Production for #1 vs #2 vs #3 WRs

On episode 43 of the FF4W podcast, I walked through the creation of a DFS lineup. It ended up finishing in the top 7%, in large part because my roster included three of the four highest-scoring non-QBs. One of the most important strategies for securing those big performers is to fade "elite" TEs and DSTs to invest more heavily in high-upside RBs and WRs.

The reason? As shared before, I've done research identifying the frequency of 20+, 30+, and 40+ point weekly scorers each season since 2002. TEs and DSTs rarely crack 20 points and almost never hit 30+.  

For example, in any given week across the past 23 seasons, DSTs collectively have had a 9.2% chance of scoring 20+ points, 0.7% chance of scoring 30+, and 0.1% chance of scoring 40+ (which has happened three times, most recently in 2012).

By comparison, RBs collectively have had a 54.3% chance of scoring 20+ points, 11.3% chance of scoring 30+, and 1.9% chance of scoring 40+. Interestingly (and not surprisingly), the percentages from 2002 to 2024 were roughly 61%, 18%, and 3%, respectively. The decline of the "bell cow running back" these past 20 years has significantly decreased the frequency of big RB performances.

My spreadsheet has a lot of information that can be sliced a lot of different ways. For example, WRs have had more 20+ point scorers than any other position in every recorded season *except* 2008, when RBs had four more. WRs had had more 30+ point scorers than any other position these past 20 seasons *except* four times compared to RBs and once compared to QBs. And since 2007, RBs have had more 40+ point scorers than WRs only twice, while QBs have had more only once.

But there's always been one area where I've wanted to do more research: slicing WRs further based on depth chart. Yesterday I finished assembling this information for the past three seasons. Here's what it tells us:

78% of 30+ point WR scorers have been teams' #1 WRs. This includes rare instances where a #1 misses a game, and the #2 dominates in his place. But in most cases, it's the locked-in #1. Additionally, 19% of 30+ point scorers have been #2 WRs. In most cases, these are #2's playing alongside their #1 teammate. Occasionally, it's been a #3 who was promoted to #2 in the absence of the regular #2. Finally, only 4% of 30+ point scorers have been WRs who entered the game as the expected #3, but who--whether because of an in-game injury to a #1, or a long-awaited ascent to prominence--came up bigger than anyone could have expected.

The breakdown for 40+ point scorers is 82% #1's, 18% #2's, and zero instances of #3's.

This is why ascending #2's like Emeka Egbuka (until Chris Godwin returns) and Wan'Dale Robinson are wise draft investments. They have a path to dominance that many other #2's don't and often for a fraction of the cost of a #1. This is also why many managers have shifted toward drafting WRs earlier than 10-15+ years ago. Snagging an elite-upside #1 WR gives you more 30+ and 40+ point potential than any other positional player.

This is why I generally steer clear of #2's in sub-par offenses, as well as #3's in pretty much any offense. There are a lot of ways to win. But sometimes the easiest way to lose is when an opponent starts a couple of guys who get 30+, and we don't have the personnel to realistically compete.

This is also why my DFS lineups are heavy on elite-upside WRs, because based on probabilities, that's our best shot at a huge output. 

---

Today's FF4W podcast: "Re-Valuing Struggling WRs"

Text Anytime ($30/month):
(1) Venmo -- https://www.venmo.com/u/ff4winners
(2) Cash App -- https://cash.app/$ff4winners
(3) PayPal -- https://paypal.me/bjrudell?country.x=US&locale.x=en_US