Avoiding RB at 1.01 and 1.03 in the rookie draft?

[Avery]

Team 1 below and I'm entering year two of a rebuild.

Strategy will likely change once we see landing spots for the players (and I may post this question about with more clarity once we do!) but I am contemplating drafting:
1.01: Chase
1.03: Pitts

My general thought is that I don't see any of the top RBs as can't miss RB1s (although admittedly I'm not a big college football fanatic and I am relying on reading rookie profiles I trust that have a good track record), and I love Chase and Pitts.

I know a lot of this will come down to whether you think that drafting a TE that early is fool-hearty (and I get many people do) and I get given the history of rookies at the position it is - but I think Pitts may be the exception that proves the rule. I know advice may be, "If you want Pitts, trade down!" but looking at my league history, the top TEs get drafted in the first round from 1.06 - 1.10 so I don't want to get cute (although I see what any offers are at 1.03).

Also, looking at the last few years of rookie drafting and, although this is anecdotal, a lot of 1st round misses at all positions.

Also also, as I've played this hobby for a while, I'm embracing the strategy more and more, if you like a guy, go get that guy!

So I would love to hear what the wisdom of the board says.

Food for thought:
- I only need to start 1 RB in this league
- TEs get a scoring bump (see sig)
- I'm really liking Trey Sermon and could be targeting him at 2.01
- I can only start 1 TE and I already have two solid ones

Edit to add:
This is a contract league, so not true dynasty which changes some equations, but that's adding a 3rd dimension so for the sake of clarity, just kinda ignoring that here.

[Mtt33]

Sure you only have to start 1 rb but you also only have to start 2 WR. WRs grow on trees in this format, opinion of course but chase 1 to me would be a mistake. I’d look to trade the pick if you don’t like the RBs.
Only starting 6 guys Is extremely shallow, depth and age wouldn’t be a priority to me, but I could see an argument for pitts or even Lawrence pretty early here if you use the picks.

[Avery]

Sure you only have to start 1 rb but you also only have to start 2 WR. WRs grow on trees in this format, opinion of course but chase 1 to me would be a mistake. I’d look to trade the pick if you don’t like the RBs.
Only starting 6 guys Is extremely shallow, depth and age wouldn’t be a priority to me, but I could see an argument for pitts or even Lawrence pretty early here if you use the picks.

Also, should mention, that I'm highly confident that the guy at 1.02 has Harris and Chase as his 1 and 2 so if I traded out of of 1.01 below 1.02, I'm guessing Harris would go 1st and Chase would then go to him at 1.02.

[abloom]

Chase at 1.01 is good. Pitts at 1.03 is likely not a great move.

[bigbuck22]

I actually don't mind this strategy. Your starting requirements make it less desirable but... in a rebuild, you grab top talents. Lamb, Chase. And Pitts could be huge for a decade. You can address other positions in years to come. RB/QB are quicker to develop and strike while WR and TE typically take a few years. Why not lock those guys in. By the time they're at the top of their game, you'll have added a few other players at RB/QB that will hopefully hit.

[Avery]

I actually don't mind this strategy. Your starting requirements make it less desirable but... in a rebuild, you grab top talents. Lamb, Chase. And Pitts could be huge for a decade. You can address other positions in years to come. RB/QB are quicker to develop and strike while WR and TE typically take a few years. Why not lock those guys in. By the time they're at the top of their game, you'll have added a few other players at RB/QB that will hopefully hit.

That is a good summery of kinda what I'm (potentially) thinking. Don't worry about position but grab talent in a rebuild - even with short benches and lineups.

[PBFalcon]

I don't think you will find many people on this forum approving of Pitts at 1.03. I know there has not been a good track record of 1st round TEs producing in fantasy, but I am with you in that Pitts looks like a guy that can be the exception.
I draft at 1.03 this year. I already have Kittle and Henry, but I am still considering Pitts if he is there for me. Guys like him just don't come around very often. And like you said, I would rather get my guy and miss then watch someone get him and have him turn into a stud in their team.
So anyways ... Yes, chase and Pitts seems like a good draft haul to me.

[prinefan]

Bottom line, just take who you like. I don't buy into the "group-think" premise.

[Gator Sens]

Bottom line, just take who you like. I don't buy into the "group-think" premise.

Taking who you want is a good way to go. Grab your favourites! For me, I would go Chase and Smith personally.

[Avery]

Bottom line, just take who you like. I don't buy into the "group-think" premise.

Taking who you want is a good way to go. Grab your favourites! For me, I would go Chase and Smith personally.

That is another direction (and as a Giants fan... that could, if the mocks are right, could be extra fun for me!) but interesting to hear others may bee "zigging" away from all RBs early.

[Jigga94]

I'd be fine with Chase and Pitts in that format of very small starting requirements, especially the 1RB part. Of course, I'd always float out those picks for proven assets first. I'm thinking you could snag a stud for either pick possibly from someone with rookie fever.

I will also say with the smaller starting size, QB should probably go a tad higher up. Idk where Lawrence or some of the others will go, but QB is your biggest need

[Avery]

I'd be fine with Chase and Pitts in that format of very small starting requirements, especially the 1RB part. Of course, I'd always float out those picks for proven assets first. I'm thinking you could snag a stud for either pick possibly from someone with rookie fever.

I will also say with the smaller starting size, QB should probably go a tad higher up. Idk where Lawrence or some of the others will go, but QB is your biggest need

I hear you but it's still a start 1 QB league and especially with short benches, there are usually serviceable ones to be had for free, so they just aren't that valuable commodities.

[krtbuckeye]

I like Chase at 1.01. As far as 1.03 goes, I would absolutely take the guy you believe in. I am not on the Pitts hype train, but I do like him as a player. In this format, one could argue he has the most potential of anyone in the class to provide a positional advantage given the small starting req’s at RB/WR and the bump for TEs.

[collbey]

Chase and Pitts. I own 1.01 in a league where I am not close to competing, either going Chase or trading down a few spots to get Pitts.