Change the way the game is played

[Underachiever]

I was looking at a different thread on this forum that listed the ADP's dating back to like 2009 or something and it got me thinking, can WE change the way fantasy football is played, or is it strictly based on the NFL.

in 2009, 10 of the top 13 players according to ADP were Running Backs. Today, you might be lucky to get two (Bell and McCoy). Can I, as an owner change the perception of the RB by constantly winning with them?

In the past 4 years, I have done 9 startup drafts and SEVERAL mocks. in those 4 years, WR reign supreme. Owners trade up in the from the 2nd and 4th rds to own two of the top 8 WRs in the game, but NEVER do they draft 2 of the top 5 RBS.

If I were to take Bell/McCoy/Lacy/(insert 4th RB Murray/Forte/Lynch/whoever you prefer) with a grouping of picks in the first 2/3 rounds, and then sit back until the 6th round and take WRs, you would have to make a damn strong argument to convince me that starting these 4 RBs and a smaller group of mediocre WRs isnt as good if not better than starting 3 WR top tier WRs and 2 mediocre RBs.

So lets pretend these 4 RBs dont get hurt and I win or place in the top 3 4 years in a row. Can I help change the perception of RBs in fantasy football, or what is going to take to get them back into even playing field with WRs..

I would assume scoring rules would play a big part. 1.5 ppr for TEs has been used for years to give them extra value, so if you were to give RBs .5 points per carry or 1.25 ppr, then you are going to even the playing field, but lets pretend the scoring rules are even for RB/WR/TEs.... what is it going to take to get them back to at least 6 of the top 12 ADP being RBs? Is it going to be reliant on the NFL passing less? Or is there something we can do? WR love is out of control, and I am a perfect example. I hate RBs in FF but I need, and I think we all need, them to come back.

[MEuRaH]

So lets pretend these 4 RBs dont get hurt and I win or place in the top 3 4 years in a row. Can I help change the perception of RBs in fantasy football, or what is going to take to get them back into even playing field with WRs..

Maybe within your league, but not in the broader spectrum. I think part of the reason that the ADP of RBs was so high was due to the increase in dynasty players. RBs are always drafted high in redraft leagues, so when these redraft players switched over to dynasty, their perception of value never changed with it. As people started to study value over time, they realized that the consistent value was found in WRs, not in RBs, hence the reason why WRs are valued so much more than RBs.

NFL teams are moving more towards an RB by committee approach. This devalues RBs. The league is making the passing game easier for QBs & WRs, which increases the value on WRs. RBs also take more hits, get injured more often, and change teams more often than WRs do.

In order to get RBs back to an even playing field, many many many things would need to happen. I don't see it happening any time soon.

[kmbryant09]

If you had posted this argument 2 years ago, you would have ended up with Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, and Ray Rice.

Aaaaaand you would have finished last each of the past few years and your team would likely still be years away from competing.

[Swampdonkey17]

I was looking at a different thread on this forum that listed the ADP's dating back to like 2009 or something and it got me thinking, can WE change the way fantasy football is played, or is it strictly based on the NFL.

in 2009, 10 of the top 13 players according to ADP were Running Backs. Today, you might be lucky to get two (Bell and McCoy). Can I, as an owner change the perception of the RB by constantly winning with them?

In the past 4 years, I have done 9 startup drafts and SEVERAL mocks. in those 4 years, WR reign supreme. Owners trade up in the from the 2nd and 4th rds to own two of the top 8 WRs in the game, but NEVER do they draft 2 of the top 5 RBS.

If I were to take Bell/McCoy/Lacy/(insert 4th RB Murray/Forte/Lynch/whoever you prefer) with a grouping of picks in the first 2/3 rounds, and then sit back until the 6th round and take WRs, you would have to make a damn strong argument to convince me that starting these 4 RBs and a smaller group of mediocre WRs isnt as good if not better than starting 3 WR top tier WRs and 2 mediocre RBs.

So lets pretend these 4 RBs dont get hurt and I win or place in the top 3 4 years in a row. Can I help change the perception of RBs in fantasy football, or what is going to take to get them back into even playing field with WRs..

I would assume scoring rules would play a big part. 1.5 ppr for TEs has been used for years to give them extra value, so if you were to give RBs .5 points per carry or 1.25 ppr, then you are going to even the playing field, but lets pretend the scoring rules are even for RB/WR/TEs.... what is it going to take to get them back to at least 6 of the top 12 ADP being RBs? Is it going to be reliant on the NFL passing less? Or is there something we can do? WR love is out of control, and I am a perfect example. I hate RBs in FF but I need, and I think we all need, them to come back.

You're a pioneer, and I'll follow you anywhere

[jeffster]

Also, I think your plan to take Bell, McCoy and Lacy in the first two rounds of a startup would be viable... as long as you were the ONLY team doing it. If an entire league is going all-in on WRs and you go against the grain and snatch up all the best RBs, I think that could potentially pan out for you, at least in the short run. But as soon as one other team tries to do it, there just aren't enough stud RBs to go around, and the position is so volatile you'll probably both end up busts.

[princey98]

In a 16- team startup I was in last year I won it all with Lynch and Murray as my workhorse backs. I got by at WR with Marshall, Djax and Roddy White, with Harry Douglas and Boldin as Bye week and injury fill ins. Gronk at TE was a huge boost as well. At QB I started a disgusting combination of RG3, Austin Davis, Drew Stanton and Mark Sanchez before trading for Big Ben for the playoff run.
I had the 1 seed going into the playoffs, on the back of the #2 and #4 scoring RBs. The #2 Seed had Bell and Forte- the #1 and #3 scoring RBs. The team I faced in the Finals had Lacy and Foster- the #5 and #6 scoring Rbs.

My conclusion here is that, if you actually want to win championships, draft workhorse RBs. If you want a team that people on forums will compliment you on, draft WRs. Obviously either way can and does win titles, but from my experience, the teams with the elite backs are the teams that win.

[clarion contrarion]

my ? for OP is why would you want to change the perception
if you have found a gold mine that would be like selling maps to your gold mine
my best advice SHHHHHH!
when yer pursuers are on the wrong path do not correct them - paraphrasing sun tzu or maybe napolean

[Telperion]

In a 16- team startup I was in last year I won it all with Lynch and Murray as my workhorse backs. I got by at WR with Marshall, Djax and Roddy White, with Harry Douglas and Boldin as Bye week and injury fill ins. Gronk at TE was a huge boost as well. At QB I started a disgusting combination of RG3, Austin Davis, Drew Stanton and Mark Sanchez before trading for Big Ben for the playoff run.
I had the 1 seed going into the playoffs, on the back of the #2 and #4 scoring RBs. The #2 Seed had Bell and Forte- the #1 and #3 scoring RBs. The team I faced in the Finals had Lacy and Foster- the #5 and #6 scoring Rbs.

My conclusion here is that, if you actually want to win championships, draft workhorse RBs. If you want a team that people on forums will compliment you on, draft WRs. Obviously either way can and does win titles, but from my experience, the teams with the elite backs are the teams that win.

In other words, you got lucky with Murray's breakout and are building an entire draft strategy based on one lucky hit. In 2013 how would that have turned out if you went Spiller & Rice in your startup? Everybody thinks they can get 2015's version of Bell and Murray, or 2013's Charles, McCoy, and Lynch, but you're just as likely to get Martin, Richardson, Rice, Spiller.

Nobody is disputing that a workhorse back can carry you in the playoffs, the problem is you can't identify in advance who that workhorse back will be.

[TommyL31]

I was looking at a different thread on this forum that listed the ADP's dating back to like 2009 or something and it got me thinking, can WE change the way fantasy football is played, or is it strictly based on the NFL.

in 2009, 10 of the top 13 players according to ADP were Running Backs. Today, you might be lucky to get two (Bell and McCoy). Can I, as an owner change the perception of the RB by constantly winning with them?

In the past 4 years, I have done 9 startup drafts and SEVERAL mocks. in those 4 years, WR reign supreme. Owners trade up in the from the 2nd and 4th rds to own two of the top 8 WRs in the game, but NEVER do they draft 2 of the top 5 RBS.

If I were to take Bell/McCoy/Lacy/(insert 4th RB Murray/Forte/Lynch/whoever you prefer) with a grouping of picks in the first 2/3 rounds, and then sit back until the 6th round and take WRs, you would have to make a damn strong argument to convince me that starting these 4 RBs and a smaller group of mediocre WRs isnt as good if not better than starting 3 WR top tier WRs and 2 mediocre RBs.

So lets pretend these 4 RBs dont get hurt and I win or place in the top 3 4 years in a row. Can I help change the perception of RBs in fantasy football, or what is going to take to get them back into even playing field with WRs..

I would assume scoring rules would play a big part. 1.5 ppr for TEs has been used for years to give them extra value, so if you were to give RBs .5 points per carry or 1.25 ppr, then you are going to even the playing field, but lets pretend the scoring rules are even for RB/WR/TEs.... what is it going to take to get them back to at least 6 of the top 12 ADP being RBs? Is it going to be reliant on the NFL passing less? Or is there something we can do? WR love is out of control, and I am a perfect example. I hate RBs in FF but I need, and I think we all need, them to come back.

I think these trends are largely based on NFL trends. Just look at the shift in the last 5-10 years of:
1. How many 4000 (and 5000) yard passing seasons we've had
2. How often RBs are taken early in the draft
3. The decrease in 1500 (or 1000) yard rushers

I also think the prevalence of PPR leagues compounds this. PPR became popular to level the playing field and make WRs more important. Now the pendulum has swung in the other direction. I think with the prevalence of information we're getting closer to a 'true' value of players based on longevity and current production but it will still never be perfect. It will also vary league to league.

I think to vary the consensus we'd have to see a shift back to more workhorse RBs who keep a job for multiple years, de-emphasis on passing and likely have non PPR leagues become more the norm.

In reference to princey's point about needing to draft stud RBs to win, I think you typically need stud RBs to win the championship but I think the idea of building around stud WRs is that you have a longer window to be competitive/find your stud RBs. If you have Dez, Julio, and OBJ you might have 10 years to put together a team around them to win whereas if you had Bell and Lacy you might only have 5. I think RBs can definitely be the topper to the cake though and maybe once you're really close to winning you trade a stud WR in order to get a stud RB. I do think most championship teams tend to have AT LEAST one stud RB though. I think the point is that you have to adjust your strategy based on your team situation.

Fun fact in 2008-2010 there were 2 WR seasons that qualified as top 10 in yards from scrimmage for the season (excluding QBs of course). Since 2011, there have been AT LEAST 2 WRs in the top of yards from scrimmage each year.

[Underachiever]

my ? for OP is why would you want to change the perception
if you have found a gold mine that would be like selling maps to your gold mine
my best advice SHHHHHH!
when yer pursuers are on the wrong path do not correct them - paraphrasing sun tzu or maybe napolean

Maybe I want to change it so I can go back to being the guy who has stacked WRs while everyone else picks RBs, haha. Like i said in my OP. I hate RBs in Dynasty. I rarely have good ones, but Im was curious if it were a trend owners could change or if it were dependent on the NFL.

[Underachiever]

If you had posted this argument 2 years ago, you would have ended up with Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, and Ray Rice.

Aaaaaand you would have finished last each of the past few years and your team would likely still be years away from competing.

Yes and No. I would have probably had Rice, but all the RBs i named above have been proven for at least two years. which Trent and Martin never were. But I get your point.

[bruiser]

can WE change the way fantasy football is played, or is it strictly based on the NFL.

Absolutely, you can change it. RBs were the prized possessions back when starting requirements looked like this:
QB, RB, RB, WR, WR, TE, DEF, K - 20 starting RBs and 20 starting WRs in a 10-team standard league.

I'm guessing that few people play in those anymore. The trend has been to add more teams to leagues AND add more starting WRs to lineups. What do you think requiring 2 starting TEs would do to their ADP? in a 20-team league?

[bruiser]

I also think the prevalence of PPR leagues compounds this. PPR became popular to level the playing field and make WRs more important.

Tommy, I have just completed a small study of PPR, .5PPR to determine if it has any significant bearing on the 'values' of WRs. I can tell you that it does not matter if you use either or neither, the value of WRs does not change much at all, but the pass-catching RBs do get significant change in 'value'. When I say that, I mean the WRs all got a raise in points (like inflation), but this was not nearly as significant as making owners find two more WRs to start on Sunday, especially in really deep leagues.

I think what became popular since 2005 was the idea of a larger league and more starting requirements for WRs. As the NFL went to 4-wide or empty-sets, the fantasy football community responded by allowing for fewer starting RBs and more starting WRs on gameday. That created some supply issues that didn't go unnoticed as ADPs shifted the next season.

[Underachiever]

Bobby, Is the value of WRs even throughout or just with say the top 15? Because there are WRs that value is highly increased by PPR that are WR3s and WR4s. Like if I had to choose between Michael Floyd (with Palmer) and Brandin Cooks, my decision would soley depend on whether it were PPR or not.

But If I had to choose between Dez and Julio Im not sure I would think much about it. Dez has 30 more TDs (granted in one extra year) than Julio but Julio has a better situation with his QB and offense and such.

Does that make sense?

[bruiser]

My conclusion here is that, if you actually want to win championships, draft workhorse RBs. If you want a team that people on forums will compliment you on, draft WRs. Obviously either way can and does win titles, but from my experience, the teams with the elite backs are the teams that win.

I won a 16-team super-deep league last year by drafting:
RB1 Bernard Pierce
RB2 Vick Ballard
RB3 Latavius Murray
RB4 Jonathan Stewart
RB5 Donald Brown
RB6 Knile Davis
RB7 Bilal Powell

I spent 8% of my auction funds on my committee. Not one of them had a season worth noting, but I rode 2 of them each week through their moments. I feel very confident about going forward in 2015 as the defending Champ, and these are my guys, lol. Skipping over the annual 'bust' position in my auction allowed me to purchase:

Watt, Gronk, OBJ and a slew of depth players to cover the inevitable injuries. If one of those workhorses 'busts' or gets hurt, a significant portion of your investment is wasted. Investing in my core players (above) was super-cheap because of all the money spent on workhorse 'stables'.