Is Stud RB Theory faltering due to split backfields

[GiantsFan11 0]

10 team league starting 1QB, 2RB 3WR/TE

 

I have taken the points scored by the top 10QB, 20RB and 30WR/TE over the past 3 years averaged them out by position and then applied an X factor

 

Top 10 Spots is RB dominated with 7RB, 2WR and 1 QB (No surprise)

 

Spots 11-20 show 1RB, 8WR and 1QB (Shocking that the top WRs out X factor the 2nd RB)

 

Spots 21-30 continue the trend with 4RB 5WR and 1 QB

 

I was very surprised to learn that after the top 7RBs go that it is a long WR run before RB value returns

 

 

If by chance your league only plays 2WRs the X value of WRs is decreased such that out of the first 20 picks 10RB, 7WR and 3QB have the highest X factor...here in the 3rd round some of the QBs start to become of significant value

 

 

X factor for RBs was 180, 160, 149, 131, 102, 91, 81, 61, 45, 43, 37, 33, 20, 18, 16, 14, 9, 8, 4, 0....notice that once the top 7-8 backs are off the board the differences start to become very small. The gap between RB 15 and RB 25 is only 41 points and in a league where folks go RB RB often there is value at WR and QB in rounds 2 & 3

 

Thoughts?

[sharkie22 0]

While there would not be much value for everyone to take RB/RB with their first two picks it still puts a premium on backs. I would still think those who manage three backs within the first 5 rounds will be at an advantage over those who do not considering injuries and the always unwelcome underperformers against the need to still start two backs. If anyone could truly know for certain which lower ranked backs will over perform and who will underperform/ get hurt that would obviously change everything but not knowing is generally what causes the majority of early picks to go to that position. The split backfields and fewer backs consistently getting the lions share of touches only serve to raise the value of those backs who do get the ball.

[xenophobe 1]

It puts a premium on the top backs, but will force a lot of owners to reach for that 2nd back. Honestly, I believe it creates opportunities for more backs to potentially be productive and can get you decent numbers as your #2 assuming that spot isn't supposed to be the strength of your team.

[remote controller 143]

I still have never seen more backs go earlier than they are going this year. Should be a bonanza for all different philosphies, as those who draft based soley on value will get it in wideouts and Manning, and those who want backs, will get them. The wideouts are very deep, so the Stud back guy gets a good crop of middle of the road wr's, and the guy who takes Manning or Wideouts early, can count on a bevy of RBBC canidates late. Throw in when the TE run takes place, and realizing that qb's will be available until deep in the draft, and we are set up for a very exciting draft season, unlike any I can remember.

[xenophobe 1]

I also think being able to correctly read the situations in many of these cities is going to determine the fate of many FF leagues. I see places like Denver and Dallas where there is some potential for fantasy impact, but are nearly impossible to assess. But in the end, I don't think it's the strategy that's important so much as what you do with it.

[remote controller 143]

I also think being able to correctly read the situations in many of these cities is going to determine the fate of many FF leagues. I see places like Denver and Dallas where there is some potential for fantasy impact, but are nearly impossible to assess. But in the end, I don't think it's the strategy that's important so much as what you do with it.

I see all the strategies working with each other this year though, and see what you mean, as you "will" be able to get the players you target easier than other season's, in my opinion. That could lead to boom or bust.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

I believe it's key to get a stud running back who doesn't have to split time.

 

If you wind up with 2 backs who tend to split time, the chances are better that you may get screwed in the end.

 

One stud back is a must. IMO, running back should always be the first player chosen.

[Wildman 0]

I have an article that should be up this week on the concept of RBBC and what I feel is the myth of RBBC's taking over.

 

In essence I believe the reason isn't a coach's desire to have a split backfield, but in a vast majority of cases a necessity.

 

Check the home page within the week.

[Junkie 0]

I believe it's key to get a stud running back who doesn't have to split time.

 

If you wind up with 2 backs who tend to split time, the chances are better that you may get screwed in the end.

 

One stud back is a must. IMO, running back should always be the first player chosen.

 

 

I wouldn't say RB should ALWAYS be the first player chosen. If you have a late pick, say 8,9 or 10, you could go ahead and grab a stud WR or Manning and come back with RB early second round. Those guys that picked ahead of you will probably be going for a WR in the second, and given the number of second and 3rd tier RBs, there should be one waiting for you in the 3rd round.

 

As for the question in the origional post, I think this is not the year to go RB/RB. After the first 7, the field evens out quite a bit at that position.

[remote controller 143]

I wouldn't say RB should ALWAYS be the first player chosen. If you have a late pick, say 8,9 or 10, you could go ahead and grab a stud WR or Manning and come back with RB early second round. Those guys that picked ahead of you will probably be going for a WR in the second, and given the number of second and 3rd tier RBs, there should be one waiting for you in the 3rd round.

 

As for the question in the origional post, I think this is not the year to go RB/RB. After the first 7, the field evens out quite a bit at that position.

It's always the year to go Rb, Rb!!! .........and sometimes then Rb

[jedeye 0]

Something has to be done to bring back the importance of QBs into fantasy football. Im a firm believer in starting 2 QBs if your league is small enough to handle it.

[remote controller 143]

I have always been a proponent of keeping it as close to real football as possible.

[rebooters 1]

it seems like with alot of teams have RBBC or questions on who will be a viable RB starter on other teams that we should make sure we have 2 RB by the end of round 4. for most FF'ers this will happen. there are always a boat load of reciever and its always hit and miss with them once you are out of the top 5-10 WR's. IMO its much easier to predict a RB's success for the next season than it is the WR. of course there are always suprises(otherwise whats the fun?) but you still gotta play the odds. as far as quaterbacks, seems to get more frustrating each year. this year i believe i will stick with waiting until late because there will be a top 5 QB sitting there past the 6th round. the trick is, which one? i am thinking its safe to assume that a higher number of RB's will be taken earlier this year than years past.

[waterwolves 0]

For me it depends where I draft. If I am going to draft in the top three this year, barring injury, any of those backs are going to be huge, so I would take a WR with my second pick and then come back and grab a Dunn or Dillion to pair with LT, LJ or SA. That way I have a super stud RB and WR but still get a good 2nd back. If I am drafting late in the first I always go RB, RB, WR because you have to make up ground on the guys with the super stud by drafting 2 studs at RB.

[remote controller 143]

For me it depends where I draft. If I am going to draft in the top three this year, barring injury, any of those backs are going to be huge, so I would take a WR with my second pick and then come back and grab a Dunn or Dillion to pair with LT, LJ or SA. That way I have a super stud RB and WR but still get a good 2nd back. If I am drafting late in the first I always go RB, RB, WR because you have to make up ground on the guys with the super stud by drafting 2 studs at RB.

[RLLD 4,283]

For me it depends where I draft. If I am going to draft in the top three this year, barring injury, any of those backs are going to be huge, so I would take a WR with my second pick and then come back and grab a Dunn or Dillion to pair with LT, LJ or SA. That way I have a super stud RB and WR but still get a good 2nd back. If I am drafting late in the first I always go RB, RB, WR because you have to make up ground on the guys with the super stud by drafting 2 studs at RB.

 

I concur.

 

It is important to mock draft against your league by yourself a few times prior to the draft. Try to guess who might fall to you and when. Then you can start to ask questions like whether or not you want Steve Smith and Rudi or Edge and Holt....as an example.

 

Start measuring the potential outcomes that could occur and decide if the values match or are truly skewed in one direction.

 

I like to review my guesses against what actually transpires as well to see if i am thinking straight about tendencies and values. I also track drafts to understand where the "runs" tend to occur in each league, and whether certain owners are trackable as well.

[Junkie 0]

For me it depends where I draft. If I am going to draft in the top three this year, barring injury, any of those backs are going to be huge, so I would take a WR with my second pick and then come back and grab a Dunn or Dillion to pair with LT, LJ or SA. That way I have a super stud RB and WR but still get a good 2nd back. If I am drafting late in the first I always go RB, RB, WR because you have to make up ground on the guys with the super stud by drafting 2 studs at RB.

 

 

This is what I'm thinking. Guys drafting early in the 1st will probably go WR in the second. If you draft late in the first and don't grab a WR either then or early second, those guys will not only start out with a better RB than you, but will also top you at WR1 as well

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

I wouldn't say RB should ALWAYS be the first player chosen. If you have a late pick, say 8,9 or 10, you could go ahead and grab a stud WR or Manning and come back with RB early second round. Those guys that picked ahead of you will probably be going for a WR in the second, and given the number of second and 3rd tier RBs, there should be one waiting for you in the 3rd round.

 

As for the question in the origional post, I think this is not the year to go RB/RB. After the first 7, the field evens out quite a bit at that position.

 

I typically, someone grab's Manning earlier than 8-10. Other than Manning, there is not QB to warrant such a high pick.

 

Now if you're in a snake draft, you can grab a top flight WR on the way back. My strategy has always been stud RB with the first pick. Second pick should be either another stud running back, Manning (if available), or a tier one WR.

 

My point being that if you don't get an everydown stud RB within the first 2 rounds, I think the draft is a bust from there out.

 

Gotta have mainstays in the lineup week in and week out.

[Kilroy 0]

Hey guys, this might be an interesting read on the topic here: Splits for RBs

[SoloMatisse 0]

Im a stud RB purist, but in a very recent 12 team redraft thru 15 rounds, here are how my first 6 picks worked out....

 

Ron Brown, RB

Terrell Owens, WR

Antonio Gates, TE

Joe Addai, RB

Cedric Benson, RB

Dominic Rhodes, RB

 

 

So, even though I reached for non- RBs in rounds 2 and 3, I snagged 4RBs in the 1st 6 rounds. I would loved to have Thomas Jones to cuff with Cedric, but I couldnt make that happen and it may hurt. The Colts and Bears dont have a history of committees, so Im hopeful Ive got the right guys, but despite the RBBCs littered throughout the league, you still just have to fill up your rosters with as many prominent backs as possible and hope for the best. But my 2nd and 3rd round picks were absolutely influenced by what I deemed as lack of value at the RB position due to all the uncertainty.

[DaveJ 0]

Yes and no... yes it still works and works well... but no in that unless your drafting in the top 8 or 9 spots, you're not getting a true stud.