How high do you take jonathan brooks

[wickerkat1212]

Right about 8 or 9.

Figure Williams, Daniels, Maye for sure.
Harrison, Nabers, Odunze for sure.
Possibly Bowers and JJM.
That means 1.09.

In Superflex #1 of mine, he went 1.07, before JJM, Maye, and Thomas.
In Superflex #2 of mine, he went 1.10, after the usual guys plus Worthy. I took Maye at 1.06 and Thomas at 1.11.
In 1 QB league, Dynasty #4 (RB premium league) he went 1.04. I took Benson at 1.10 (I have Conner).

[tstafford]

One hour ago, he went 1.2 in a 1qb league draft I was in.

Can’t fix stupid

I get it that rookie WRs are the darlings of dynasty world. But at some point, teams have to draft for need.

This "draft for talent" sounds good on paper, but doesn't always work in the real world. If a team is stacked and ready to contend, but light at RB, I can't think of a good reason to draft a WR who will not play for that fantasy team over a RB who will start from week 1.

I'm in this to win, not have value on paper.

You have a point. It's easy on a forum to take strong positions about drafting for value, not holding RBs on non-contenders, not trading for RBs during the off-season, etc. The historical arguments support those positions when looked at across many leagues. However we play in individual leagues with ~11 other mangers. Leagues operate idiosyncratically - not always mirroring the broader market. If trades are hard to come by, at some point managers have to draft for need.

[tstafford]

Right about 8 or 9.

Figure Williams, Daniels, Maye for sure.
Harrison, Nabers, Odunze for sure.
Possibly Bowers and JJM.
That means 1.09.

In Superflex #1 of mine, he went 1.07, before JJM, Maye, and Thomas.
In Superflex #2 of mine, he went 1.10, after the usual guys plus Worthy. I took Maye at 1.06 and Thomas at 1.11.
In 1 QB league, Dynasty #4 (RB premium league) he went 1.04. I took Benson at 1.10 (I have Conner).

I'm very curious to see where he goes in my SF league. I think the tiers and results you list are what "should" happen but I'm not sure if it "will" happen. The scarcity of the position, the draft capital and fairly ideal situation could pump him up. Sort of like JJM has rocketed up boards.

We're going in to year two in the SF league so this is the first rookie draft. Based on the start-up and especially the trades during year one, the league doesn't value QBs like the forum consensus. I could see Brooks going before Maye for example. Instant gratification.

[Anteaters]

Can’t fix stupid

I get it that rookie WRs are the darlings of dynasty world. But at some point, teams have to draft for need.

This "draft for talent" sounds good on paper, but doesn't always work in the real world. If a team is stacked and ready to contend, but light at RB, I can't think of a good reason to draft a WR who will not play for that fantasy team over a RB who will start from week 1.

I'm in this to win, not have value on paper.

You have a point. It's easy on a forum to take strong positions about drafting for value, not holding RBs on non-contenders, not trading for RBs during the off-season, etc. The historical arguments support those positions when looked at across many leagues. However we play in individual leagues with ~11 other mangers. Leagues operate idiosyncratically - not always mirroring the broader market. If trades are hard to come by, at some point managers have to draft for need.

I agree that the likelihood of trades is a big part of making this decision. Some leagues simply do not have an overactive trade market. Other times, there may be more trade activity, but the price of trading for a RB capable of producing a T12RB season is high, and maybe even higher factoring in the youth of Brooks.

If Brooks generates Pacheco-like RB fantasy production for five years, I think that's a fair trade off if the WR ends up replicating Devonta Smith's fantasy production for eight years. I like Devonta, but if he's my WR3 and I have a chance to add Brooks (who might end up my RB1 or RB1b) I think that's a fair value swap.

I think there's a tendency to look at all top rookie WRs through only a best-case scenario. There is no guarantee Nabers/Odunze will produce better fantasy stats than Devonta/Amari/Drake. Trading London for the next rookie RB who might produce like Gibbs/Pacheco/RWhite is not a bad tradeoff in my opinion.

It's all a matter of preference and roster need. Very few WRs in a rookie draft are definitively inherently more valuable to a fantasy roster than a RB who might be a T12RB producer for five or six years.

[tstafford]

I get it that rookie WRs are the darlings of dynasty world. But at some point, teams have to draft for need.

This "draft for talent" sounds good on paper, but doesn't always work in the real world. If a team is stacked and ready to contend, but light at RB, I can't think of a good reason to draft a WR who will not play for that fantasy team over a RB who will start from week 1.

I'm in this to win, not have value on paper.

You have a point. It's easy on a forum to take strong positions about drafting for value, not holding RBs on non-contenders, not trading for RBs during the off-season, etc. The historical arguments support those positions when looked at across many leagues. However we play in individual leagues with ~11 other mangers. Leagues operate idiosyncratically - not always mirroring the broader market. If trades are hard to come by, at some point managers have to draft for need.

I agree that the likelihood of trades is a big part of making this decision. Some leagues simply do not have an overactive trade market. Other times, there may be more trade activity, but the price of trading for a RB capable of producing a T12RB season is high, and maybe even higher factoring in the youth of Brooks.

If Brooks generates Pacheco-like RB fantasy production for five years, I think that's a fair trade off if the WR ends up replicating Devonta Smith's fantasy production for eight years. I like Devonta, but if he's my WR3 and I have a chance to add Brooks (who might end up my RB1 or RB1b) I think that's a fair value swap.

I think there's a tendency to look at all top rookie WRs through only a best-case scenario. There is no guarantee Nabers/Odunze will produce better fantasy stats than Devonta/Amari/Drake. Trading London for the next rookie RB who might produce like Gibbs/Pacheco/RWhite is not a bad tradeoff in my opinion.

It's all a matter of preference and roster need. Very few WRs in a rookie draft are definitively inherently more valuable to a fantasy roster than a RB who might be a T12RB producer for five or six years.

I tend to agree with this.

But one caveat - it's possible that no one can produce T12RB results in CAR. It might just be a messy slog with a RBBC, bad game flow, low scoring, etc. I agree that Brooks appears to be the best bet but it's a crowded RB room esp. with the (odd) addition of always injured Penny.

[Anteaters]

But one caveat - it's possible that no one can produce T12RB results in CAR. It might just be a messy slog with a RBBC, bad game flow, low scoring, etc. I agree that Brooks appears to be the best bet but it's a crowded RB room esp. with the (odd) addition of always injured Penny.

No disagreement there. He "could" do well ... but the Tepper effect is always going to be a factor until it's not.

[tstafford]

But one caveat - it's possible that no one can produce T12RB results in CAR. It might just be a messy slog with a RBBC, bad game flow, low scoring, etc. I agree that Brooks appears to be the best bet but it's a crowded RB room esp. with the (odd) addition of always injured Penny.

No disagreement there. He "could" do well ... but the Tepper effect is always going to be a factor until it's not.

Yep. It appears toxic. This is the only reason I'm not 100% all in on BY as a buy-low.

[zoster80]

One hour ago, he went 1.2 in a 1qb league draft I was in.

Can’t fix stupid

I get it that rookie WRs are the darlings of dynasty world. But at some point, teams have to draft for need.

This "draft for talent" sounds good on paper, but doesn't always work in the real world. If a team is stacked and ready to contend, but light at RB, I can't think of a good reason to draft a WR who will not play for that fantasy team over a RB who will start from week 1.

I'm in this to win, not have value on paper.

I’m in similar situation, I am in Rebuild obviously (Zo Nasty below), but I have four 1sts, and while I would never consider him at 1.03, am thinking about him at 1.06, because I am positive he won’t make it to 1.10. It’s not a draft for need situation but more what work better for my team, do I need another WR lottery ticket, I have a bunch from the last two drafts or should I diversify my lottery tickets,, regardless I’m ending up with at least two WRs out of my 4 picks already,

[blueeyedbanditt]

I'm drafting at 1.05 in 1QB and am contemplating taking him there even though I am set at RB. I've gone back and forth on it so many times. I just think the WR market has become flooded with young talent that they frankly either need to be top 10 (maybe even top 5!) options or they're all the same. Does a Worthy or a BTJ move the needle for my team? Probably not. And there's a decent chance they both bust, neither are flawless prospects. Ideally you'd want to move back and pick up some capital so someone else can draft those WR, but you can't always do that and might miss out on Brooks. I'm trying hard to move up to the 1.01 for a difference maker at WR I think or just taking Brooks at 1.05.

[tstafford]

I'm drafting at 1.05 in 1QB and am contemplating taking him there even though I am set at RB. I've gone back and forth on it so many times. I just think the WR market has become flooded with young talent that they frankly either need to be top 10 (maybe even top 5!) options or they're all the same. Does a Worthy or a BTJ move the needle for my team? Probably not. And there's a decent chance they both bust, neither are flawless prospects. Ideally you'd want to move back and pick up some capital so someone else can draft those WR, but you can't always do that and might miss out on Brooks. I'm trying hard to move up to the 1.01 for a difference maker at WR I think or just taking Brooks at 1.05.

Totally fine to take him 1.05 in 1QB. I'm with you that Worthy/BTJ have some kinks.

[Anteaters]

I'm drafting at 1.05 in 1QB and am contemplating taking him there even though I am set at RB. I've gone back and forth on it so many times. I just think the WR market has become flooded with young talent that they frankly either need to be top 10 (maybe even top 5!) options or they're all the same. Does a Worthy or a BTJ move the needle for my team? Probably not. And there's a decent chance they both bust, neither are flawless prospects. Ideally you'd want to move back and pick up some capital so someone else can draft those WR, but you can't always do that and might miss out on Brooks. I'm trying hard to move up to the 1.01 for a difference maker at WR I think or just taking Brooks at 1.05.

I think it was great to take Brooks at 1.05!

Team 1 in my sig, I was in a similar situation in a 1qb draft. I hoped Odunze would fall to me. When he did not, I looked at the rookie WR options remaining, looked at my roster, and knew none of those rookies would ever be likely good enough to start for me. The rookie RBs might not start for me either, but with RBs, there is always a chance. It came down to Ladd or Corum and I chose Corum.

So I took Corum and later Jaylen Wright. With my roster, I'd rather take a flier on a RB who has T12 potential, than a WR with dynasty WR30 potential. Later, I picked up Corley to satisfy my WR dart throw needs.

[killer_of_giants]

after benson, back-end of round 1 in SF or anywhere after 1.05 in 1 QB.

[MacDaddy123]

Brooks and Benson are going higher than they should go simply because of demand.
As the 2017 RB class ages out, RB supply is dwindling, which is what is driving up demand.

In Full PPR, neither RB should go ahead of Worthy, Brian Thomas Jr., or even McConkey, but further we get from the draft the higher the RB's seem to be going. That is just RB inflation, IMO.
I'm hoping the 2025 RB class can once again replenish the waters in the RB pool, and restore the RB economic balance.

In rookie drafts that started April 27th/28th, I did not see any RB go in round 1 of 12 team SF TEP rookie drafts.
More recent drafts I have seen Brooks go as high as 1.07, over Odunze.

Simple supply and demand values, as WR's are plentiful now, even TE's are at an increased supply/lower demand now.
Now, RB's are the scarcity in fantasy.

[Black Adam]

You have a point. It's easy on a forum to take strong positions about drafting for value, not holding RBs on non-contenders, not trading for RBs during the off-season, etc. The historical arguments support those positions when looked at across many leagues. However we play in individual leagues with ~11 other mangers. Leagues operate idiosyncratically - not always mirroring the broader market. If trades are hard to come by, at some point managers have to draft for need.

Best post I’ve seen on here in a minute.

I think we’re all guilty of this to a degree. I know I for one don’t buy into the ideas of “contending vs. rebuilding”, don’t necessarily draft for need or value, don’t really care about future picks, and I always lock up RBs early and often, to somewhat mixed results, as seen by the final standings in my sig.

[tstafford]

Brooks and Benson are going higher than they should go simply because of demand.
As the 2017 RB class ages out, RB supply is dwindling, which is what is driving up demand.

In Full PPR, neither RB should go ahead of Worthy, Brian Thomas Jr., or even McConkey, but further we get from the draft the higher the RB's seem to be going. That is just RB inflation, IMO.
I'm hoping the 2025 RB class can once again replenish the waters in the RB pool, and restore the RB economic balance.

In rookie drafts that started April 27th/28th, I did not see any RB go in round 1 of 12 team SF TEP rookie drafts.
More recent drafts I have seen Brooks go as high as 1.07, over Odunze.

Simple supply and demand values, as WR's are plentiful now, even TE's are at an increased supply/lower demand now.
Now, RB's are the scarcity in fantasy.

Agreed that RBs are scarce.

IMHO - I think the earlier drafts you reference were undervaluing Brooks more than he's overvalued now. Once healthy, he projects as a weekly starter for '24 and is already a top-20 option at the position for dynasfy (maybe top-15). For a contending team - and that's the range he's going in drafts - he's a great pick. I'm sitting at the 1.10 in my SF league and hope he falls. Probably won't.