#746

I reckon Jerrick McKinnon is a better bet than what you have.

He’s got volume and has been a bit better since the change of OC. He should be fairly game-script proof against Dallas.

#747

McKinnon won’t clear waivers in time. (Yes I have been looking through the waiver wire of a league I’m not even in).

1 Like
#748

Zero RB was rubbish wasn’t it?

The leagues I waited on Running Backs in (not even to the extent of zero RB,) I flunked. Those I went running back hard and early in, I’m doing well. On any given week, look at the relative strength on the wire of WR and RB. Never again…

#749

Same here!

Oh shit, they play tonight don’t they.

#750

I generally follow a sort of zero rb, although it’s less ZERO RB STRATEGY and more that I value good WRs over good RBSs (outside of the elite 3-4 RBs who I’d probably go for next year if I was drafting at the top). But if I’m in round two, and a really nice rb had dropped, I’d take him, especially with scarcity. It’s just so murky with injuries and committees, I’d rather take a more easily projectable WR, and take a chance on a less fancied RB who I think is pretty much the same as guys being drafted in rounds 3 and 4 (this year i got Gore, Hill, Blount, Langford, Mathews across my two teams, did get Ingram late in 2nd in one as well tbf).

I target certain players, and I’ll overdraft by a round or two, but generally i just go for what I perceive as best player available for my team when I’m up, regardless of position (unless I need eg a TE for a legal lineup)

#751

The trouble with zero RB is that it relies on several things.

One - All the first/second round RBs being shit/getting injured. OK, that largely happened last year, but Johnson, Elliott, McCoy, Freeman and Bell have more or less held entire teams together this year.

Two - RB replacements being more or less as valuable as the original. Patently not the case, see E Elliott/A Morris, D Johnson/A Ellington.

Three - Picking up the replacement RBs on the waiver wire when players do go down. This is fine, assuming all the other owners have given up or are dribbling vegetables.

On top of all that, in most cases there is only one RB worth having on each team (and in some cases zero, thanks Giants), while there can be two or three receivers that are valuable on any one team. Fuck’s sake, Pryor and Coleman have been useful for fantasy purposes on an 0-12 Browns team. So the pool of RBs is so small compared to WRs, as you allude to.

There’s also absolutely no guarantee your elite WRs will perform better or remain injury free compared to their RB counterpart. Take Amari Pooper’s first 4 picks this year: Hopkins, Robinson, Cobb, Decker. Why, is that a 2-10 start I see? Yes, yes it is.

#752

JFC :joy:

#753

Along with all of ^this, goalline situations are so important because of the value of TDs in fantasy.

If you’re passing from inside the 5, you’re normally looking for a big body receiver in the endzone, which (outside of Mike Evans) isn’t what the top fantasy WRs are. Top running backs get carries at the goalline, top WRs lose receptions to TEs, fullbacks, eligible linemen etc.

#754

Yep, I’ve lost count of the times this year when a receiver has been targeted in the endzone, there’s defensive pass interference, RB bumbles in from the one yard line to save his day despite averaging three yards a carry. Melvin Gordon, I’m looking at you.

1 Like
#755

Blount.

Short yardage running backs on high powered passing offences have become quite a thing this year.

#756

First world problems - fantasy football edition.

Ball on one yard line, 1st and goal. Your power running back is on the field, ready to go. Rub hands with glee, permit yourself a small cackle.
False start, offense, fat fucker number 77. First and goal from the 6. Passing down back trots on. Throw slipper at telly, go to bed.

2 Likes
#757

Mike Evans + no Doug Martin this year has been a goldmine

#758

Sigh.

trade.jpg792×102 18.9 KB

#759

Nevermind, it’s not like he’s the highest scoring WR in fantasy this sea-oh

#760

Wouldn’t bother with Jalen. Hill is a much better option, he’s seeing more snaps at the moment so you can expect around 10pts. I’ve got no idea bout Rogers.

#761

I mean yeah, you’ve gotta be smart about it - tbf, lots of the ‘fantasy geniuses’ were projected Hopkins and Robinson as a first round picks, but I tend to steer clear of one season wonders in the first/second, especially when there’s a big change at/questionable QB. And this year was a funny one - Bell suspended, Elliot a rookie, Johnson only had half a season (and unknown whether he’d be the bellcow), Freeman had a bizarre season last year (an amazing run, but pretty average outside that), Murray was supposed to be in a committee, don’t think i saw McCoy projected as first round anywhere. Peterson and Gurley were probably the equivalent of Robinson and Hopkins - great players on bad Os.

I dunno. I think to win a league you generally need to get a homerun or two lower down the draft or in waivers, and pair that with a couple of solid picks in the first 3. Don’t think it comes down to picking a particular position ‘here’ and another position ‘there’.

#762

This, exactly.

1 Like
#763

You can’t win in rounds 1-3 but you sure can lose.

I think the key with drafting is being completely flexible in your strategy and in the main, taking the best value on the board. The value on the board changes according to the cards you already hold and what else is left deeper down the board. It’s why going in with a strict 0 RB/ 0 WR strategy is rarely going to be successful.

1 Like
#764
1 Like
#765

Totally. Maybe zig when other people zag (the whole zero RB thing seems to have exploded this year, making it a lot less viable). But yeah, if other teams are fixated on one position for whatever reason, creates value elsewhere. Kinda (and this is a stretch) like when real teams are flipping between 3-4 and 4-3 (blah blah base personnel vs Nickel/Dime) - sometimes the best one to be is the one that’s used less. If everyone’s in 4-3, there’s probably some great nose tackles available.

1 Like