Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Should drafting a K and DEF be required?


DrRazvi

Recommended Posts

I was just arguing against the myth that it's super hard to fill your RB3 slot with a roughly top 30 RB on a week to week basis. It's in fact very easy, for everybody, to find such RBs.

I don't know where you got the idea that I was saying there was ten such guys available, I never hinted at any such thing.

If EVERYBODY in a 10 team league can land a top 30 back off waivers, then (correct me if my math is wrong here) you're inferring that there are 10 top 30 caliber backs on the wire every week. That's just cray cray.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So let's look at his week 16 rankings, he has Ryan Grant and Beanie Wells ranked in the top 30 - yet both were available in one of my more competitive leagues where people manage their teams through the end. Beanie Wells disappointed as he got hurt in that game, but Ryan Grant put up a great 23 points. These guys were available in my league, and a lot of leagues.

Wow, dude. You're using Week 16 as an example? When many leagues only have two teams (quite possibly the two strongest teams in said league) remaining? C'mon bro. I don't want to say you're sounding desperate now, but you do realize why this example is incredibly flawed, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a player is a free agent and no teams make a claim on him, please tell me why some teams are unable to pick him up. Analysis takes place on the margin, and until the player is picked up, all the teams are able to do so. Supply is bigger than demand in essence.

I highly doubt you ever though I was talking about there being ten players available, since earlier you said:

Like I said before, some of my leagues are pretty casual but even in those leagues, if a free agent RB gains enough value to vault him into the top 30 range for that given week, he is very likely going to get snatched up.

But if you did accidentally think I was talking about ten such players being available, you should now realize that was a misunderstanding and there's no reason to keep going on that point.

So let's look at his week 16 rankings, he has Ryan Grant and Beanie Wells ranked in the top 30 - yet both were available in one of my more competitive leagues where people manage their teams through the end. Beanie Wells disappointed as he got hurt in that game, but Ryan Grant put up a great 23 points. These guys were available in my league, and a lot of leagues.

Wow, dude. You're using Week 16 as an example? When many leagues only have two teams (quite possibly the two strongest teams in said league) remaining? C'mon bro. I don't want to say you're sounding desperate now, but you do realize why this example is incredibly flawed, right?

See bold. I said this is not the case in this league, we have money prizes for teams that do well in weeks 15 and 16 in this league even if they aren't in the playoffs - incentivizing everybody to keep managing through the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These were the first 12 free agent RB's on waivers after Week 13 last year in my main league...

Danny Woodhead

Dexter McCluster

Kendall Hunter (IR)

Jason Snelling

Toby Gerhart

Cedric Benson (IR)

Charles Clay (IR)

Peyton Hillis

Justin Forsett

Cedric Peerman

Montell Owens

Chris Ogbonnaya

I asked for a list of all the players owned, not a couple of the players available, but luckily your list will suffice. Bam, Danny Woodhead right there on your list as available in free agents. A player that I singled out in fact in an earlier post.

There's a reason why Danny Woodhead only had 32% ownership in ESPN leagues last year despite finishing as a top 30 RB (he was incidentally owned in most of my leagues fwiw). It's not because people are stupid or leagues are dead - it's because there's simply not all that much demand for a very low upside RB3. Sure he may give you a point more in any given week than you'd otherwise get, but owners aren't really concerned with such small point amounts when they cap your long term upside.

Montell owens was also rated #35 for week 14 by the bestdome guy (http://www.beastdome.com/2012/fantasy-football-rankings-beauty-the-beast-week-14/), which although not strictly RB3 by my criteria - isn't far off at all. He would have fit my criteria for a RB3 in a 12 team league though. He put up 91 yards and a TD, plus an 11 yard reception in week 14.

Now I could respond in kind and say "LOL there are RB3's just sitting there in your league, man you play in a joke league LOLOL," which is essentially how you two have been treating me, but really I just wanted to show you that in pretty much every league there's a couple of these guys available. It's not because you're in a joke league that Woodhead was available for free, just sitting there waiting for anybody at all to grab him if they need him. It's because that's the way all of these leagues are.

But thank you for the additional league insults. FWIW I do play in 16 team leagues also, and would be happy to join one if you're inviting me into one of your leagues. Obviously streaming RBs is different in those leagues, because less players are available and also because in a 16 team league you only need 3 points to be top 48 compared to 7 points for top 30 in a ten team league.

But this was never about what leagues are hard or easy, this started off as me giving an example of a special case in in the context of a ten league. People argued that this was not the case, even in ten team leagues there aren't RB3's available. I argued it was. Then I got insulted about the quality of my ten team league relative to other ten team leagues, and now finally we are reaching insults about all ten team leagues in general. Classy, but unnecessary and irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank god I was able to rush out and pick up Danny Woodhead for that Week 13 so I didn't miss out on his 5.9 points in a PPR scoring system or his 3.9 standard points. What about Week 14? Oh he was good for another 3.8 in PPR and 1.8 in standard.

You still haven't come anywhere near proving your point even though you've told us in 12 paragraphs that you have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking ex-ante not ex-post. It's easy to say people shouldn't have started Doug Martin in week 15 against NO after the fact, but we've made it very clear we're talking about before the fact here.

I know you're glad you didn't have start Woodhead week 13 and 14, but he did put up a nice 22.7 points in week 15 (27.7 PPR), 10.5 points in week 16 (12.5 PPR), and 9.7 points in week 16 (14.7 PPR). So between weeks 13 to 17 he averaged 9.7 points per week in standard and 12.9 points per week in PPR. I think that qualifies as RB3 production. He also finished the season as a top 30 RB overall in standard scoring, not sure off hand about PPR but I'd guess he ranked even better there.

But it's not really about Woodhead, there are other guys if you don't agree with me using him as an example. You didn't provide me with what I asked, so I had to make due with what I was given. If you want to give me a list of every single RB owned like I asked for, I'd be happy to point out other solid options (ex-ante) like I did with Woodhead and Owens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm done, you win, I'm changing my whole strategy this year, not drafting a single RB because I can just add 2 studs off waivers each week to fill out my lineup.

And remember......draft your kicker in round 11.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know you're glad you didn't have start Woodhead week 13 and 14, but he did put up a nice 22.7 points in week 15 (27.7 PPR), 10.5 points in week 16 (12.5 PPR), and 9.7 points in week 16 (14.7 PPR). So between weeks 13 to 17 he averaged 9.7 points per week in standard and 12.9 points per week in PPR. I think that qualifies as RB3 production. He also finished the season as a top 30 RB overall in standard scoring, not sure off hand about PPR but I'd guess he ranked even better there.

One last thing on this, he did have a monster fluke game Week 15 AGAINST THE SAN FRANCISCO FORTY-NINERS!!!! I'm sure a ton of people would've been in on the claim for him Week 15 against one of the best run defenses in the NFL after back-to-back duds against Miami and Houston.

You are bashing us for using "after the fact" examples, yet you are calling Woodhead's December averages "RB3 worthy". Just stop now please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just arguing against the myth that it's super hard to fill your RB3 slot with a roughly top 30 RB on a week to week basis. It's in fact very easy, for everybody, to find such RBs.

I don't know where you got the idea that I was saying there was ten such guys available, I never hinted at any such thing.

I highly doubt you ever though I was talking about there being ten players available

But if you did accidentally think I was talking about ten such players being available, you should now realize that was a misunderstanding and there's no reason to keep going on that point.

If you didn't mean that there were 10 available, then why did you say that "It's very easy for everybody to find these RBs"? EVERYBODY! Did you mean that it was easy for ONE PERSON per league to find these backs? Because that's not exactly the same as everybody, sir.

Do you now see how ridiculous your hyperbole sounds? If you meant what you said, that it's some extremely simple task for "everybody" to pick up useful free agent RBs, then there would be at least 10 (probably many more since it's "very easy") available every single week.

Honestly, I'm so done with this whole thing. It's just hard to resist pointing out the flaws in your logic. I can't believe this entire situation commenced over a couple of guys on this forum (a forum for which I respect the fantasy minds of most of the users) who don't see anything wrong with taking a kicker in the 11th or 12th round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not really what it's about, RB3's aren't exactly studs. But the conversation was just about whether there's a problem getting low level starters on a weekly basis, there is not. I admit I probably wouldn't have considered Woodhead a RB3 for week 15, but you didn't give me what I asked for, and I would have considered him a RB3 for several other weeks when he may have also been available in your league (e.g. certainly week 16 against the Jags and week 10 against Buffalo).

Although I would indeed caution you against blindly drafting RBs simply because they are RBs if better players are available at other positions.

I've won plenty of leagues with crappy RBs but studs at other positions. Points are points, regardless where they are coming from. Rotating QBs while having a stud RB3 is really not all that different than rotating RB3's while having a stud QB.

-----

SenatorSpaceman, do you understand what analysis on the margin means?

For the tenth time, lets look at the following situation:

Danny Woodhead is a free agent

No team has picked him up, no team wants to pick him up. He's a free agent as I said.

There are ten teams, Team A, Team B, Team C, ... Team J.

Now please tell me why 9 teams are unable to pick him up, and which is the only team that could possibly pick him up, despite him just sitting there. Until he's picked up, everybody is free to pick him up - despite there not being ten Woodheads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way of looking at it:

Suppose I said, "everybody could draft Jackie Battle in the first round if they wanted." Clearly it doesn't mean that there are ten Jackie Battles.

What it means is that since nobody is going to draft Jackie Battle in the first round, if anybody wanted to be able to do so, they would be able to do so.

Obviously if we reached a crazy place where somebody did in fact draft Jackie Battle first overall the rest of the league wouldn't be able to draft him in the first anymore. But my original statement wouldn't be wrong because I ever thought there were ten Jackie Battles, the place I would have been mistaken is that nobody wanted him in the first.

If we bring this over to my original claim that everybody can get low end RB3's on a weekly basis, if I was wrong it wouldn't be because I thought there were more RB3's available than there actually were. It would because I thought nobody wanted those RB3's when people actually did. I think I've done a pretty good example of showing that there really isn't as much demand for these guys as one might initially think, but if you disagree with me that's the place to disagree. To be clear: my mistake would be thinking nobody wants Woodhead that bad, not thinking that there are ten Woodheads.

Is this misunderstanding cleared up yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may apply to your specific league, but man I'm telling you in my leagues there's just not that type of player readily available on waivers. I owned Woodhead in this league for a few weeks, and dropped him Week 12. Also, my leagues use a FAAB system, so if there is one usable guy on waivers, he'll draw a lot of attention and you'll need to spend to get him. And even then, there's no guarantee he's gonna do anything.

I just look at my roster differently, I know I can get sure solid numbers week in, week out from my QB & RB's if they are quality. But WR's and TE's even if they are studs are gonna have games where they only throw out a line of 2-3 catches for 50 or less yards...but I understand that, so I'm OK looking for WR3/WR4 options on waivers each week because there's a lot more of them to choose from on waivers; but I want at least 3 quality backs on my roster -- and not because I need to start all 3 of them, my leagues use a Flex, but even with just 2 RB slots, I want at least 3 guys to give me coverage during the year. If you are planning on streaming your RB3, that's just insane in my opinion, but I guess it can be done in smaller leagues with less skilled owners...which is what we've been saying all along. If you think your league is tough, branch out and try something bigger, because I can guarantee RB-streaming is a system used by exactly 0% of teams in my leagues (out of 1000's of teams).

I used to crush my home poker game, I knew the players better than they did, knew exactly what to do and when, but I'm not stupid enough to think I can compete with the guys on TV playing for bets 50x the size of my mortage, because their game is much tougher than my regular opponents. Same thing in your league, you've discovered a niche strategy that works against a specific league, it's not going to work for every owner in every league and you've gotta understand that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RB streaming isn't a strategy you really plan to do, it's something you fall back on if needed and it can work. I've successfully streamed in 16 team leagues, so it can work in larger leagues too.

I really don't understand how this even got so out of hand. I thought I was saying something small and innocent that pretty much everybody on these forums already knew - that if you're in a really tight spot, it's not all that difficult to find a 1 week stopgap RB who can get you 7 points or so in a ten team league (or 3 points in a 16 team league). These stopgap RBs won't win you your league, and they don't help your team long term, so they aren't something you want to rely on if you don't have to (which is incidentally why they are available), but if your team is strong enough at other positions they can keep you afloat.

I'm not the only person to have found this to be the case either. I know rraayy3 has, e.g. (this same argument took place in the other thread, there because people said you had to go RB-RB because otherwise you're in too much trouble getting anybody startable on a week to week basis, and I disagreed with that)

I once won a league cycling Vince Young and Jason Campbell at QB. My best team ever (on paper), I took Rodgers 1st round and didnt take RB til the 3/4th of a 14 team league. I made the playoffs starting Moreno/Bryce Brown last year aling with Kaep/Gordon/dx and the waiver allstars after my team fell apart.

Point: There's no right/wrong way to build a team. Gimme 3 studs, regardless of position, in the first 3 rounds --- and I'll sort out the rest later.

I think it was probably similar in your league too, you just didn't realize it because you didn't have to worry about it. But if all your RBs ended up hurt, I think you would have been able to scrap together 3 RBs most weeks and average around 7 points per spot. Of course that's not all that good, considering a lot of people are probably getting 15 points from a RB1 and 10 points from a RB2, but it's still better than averaging 1 point per slot or whatever people seem to think you'll end up with if you stream RBs.

I know you said Woodhead was owned until week 12, which is fine - maybe he's a bad example - but for example Owens was also apparently available in week 14. He's one of those guys I was talking about okay one week outlook, but other than that he's on a bad team and had a tough upcoming future schedule against MIA and NE, not really a guy you expect to drop 15+ points even though he got lucky and did in week 14. I can't blame anybody if they didn't rush to pick him up, even though he was grabbed in my league.

Maybe if you're in a league where benches are really big benches none of these guys will be available, but if only 50 RBs are owned it should be easy to get these guys. And I know I'm not the only person to find it easy to find low level low upside stop-gaps. For example somebody else said they couldn't find the type of RBs I'm talking about (Woodhead, Ryan Grant, Bell, Beanie Wells, Montell Owens, types) and they got called out by third parties as trolling:

You have only 5 bench spots and you are really saying you can't find quality rbs on the wire throughout the year?

Are you trolling or what?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of this thread is not can you pick up a RB3 in your league. If you can/are picking up Reece/Vereen/RB3 AND starting them, then your team has other issues, like depth and your league mates don't think the player has much upside or they'd be spending waiver priority/bucks on them too. The point of this thread is "do you draft a kicker prior to the last round." The answer is normally "No." The reason is value. Please explain why NOBODY uses waiver priority or waiver bucks for a kicker? It is because there are 19 more on the waivers and you can always pick up a top 10 matchup. if you want to argue Gostkowski, have at it. He averages 1 point per game more on the year than the #12 kicker. He also plays in Foxboro and is a week 14-16 question every year with weather. And he wasn't even #1 kicker last year or the year before. The leading kicker last year was Blair Walsh. So good luck guessing who it will be this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See that's the thing, I never disagreed with any of the things you said.

Most of the back and forth has been people claiming that I've been saying things I haven't been saying and me trying to straighten them out as to what I said. Everybody, including me, agree that normally you don't draft a kicker until the last round, or at all.

However, one of the people here was high on Gostkowski and wanted to draft him a little higher. Everybody jumped on him and was saying how stupid he was, and his defense was that he wasn't missing out on anybody he wanted. I then jumped in and said that, although it's unusual, it is a valid defense. Last year I wanted Janikowski in one of my leagues so instead of drafting RB, DST, K in the last three rounds I went K, RB, DST and drafted the same RB in round 15 as I would have in round 14. Janikowski obviously didn't work out, but other than that it didn't affect my team at all. I didn't sacrifice RB quality to get the kicker I wanted, because I got the same RB I would have drafted anyways.

Then this took all sorts of side tangents about how could I possibly know that RB would have been available, etc etc. But really I don't think I said anything crazy at any point and I don't know why it has been taken as such.

In fact I thought I was saying something that nobody could possibly disagree with: if the rest of your team is going to be exactly the same, there's really no harm in drafting kicker you like a little better.

It depends from person to person and league to league whether you can pull the above off, but if you can I don't see what the problem is.

When I go all back to the post I made on page 2 which ignited the firestorm, I still don't see what was so incendiary about it:

But really this is a call each person needs to make on their own and it changes from league to league. You have to decide who your sleepers are that you want, and whether you'll still get them if you jump up a round to take a kicker. If you get the same position player, but a better kicker, then I'm not really seeing what the problem is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...