More 2020 Hype: "If You Need A RB or WR, this is the draft for you."

[OhCruelestRanter]

What do you think are the chances Tua overtakes Burrow as the 1.01 once he starts throwing? I have the 1.01 and need a QB - I also think Tua is more talented and has more upside than Burrow, but obviously the injury is a big consideration.

Burrow is the 1.01 in SF.

If Taylor kills the combine and then lands in KC as the first RB off the board, then I think it comes down to your format. "Superflex" means a lot of things. 10 team, 4 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 3WR, 1TE, 3Flex? I'll take the RB in the great spot. 14 team, 6 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1Flex? Gimme Burrow.

[FantasyFreak]

What do you think are the chances Tua overtakes Burrow as the 1.01 once he starts throwing? I have the 1.01 and need a QB - I also think Tua is more talented and has more upside than Burrow, but obviously the injury is a big consideration.

Burrow is the 1.01 in SF.

If Taylor kills the combine and then lands in KC as the first RB off the board, then I think it comes down to your format. "Superflex" means a lot of things. 10 team, 4 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 3WR, 1TE, 3Flex? I'll take the RB in the great spot. 14 team, 6 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1Flex? Gimme Burrow.

Very true

[bjd5211]

What do you think are the chances Tua overtakes Burrow as the 1.01 once he starts throwing? I have the 1.01 and need a QB - I also think Tua is more talented and has more upside than Burrow, but obviously the injury is a big consideration.

Burrow is the 1.01 in SF.

If Taylor kills the combine and then lands in KC as the first RB off the board, then I think it comes down to your format. "Superflex" means a lot of things. 10 team, 4 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 3WR, 1TE, 3Flex? I'll take the RB in the great spot. 14 team, 6 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1Flex? Gimme Burrow.

Sure, but unless someone gives detailed set of their league settings, I'm just going to assume that value leans heavily to QB when they ask for advice or rankings in a "Superflex league", because in most cases that's exactly where the value leans in SF leagues.

[Jigga94]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class or players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

I'm slowly coming to the realization that I'm not getting him at 1.02

[FantasyFreak]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class or players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

I'm slowly coming to the realization that I'm not getting him at 1.02

Yeah, I have a feeling that's what's going to happen. Unless landing spots change something.

[OhCruelestRanter]

Burrow is the 1.01 in SF.

If Taylor kills the combine and then lands in KC as the first RB off the board, then I think it comes down to your format. "Superflex" means a lot of things. 10 team, 4 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 3WR, 1TE, 3Flex? I'll take the RB in the great spot. 14 team, 6 pt passing TDs, with 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1Flex? Gimme Burrow.

Sure, but unless someone gives detailed set of their league settings, I'm just going to assume that value leans heavily to QB when they ask for advice or rankings in a "Superflex league", because in most cases that's exactly where the value leans in SF leagues.

That's interesting. It's not my experience. Most of the superflex startups I've joined the past three years are 12 teams with 8-10 non-QB starters, with PPR, TE Premium, and some other non-QB scoring bonus (threshold bonuses, big play bonuses, PPC). I have one 10 teamer where it should clearly be a RB, and one 14 teamer where it should clearly be a QB. I wonder how common these types of rules are among superflex leagues. I have no idea and wouldn't know where to look.

[Hankybro21]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class of players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Can you give a Source/link for this?

[bjd5211]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class of players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Can you give a Source/link for this?

https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-footba ... ty-leagues

[Johnny B. Goode]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class of players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Can you give a Source/link for this?

https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-footba ... ty-leagues

As a 1.02 holder I hope this talk continues.. Swift should be 1.01 no matter what. I'd be thrilled to land him at 2.
For some reason PFF hates Swift. Keep it up!

[Pullo Vision]

Yeah, at least he couldn't find a correlation. The draft capital tends to be affected by combine, so guys with similar draft capital, it seemed the slower one was the better pick because the draft capital was skewed by the times. I thought that was funny. Draft the slower guy with similar draft capital to a faster guy.

He was pretty clear that as of now Taylor should be the runaway 1.01, though. Those names he lined up with were all elite.

That makes a ton of sense. Speed guys get drafted for their on-field "clear out" benefit but, from a fantasy perspective, are overdrafted.

The faster a guy is, the more important weight/BMI and stop/start ability is.

[gunfrees]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class or players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Did you hear the funny tidbit about how thoroughly irrelevant the combine seems to be for WR prospects. He found greater correlation between worse forty yard times for 2nd round WR's and future success than the faster guys. Basically the two things that seemed to be connected to future success were total nonsense (like different weight lifting drills) suggesting the combine was total noise, and not helpful at all w/WR's.

That would echo what I've heared from rotoviz: namely, draft capital, then breakout age, then dominator, and if you're looking for more details you can check out some regression trees they make, but basically with WR, you're best advised to just use a combo of draft capital and breakout age, and dominator to screen guys out. You'll miss on the occasional guy like McLaurin and Michael Thomas, but they are so rare (only about 10-15% of WR's that are producing WR1-WR4 type seasons have sub 50ish percentile breakout ages, and oddly, 2 of the most recent 4 or 5 were Ohio State guys-so paying attention to situations like Ohio State, this year's Alabama perhaps, for outliers probably makes sense for the rare exceptions) that it's just a highly effective tool for tossing out some players more likely to bust than others.

Jesse Reeve's from PlayerProfiler seems to also think draft capital + breakout age is probably your best bet for a receiver

https://twitter.com/JesseReevesFF/statu ... 7859127298

[Johnny B. Goode]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class or players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Did you hear the funny tidbit about how thoroughly irrelevant the combine seems to be for WR prospects. He found greater correlation between worse forty yard times for 2nd round WR's and future success than the faster guys. Basically the two things that seemed to be connected to future success were total nonsense (like different weight lifting drills) suggesting the combine was total noise, and not helpful at all w/WR's.

That would echo what I've heared from rotoviz: namely, draft capital, then breakout age, then dominator, and if you're looking for more details you can check out some regression trees they make, but basically with WR, you're best advised to just use a combo of draft capital and breakout age, and dominator to screen guys out. You'll miss on the occasional guy like McLaurin and Michael Thomas, but they are so rare (only about 10-15% of WR's that are producing WR1-WR4 type seasons have sub 50ish percentile breakout ages, and oddly, 2 of the most recent 4 or 5 were Ohio State guys-so paying attention to situations like Ohio State, this year's Alabama perhaps, for outliers probably makes sense for the rare exceptions) that it's just a highly effective tool for tossing out some players more likely to bust than others.

Jesse Reeve's from PlayerProfiler seems to also think draft capital + breakout age is probably your best bet for a receiver

https://twitter.com/JesseReevesFF/statu ... 7859127298

Jesse must have seen my spreadsheet and been inspired...

This was covered a few pages ago. I can share my spreadsheet by request. Can predict a fantasy top 24 WR better than the NFL draft hit rate of a fantasy top 24 WR

[Lord_Varys]

Can you give a Source/link for this?

https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-footba ... ty-leagues

As a 1.02 holder I hope this talk continues.. Swift should be 1.01 no matter what. I'd be thrilled to land him at 2.
For some reason PFF hates Swift. Keep it up!

Depends on landing spot, and depends if you prefer explosiveness to elusiveness.

[FantasyFreak]

Can you give a Source/link for this?

https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-footba ... ty-leagues

As a 1.02 holder I hope this talk continues.. Swift should be 1.01 no matter what. I'd be thrilled to land him at 2.
For some reason PFF hates Swift. Keep it up!

I don't think he's head an shoulders above everybody else.....especially at 5 foot 8. Ba dum. But seriously, I disagree that he's the 1.01 regardless of when and where he goes. He's a good back, but he's not a transcendent talent by any means.

[stoneghost28]

Interesting hearing Scott Barrett from PFF saying Taylor should be the clear 1.01. The analytics he used had him in a class of players that is jaw dropping. He also said yards per route run was the most predictive stat for receiving at the next level for RB's, in which he finished first, and Swift 2nd.

Can you give a Source/link for this?

He's mentioned this on a few podcasts over the past week, I think one was Dynasty Blueprint with McDowell and Williamson. Would have to check. I'd couch what he said as something along the lines of:

Taylor fits in snugly with the next tier after Barkley when it comes to RB's drafted over the past decade, the very best of '15, '17 and '18.