Somewhat early 2024 Draft thread

[Cameron Giles]

The RB class is better IMO than what is being projected by many, but then these guys have been a target for derision for quite a while by the FF groupthink. I don’t see a legit stud bellcow in the bunch, but I do see enough guys with enough positive qualities that they’ll be able to earn enough opportunity to become feasible RB2s/flex at the next level. Some FFers are only interested in studs - and everyone wants those guys on their rosters - but there’s very real value in reliable guys that can round out your starting lineup or fill in solidly when your stud goes down. For some reason some FFers just don’t see any value in those kinds of guys.

I don't think it's groupthink at all. There are a lot of scouts (if not most) who don't care about FF, and think this RB class stinks. It would not be a shock if only 1 RB goes Top 64, which is brutal. Hell, it's realistic that no RBs go R1-2.

If your best sell on this RB class is that you can find some short-term RB2s and Flex radar players, then it is in fact....a bad class and very low upside. It's not awful to get one of those players with a random 2nd or even a 3rd, but these players don't stay on the map for a while and there's nothing special about them.

That said, it's not out of the question for an RB1 to come out this class. Because opportunity is the biggest factor and sometimes the stars align with random players. Kyren Williams and Aaron Jones are examples. But there's really no depth in prospects and it's not top heavy either. It's a lot of guys who wouldn't be in the mix in a competent RB group.

[TheTroll]

The RB class is better IMO than what is being projected by many, but then these guys have been a target for derision for quite a while by the FF groupthink. I don’t see a legit stud bellcow in the bunch, but I do see enough guys with enough positive qualities that they’ll be able to earn enough opportunity to become feasible RB2s/flex at the next level. Some FFers are only interested in studs - and everyone wants those guys on their rosters - but there’s very real value in reliable guys that can round out your starting lineup or fill in solidly when your stud goes down. For some reason some FFers just don’t see any value in those kinds of guys.

I don't think it's groupthink at all. There are a lot of scouts (if not most) who don't care about FF, and think this RB class stinks. It would not be a shock if only 1 RB goes Top 64, which is brutal.

If your best sell on this RB class is that you can find some short-term RB2s and Flex radar players, then it is in fact....a bad class and very low upside. It's not awful to get one of those players with a random 2nd or even a 3rd, but these players don't stay on the map for a while.

This is how I feel… if there is only 1 drafted in first two rounds, that really is a tell tale sign. Also when we are watching the “team needs tracker” for each team (usually the top 4 positions the experts think each team should address in the draft), the teams with RB as team need as one of the 4 positions, how long they wait to fill it as opposed to the other 3 needs will be a big sign too.

[Bronco Billy]

The RB class is better IMO than what is being projected by many, but then these guys have been a target for derision for quite a while by the FF groupthink. I don’t see a legit stud bellcow in the bunch, but I do see enough guys with enough positive qualities that they’ll be able to earn enough opportunity to become feasible RB2s/flex at the next level. Some FFers are only interested in studs - and everyone wants those guys on their rosters - but there’s very real value in reliable guys that can round out your starting lineup or fill in solidly when your stud goes down. For some reason some FFers just don’t see any value in those kinds of guys.

I don't think it's groupthink at all. There are a lot of scouts (if not most) who don't care about FF, and think this RB class stinks. It would not be a shock if only 1 RB goes Top 64, which is brutal.

If your best sell on this RB class is that you can find some short-term RB2s and Flex radar players, then it is in fact....a bad class and very low upside. It's not awful to get one of those players with a random 2nd or even a 3rd, but these players don't stay on the map for a while.

So your position is that a RB class has to have at least 1 - maybe more, what’s your number? - guy who is a lock to be one of the 12 best RBs in the NFL? Or that the class has to have several players selected in at least the 2nd round, despite the way the NFL currently values RBs? Otherwise it just sucks?

We’re going to have to agree to disagree. The NFL has enough misses at RB in drafting some guys way too high while others with strong skill sets drop because some teams (not the entire league, but enough of it) prioritize certain skills that don’t correlate with being successful in the NFL while underemphasizing others that do. Draft capital can easily be one team making a mistake while other teams that have better evaluation systems will let desirable players drop further because demand/supply conditions require filling other positions higher in the draft.

[Cameron Giles]

The RB class is better IMO than what is being projected by many, but then these guys have been a target for derision for quite a while by the FF groupthink. I don’t see a legit stud bellcow in the bunch, but I do see enough guys with enough positive qualities that they’ll be able to earn enough opportunity to become feasible RB2s/flex at the next level. Some FFers are only interested in studs - and everyone wants those guys on their rosters - but there’s very real value in reliable guys that can round out your starting lineup or fill in solidly when your stud goes down. For some reason some FFers just don’t see any value in those kinds of guys.

I don't think it's groupthink at all. There are a lot of scouts (if not most) who don't care about FF, and think this RB class stinks. It would not be a shock if only 1 RB goes Top 64, which is brutal.

If your best sell on this RB class is that you can find some short-term RB2s and Flex radar players, then it is in fact....a bad class and very low upside. It's not awful to get one of those players with a random 2nd or even a 3rd, but these players don't stay on the map for a while.

So your position is that a RB class has to have at least 1 - maybe more, what’s your number? - guy who is a lock to be one of the 12 best RBs in the NFL? Or that the class has to have several players selected in at least the 2nd round, despite the way the NFL currently values RBs? Otherwise it just sucks?

We’re going to have to agree to disagree. The NFL has enough misses at RB in drafting some guys way too high while others with strong skill sets drop because some teams (not the entire league, but enough of it) prioritize certain skills that don’t correlate with being successful in the NFL while underemphasizing others that do. Draft capital can easily be one team making a mistake while other teams that have better evaluation systems will let desirable players drop further because demand/supply conditions require filling other positions higher in the draft.

Yes, and historical numbers back this up. Teams don't value paying RBs a ton of money in free agency, but they still value drafting good RBs with early draft capital. And the success rate for RBs dips round by round. If these backs are good, then teams will pounce on them as soon as they can no matter what.

It's very telling that scouts from an NFL lens and FF lens are aligned in how they feel about the RBs in this class. There's nothing special about an "RB2 Draft Class" in FF. It doesn't mean that it's not good value to get an RB2 with a late 2nd, but it's not particuarly meaningful if you're selling that a position group is underrated.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

There’s going to usable players for FF nearly every year at every position in every rookie draft. But there aren’t any projected stud RBs (such as bijan, breece, etienne, JT, etc) this year, and I haven’t done a deep dive yet but from what I’m hearing there aren’t even any rbs the next level down (guys like swift, dobbins, Javonte, etc). The further down you get, the more variance you’re going to get. So sure there probably will be usable RBs for fantasy but nailing down which once’s is going to be more difficult than usual, I would think. RBs drafted outside of the top 2 rounds have a very low chance of having great success, so if we don’t have many drafted in those rounds that doesn’t bode well for this rb class. The odds a player hits a 1k yard rushing season more or less half’s per draft round. Round 1 it’s 70%, Round 2 it’s 46%, Round 3 it’s 24%.

[tstafford]

FWIW - ADP doesn't support that FF Groupthink is down on the RBs. In DLF April SF drafts four RB prospects went ahead of Charbonnet and six went ahead of Kendre Miller. Two (Brooks and Benson) are inside the top-24 at the position. I'd argue that the ADP suggests folks are overrating them.

ADP is just one data point obviously but it's a important gauge of value.

[Bronco Billy]

FWIW - ADP doesn't support that FF Groupthink is down on the RBs. In DLF April SF drafts four RB prospects went ahead of Charbonnet and six went ahead of Kendre Miller. Two (Brooks and Benson) are inside the top-24 at the position. I'd argue that the ADP suggests folks are overrating them.

ADP is just one data point obviously but it's a important gauge of value.

That’s awfully apples and oranges, isn’t it? You think if Brooks is drafted by IND and Benson is drafted by GB that those ADPs would stay that way? Charbonnet is currently locked into a rbbc and Miller never had much of a chance to get any traction.

[tstafford]

FWIW - ADP doesn't support that FF Groupthink is down on the RBs. In DLF April SF drafts four RB prospects went ahead of Charbonnet and six went ahead of Kendre Miller. Two (Brooks and Benson) are inside the top-24 at the position. I'd argue that the ADP suggests folks are overrating them.

ADP is just one data point obviously but it's a important gauge of value.

That’s awfully apples and oranges, isn’t it? You think if Brooks is drafted by IND and Benson is drafted by GB that those ADPs would stay that way? Charbonnet is currently locked into a rbbc and Miller never had much of a chance to get any traction.

Was just pointing out that as we sit today, people are valuing these guys fairly highly.

I get your point but if people were actually way down on these guys one might expect their ADP to be low and if they land well (DAL) that it would shoot up. Seems weird to me that if the prospects are "bad" that people would take them this high w/o landing spots.

It's not to suggest you're wrong. It's to point out a disconnect b/w the narrative and what happens when people pull the trigger in a draft.

[Jrblaha]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

[FantasyFreak]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

There's no guarantees on that, though. It's just a guess. 3 RB's in this class give 3 RB2 plus years? We shall see. That's iffy. The further down the players go due to lower draft capital, the easier it is to outperform ADP, too.

The reality is, in terms of NFL evals, this is a weak RB class. Of course some may do well, but figuring that out becomes a lot harder when there's no Bijan, Gibbs, even Breece of KW9 level prospects.

There's just not a lot to get excited about in this class, in general, beyond the top of the board, but it doesn't mean none of them will be relevant. It's just projecting to be a weaker class, for FF purposes, based on their profiles and NFL evaluations, but they can obviously outperform those things.

I think the mistake would be to expect them to, because then you're putting too much value on the pick assigned to the player, at the time of the rookie draft, and not properly assessing the risk/reward of the prospects there. You don't have to use a rookie pick, you can trade it. 1.09, for example, isn't the same every year, but some people view it that way, and there may be an opportunity to move it for a more proven player, which IMO, should be explored more than some years, that's all.

[Cameron Giles]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

This sounds very optimistic based on what we know about this class so far.

Just for comparison, there were 3 rookie RBs last year who were RB2+ (Robinson, Gibbs, Achane) in a much better RB group.

[Menace2010]

Landing spot pending, I'm very interested in Brooks and Benson. Think they're solid prospects with some upside. We'll see what happens Friday.

[Jrblaha]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

There's no guarantees on that, though. It's just a guess. 3 RB's in this class give 3 RB2 plus years? We shall see. That's iffy. The further down the players go due to lower draft capital, the easier it is to outperform ADP, too.

The reality is, in terms of NFL evals, this is a weak RB class. Of course some may do well, but figuring that out becomes a lot harder when there's no Bijan, Gibbs, even Breece of KW9 level prospects.

There's just not a lot to get excited about in this class, in general, beyond the top of the board, but it doesn't mean none of them will be relevant. It's just projecting to be a weaker class, for FF purposes, based on their profiles and NFL evaluations, but they can obviously outperform those things.

I think the mistake would be to expect them to, because then you're putting too much value on the pick assigned to the player, at the time of the rookie draft, and not properly assessing the risk/reward of the prospects there. You don't have to use a rookie pick, you can trade it. 1.09, for example, isn't the same every year, but some people view it that way, and there may be an opportunity to move it for a more proven player, which IMO, should be explored more than some years, that's all.

Sure, I mean there’s guarantee in anything football related though. Most mocks I see have RB1 or RB2 of the class going ~1.12. And sure you could trade that pick, but for what? I’d rather the rb dart throw of RB1 or RB2 in this class (but I like the top 2 RBs <pending draft spot/capital> to be startable) than my expected RB return of trading 1.12 (1 QB)

[Jrblaha]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

This sounds very optimistic based on what we know about this class so far.

Just for comparison, there were 3 rookie RBs last year who were RB2+ (Robinson, Gibbs, Achane) in a much better RB group.

Right, but that’s only 1 year worth of data so far on that class. Im talking about their career, not simply rookie year. Brooks for example in class, will probably be better year 2 than his rookie year.

[FantasyFreak]

I think 2-3 RBs in this class will outperform their adp. How many startable years for a WR or RB do you really expect for guys going late 1st/early 2nd (1QB)? If 2-3 RBs give you 3 years of RB2+, that doesn’t seem bad to me

There's no guarantees on that, though. It's just a guess. 3 RB's in this class give 3 RB2 plus years? We shall see. That's iffy. The further down the players go due to lower draft capital, the easier it is to outperform ADP, too.

The reality is, in terms of NFL evals, this is a weak RB class. Of course some may do well, but figuring that out becomes a lot harder when there's no Bijan, Gibbs, even Breece of KW9 level prospects.

There's just not a lot to get excited about in this class, in general, beyond the top of the board, but it doesn't mean none of them will be relevant. It's just projecting to be a weaker class, for FF purposes, based on their profiles and NFL evaluations, but they can obviously outperform those things.

I think the mistake would be to expect them to, because then you're putting too much value on the pick assigned to the player, at the time of the rookie draft, and not properly assessing the risk/reward of the prospects there. You don't have to use a rookie pick, you can trade it. 1.09, for example, isn't the same every year, but some people view it that way, and there may be an opportunity to move it for a more proven player, which IMO, should be explored more than some years, that's all.

Sure, I mean there’s guarantee in anything football related though. Most mocks I see have RB1 or RB2 of the class going ~1.12. And sure you could trade that pick, but for what? I’d rather the rb dart throw of RB1 or RB2 in this class (but I like the top 2 RBs <pending draft spot/capital> to be startable) than my expected RB return of trading 1.12 (1 QB)

Why does it have to be a 1 for 1 scenario? You can package picks, trade for another position etc. I'm not simply suggesting you trade 1.09 for a RB, but that it's value as a standalone pick as trade value, in the heat of rookie fever, may be better used than picking a player in that spot.