gone way down. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is another side to the fact that you can generally get an earlier tell about how good the RB will be in their first season as opposed to waiting for year two or maybe even year 3 before you have some sense of how good the WR can be in relation to roster construction.

When you know that you can get impact players at the RB just about every year (there were a few seasons where the talent was somewhat lacking though) then why do you need to fill your roster up with RB?

If you build your team around WR and QB whos careers last longer, then you are always in a position to add a RB to your team that can push your team over the top. If your roster is full of RB and a bunch of WR 3s then what happens when your RB get older? It is a fungible position and the average amount of time that a RB is a top 12 RB for fantasy is two seasons. You are always needing to add RB every year anyways because things change, RB get hurt or another RB comes along who is better than them. What happens to your team when you are investing all your assets into a position that keeps turning over frequently?

You lose your shirt more frequently.

I am always trying to build the best team and I would like to have more of my investments be in players with longer term value. I do not want my roster to be imbalanced on the RB side of things because the value of those assets is fleeting. 

Because it is harder to find the good WR and the WR who are good tend to have more than just two top 12 seasons in their career, to me it makes sense to value those players more.

If the best path to acquiring top WR is by drafting RB and trading RB for those WR then by all means do it. I do think you need to be adding quality WR to your team somehow if you are not drafting them. Trade or the wire I guess. A lot of the time the cheapest way to acquire these WR is by drafting them though, and with a little luck some of the guys you draft end up panning out. You are going to have to pay through the nose for a proven top WR in trades (I would think) because they are so hard to find.

The more folks prioritize drafting RB the more likely WR value is going to fall to you in drafts. Do you pass on a WR who reasonably seems more talented than the next best RB just because it is a WR?

I can see some folks really regretting that if they do. More likely to be drafting busts if you are passing better players for RB lottery tickets.

 
Biabreakable said:
There is another side to the fact that you can generally get an earlier tell about how good the RB will be in their first season as opposed to waiting for year two or maybe even year 3 before you have some sense of how good the WR can be in relation to roster construction.

When you know that you can get impact players at the RB just about every year (there were a few seasons where the talent was somewhat lacking though) then why do you need to fill your roster up with RB?

If you build your team around WR and QB whos careers last longer, then you are always in a position to add a RB to your team that can push your team over the top. If your roster is full of RB and a bunch of WR 3s then what happens when your RB get older? It is a fungible position and the average amount of time that a RB is a top 12 RB for fantasy is two seasons. You are always needing to add RB every year anyways because things change, RB get hurt or another RB comes along who is better than them. What happens to your team when you are investing all your assets into a position that keeps turning over frequently?

You lose your shirt more frequently.

I am always trying to build the best team and I would like to have more of my investments be in players with longer term value. I do not want my roster to be imbalanced on the RB side of things because the value of those assets is fleeting. 

Because it is harder to find the good WR and the WR who are good tend to have more than just two top 12 seasons in their career, to me it makes sense to value those players more.

If the best path to acquiring top WR is by drafting RB and trading RB for those WR then by all means do it. I do think you need to be adding quality WR to your team somehow if you are not drafting them. Trade or the wire I guess. A lot of the time the cheapest way to acquire these WR is by drafting them though, and with a little luck some of the guys you draft end up panning out. You are going to have to pay through the nose for a proven top WR in trades (I would think) because they are so hard to find.

The more folks prioritize drafting RB the more likely WR value is going to fall to you in drafts. Do you pass on a WR who reasonably seems more talented than the next best RB just because it is a WR?

I can see some folks really regretting that if they do. More likely to be drafting busts if you are passing better players for RB lottery tickets.
Click to expand...
This year is the year to draft RBs.  There are several RBs to take over any WR and they are: Barkley, Guice, Michel, Jones II for sure, and some would argue Chubb, Penny and Johnson as well.

 
hoffman0001 said:
Yes, and for every guy on your list we have 3-4 that are out of the NFL or are waiver wire fodder. My point is you can't really build a fantasy team by drafting rookie WR's. You can throw darts and pray. The quality of the prospect WR's has gone way down. 
Click to expand...
Thats true for rb, qb and te too though.  Not unique to wr.

 
JohnnyU said:
This year is the year to draft RBs.  There are several RBs to take over any WR and they are: Barkley, Guice, Michel, Jones II for sure, and some would argue Chubb, Penny and Johnson as well.
Click to expand...
I agree that there are not really any stand outs at WR from this draft class and some talented RB and you should draft the best players, but obviously I was talking about more than just that, in response some arguments for drafting RB over WR on principle.

 
hoffman0001 said:
Yes, and for every guy on your list we have 3-4 that are out of the NFL or are waiver wire fodder. My point is you can't really build a fantasy team by drafting rookie WR's. You can throw darts and pray. The quality of the prospect WR's has gone way down. 
Click to expand...
But just about every guy on that list are among the most valuable dynasty players. I agree with your overall premise here that RBs give returns quicker generally but the elite WRs have paid off as well - not sure we have any in this draft. For me I'll see how draft plays out.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

eighsse2
  • Poll
Rookie WR Most Likely to Become Elite
Replies
34
Views
1K
titusbramble
titusbramble
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
175
zamboni
zamboni
Joe Bryant
WR Davante Parker, PHI
Replies
6
Views
160
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top