As most of you know, I'm not a zero-RB guy in drafts. I'm also not an RB-RB guy. Some of you are the same way. We feel out the room, picking the players that makes the most sense in rounds 1 and 2, and so on until taking the "best player available" no longer works. Because maybe it's the 10th round, and we need to snag a solid-upside QB. Or we reach for an RB handcuff because we already have that team's bell cow.
I'm bringing up drafts because I looked back last night on a couple drafts I did for friends who needed a last-minute sub when life got in the way. In one, I took Austin Ekeler and Travis Kelce in the first two rounds. In the other, I took Justin Jefferson and CeeDee Lamb.
Both strategies seemed pretty safe, but created entirely different pathways for the remaining picks. The first offered the luxury of not needing to worry about a TE later, narrowing my focus to three positions for most of the draft, though without a sure-fire top-10 WR. The second offered the luxury of not needing to worry about another WR for awhile, though without sure-fire top-14 RB.
Of course, we know better. Top-10 WRs still exist in round 3 and beyond. So do top-14 RBs. If this past weekend showed anything, it's that even the most elite players can crash at the worst time. And if the past many years have shown anything, it's that elite production can come from the most unlikely places.
I've read studies "proving" that the best teams are drafted by those who have one of the 2-3 picks. I've read other studies showing the middle rounds are ideal.
It's all bunk. It's drawing conclusions based on data without context. When Christian McCaffrey went #1 in most 2020 drafts (he was the consensus overall #1), and Saquon Barkley went #2 (because he was the consensus #2), that skewed the results. Those who picked first or second were at a distinct disadvantage. They didn't know it yet, but they'd just drafted the ultimate busts.
So then the question is, are these busts predictable? Or more to the point, can we draft with a high degree of certainty that our top players are relatively low injury risks? Can we protect ourselves from falling victim to "the ultimate bust"?
And that's the holistic approach to drafting and in-season roster management. I equate it to going to the eye doctor to get fitted for glasses or contact lenses, when they ask if you can see better using lens "one or two . . . three or four . . . five or six . . .?" With the seventh pick in the first round, we might go (1) bellcow RB, or (2) elite WR. Depending on bullishness and league scoring, you might be tempted to go (3) Josh Allen, or (4) Travis Kelce.
Then, depending on our choice, we'll have an entirely new set of choices in round 2. And so on. Each building on the next.
It begins with that first pick. Statistically/historically, RBs are bigger injury risks. QBs have more consistently high floors, but are sometimes no better than waiver fodder. WRs are relatively durable, but are highly dependent on the healthy of their starting QB. TEs are almost as durable as WRs, but most never come close to rivaling the ceilings of the other three positions.
There are pros and cons at each step. If you pick a bellcow who racks up 275+ touches while starting every game, congratulations. You're one of the lucky ones. Roughly half of all preseason top-12 RBs fall noticeably short of expectations. But the funny thing is, so do WRs. And TEs. Quarterbacks actually are the most consistently "good." But the problem is, they're not often good enough to merit burning a middle-round pick, when a comparable or better QB could be found in the final round.
We can dig even deeper like the frequency of 20+ point and 30+ point scorers at each position. I've walked through this once or twice. My findings led me to shift strategies midseason last year, and were directly responsible for my winning the title. If you want the best shot at a big boom, go with a highly targeted WR. If you want the best shot at a gaping positional advantage, go with an elite TE.
There are dozens of variables to consider. Some are weighted heavier than others, such as the dreaded "heavy-workload" RB (350+ touches the previous season). Others are might or might not be indicative of risk. For example, this summer I pointed out that Cooper Kupp led all non-QBs in 2021 with 1,301 offensive snaps: "The year before, the top four snap-count non-QBs were DeAndre Hopkins, Logan Thomas, Darren Waller, and Michael Gallup. They all missed between six and 11 games last season. The year before, Christian McCaffrey and Julian Edelman led all non-QBs, and 2020 was similarly injury-plagued."
Is there something to that? I might research it more this summer to find out.
The key here is that there's no such thing is a sure thing, and there's no such thing as a bad draft spot. I get that some you might feel emotionally pained when you learn you're picking 12th or 13th in a 14-team draft. But you know who picked 12th and 13th in my draft this year? Joe Terlecki and Joe Gross. They finished #1 and #2 in the regular season. Terlecki went RB-TE-WR in rounds 1-3. Gross went WR-RB-RB.
Among the top-two regular-season finishers in each of the Premier Fantasy Football League's 12 divisions, the most common draft positions were #3 (frequently taking CMC or Ekeler), #5 (most popular: Justin Jefferson), #8, and #12. If CMC had gotten seriously hurt for the third straight season, or if Ekeler had been knocked out for 10 games, those results might have come out very differently.
As always, it's about playing the probabilities. When it works out, we look deservedly smart. When it doesn't, that doesn't mean we made a bad decision. It might just mean we took a bigger risk--or else we minimized risk, but the bad luck found us anyway.
I'm bringing up drafts because I looked back last night on a couple drafts I did for friends who needed a last-minute sub when life got in the way. In one, I took Austin Ekeler and Travis Kelce in the first two rounds. In the other, I took Justin Jefferson and CeeDee Lamb.
Both strategies seemed pretty safe, but created entirely different pathways for the remaining picks. The first offered the luxury of not needing to worry about a TE later, narrowing my focus to three positions for most of the draft, though without a sure-fire top-10 WR. The second offered the luxury of not needing to worry about another WR for awhile, though without sure-fire top-14 RB.
Of course, we know better. Top-10 WRs still exist in round 3 and beyond. So do top-14 RBs. If this past weekend showed anything, it's that even the most elite players can crash at the worst time. And if the past many years have shown anything, it's that elite production can come from the most unlikely places.
I've read studies "proving" that the best teams are drafted by those who have one of the 2-3 picks. I've read other studies showing the middle rounds are ideal.
It's all bunk. It's drawing conclusions based on data without context. When Christian McCaffrey went #1 in most 2020 drafts (he was the consensus overall #1), and Saquon Barkley went #2 (because he was the consensus #2), that skewed the results. Those who picked first or second were at a distinct disadvantage. They didn't know it yet, but they'd just drafted the ultimate busts.
So then the question is, are these busts predictable? Or more to the point, can we draft with a high degree of certainty that our top players are relatively low injury risks? Can we protect ourselves from falling victim to "the ultimate bust"?
And that's the holistic approach to drafting and in-season roster management. I equate it to going to the eye doctor to get fitted for glasses or contact lenses, when they ask if you can see better using lens "one or two . . . three or four . . . five or six . . .?" With the seventh pick in the first round, we might go (1) bellcow RB, or (2) elite WR. Depending on bullishness and league scoring, you might be tempted to go (3) Josh Allen, or (4) Travis Kelce.
Then, depending on our choice, we'll have an entirely new set of choices in round 2. And so on. Each building on the next.
It begins with that first pick. Statistically/historically, RBs are bigger injury risks. QBs have more consistently high floors, but are sometimes no better than waiver fodder. WRs are relatively durable, but are highly dependent on the healthy of their starting QB. TEs are almost as durable as WRs, but most never come close to rivaling the ceilings of the other three positions.
There are pros and cons at each step. If you pick a bellcow who racks up 275+ touches while starting every game, congratulations. You're one of the lucky ones. Roughly half of all preseason top-12 RBs fall noticeably short of expectations. But the funny thing is, so do WRs. And TEs. Quarterbacks actually are the most consistently "good." But the problem is, they're not often good enough to merit burning a middle-round pick, when a comparable or better QB could be found in the final round.
We can dig even deeper like the frequency of 20+ point and 30+ point scorers at each position. I've walked through this once or twice. My findings led me to shift strategies midseason last year, and were directly responsible for my winning the title. If you want the best shot at a big boom, go with a highly targeted WR. If you want the best shot at a gaping positional advantage, go with an elite TE.
There are dozens of variables to consider. Some are weighted heavier than others, such as the dreaded "heavy-workload" RB (350+ touches the previous season). Others are might or might not be indicative of risk. For example, this summer I pointed out that Cooper Kupp led all non-QBs in 2021 with 1,301 offensive snaps: "The year before, the top four snap-count non-QBs were DeAndre Hopkins, Logan Thomas, Darren Waller, and Michael Gallup. They all missed between six and 11 games last season. The year before, Christian McCaffrey and Julian Edelman led all non-QBs, and 2020 was similarly injury-plagued."
Is there something to that? I might research it more this summer to find out.
The key here is that there's no such thing is a sure thing, and there's no such thing as a bad draft spot. I get that some you might feel emotionally pained when you learn you're picking 12th or 13th in a 14-team draft. But you know who picked 12th and 13th in my draft this year? Joe Terlecki and Joe Gross. They finished #1 and #2 in the regular season. Terlecki went RB-TE-WR in rounds 1-3. Gross went WR-RB-RB.
Among the top-two regular-season finishers in each of the Premier Fantasy Football League's 12 divisions, the most common draft positions were #3 (frequently taking CMC or Ekeler), #5 (most popular: Justin Jefferson), #8, and #12. If CMC had gotten seriously hurt for the third straight season, or if Ekeler had been knocked out for 10 games, those results might have come out very differently.
As always, it's about playing the probabilities. When it works out, we look deservedly smart. When it doesn't, that doesn't mean we made a bad decision. It might just mean we took a bigger risk--or else we minimized risk, but the bad luck found us anyway.