Every year the "experts" say not to reach for a TE because there is so much depth at the position. At the same time, we are obviously encouraged to draft a top running back with our first pick because after the first tier of RBs there is a significant dropoff in how many fantasy points you can expect for the season. I don't need to say that I guess, because it's basic common knowledge amongst fantasy players.

We are also encouraged to draft WRs before QBs, because again, there is a big dropoff in WR production after the first and second tiers, but not such a huge dropoff with QBs. TEs are treated like QBs by draft experts -- draft them late because the position is so deep. I am not convinced that this is the best possible draft strategy in the age of RBBC.

Looking at 2008's numbers, the QB1 (Warner - 391) scored 157 more fantasy points than the 12th ranked QB (Eli Manning - 234). That is almost 10 more fantasy points per week.

The TE1 (Gonzo - 158) scored 85 more fantasy points than the 12th ranked TE (Scheffler - 73) for over 5 fantasy points per week.

Contrasting this to RB and WR numbers:

The RB1 (Williams - 276) scored 100 more fantasy points than the 12 ranked RB (Brown - 176). What's that? The difference between the #1 RB and the #12 RB was only 100 points? The dropoff in TEs from #1 to #12 was 85 points - hardly a difference that screams you must draft RBs for the first 2 rounds. Lets take it further. The RB13 (first RB2, Lynch - 170) scored only 28 more points than the RB24 (the last RB2, Grant - 142). WHAT!?!?!?! 28 points? That means that last year, the difference between the #13 and #24 running back was less than 2 points per week. Let's continue on with this, because we can start an RB at Flex. The RB25 (Hightower - 141) scored only 30 points more than the RB36 (Addai - 111), and only 59 more points than the RB48 (Fargas - 84). Furthermore, the difference between the RB13 and the RB48 was a mere 94 fantasy points.

Running Backs may no longer be so important. If this trend holds, draft strategy may soon dictate snapping up the best QBs and TEs right after the top workhorse RBs are off the board, instead of everyone hording RBs and WRs for the first two rounds.

Last year's numbers at WR can be a bit strange because LFitz completely went off the charts, so I'm treating him as an outlier. The WR2 (A Johnson - 197) scored only 45 more points than the WR13 (Hines Ward - 142). The WR14 (Mason - 150) scored only 30 more points than the WR25 (Coles - 120). The WR26 (Holmes - 119) scored only 26 more than the WR37 (Jenkins - 95).

WRs look overvalued too.

To wrap this up, it looks to me like QBs and TEs should get a lot more ADP respect than they currently do.

In 2008:

The QB1 outscored the QB12 by 159 points.
The TE1 outscored the TE12 by 85 points.
The RB1 outscored the RB12 by 100 points.
The RB13 outscored the RB24 by 28 points.
The WR2 outscored the WR13 by 45 points.
The WR14 outscored the WR25 by 30 points.
The WR26 outscored the WR37 by 26 points.


Thoughts?

draft strategy should basically consist of "hitting" picks. player position is pretty meaningless. the worse the competition is, the more leniency you have to just go for the home run every round.

If the numbers end up like that again this year, I'm not going to be afraid to draft a QB in the first round (if I miss the top RBs) or a TE in the 3rd.

I applaud you're efforts to start a substantive discussion. A couple of questions. 1. In order to really make a good statistical argument for your point , you need to include more than one year to really infer that a trend is starting. 2. You've already started to show bias in your breakdown. You took out Fitzgerald's numbers because you considered them outlier (which I don't really understand, where are you getting your numbers), but you didn't treat the TE position with the same analytical insight. Look at Gonzo's numbers vs. the other TEs. His numbers are EVEN MORE statistically beyond the norm than Fitzgerald's. Also, certainly scoring format will color the argument. Also, look at 2007. RB1 was about 125 points more than RB13.......

Your analysis is flawed. If 12 teams each start 1 QB, 1 TE, 3 WRs and 2 RBs, you dont take the 12th best at every position. Compare QB1 to QB 12, TE1 to TE 12, WR1 to WR 36 and RB 1 to RB 24.

Just look at the waiver wire in any of your leagues. You can probably pick up a respectable QB at any time in the season, but RBs will be bone-dry. WRs will be somewhere in the middle.

Also, you cant remove outliers at one position and not others.

ALSO, you cant juse use 1 year's worth of data to predict the future.


RBBC makes the first-round RBs even more valuable...seperating the studs who get a huge workload from the carry-split backs.

for the most part i agree. oddly enough though, my league is PPR with a W/T slot that makes a standout second TE really valuable.

Obviously the analysis is flawed. It's not designed to PROVE anything, it's just there to start a discussion.

The main point is that after the first 4-5 workhorse running backs, the drop-off becomes smaller and smaller because of RBBC. When a 2nd round RB is only scoring 30-60 more fantasy points during a season than an 8th-round RB, the opportunity cost for taking a 2nd round RB is too probably too high.

But the problem, especially with TEs is that the "hit" quotient is even worse. First round RBs that have worked this year are: AD, Sjax, CJ, MJD, DWill, and Turner, Slaton (although this could look different in a couple of weeks) as these back are in the top 12-13 scorers in a standard league. Miss guys are: Gore (injury), Forte and I guess LT. Top TEs that have worked out: Clark, Gates, Winslow and Daniels(it won't within a couple of weeks). Hasn't worked out for: Witten, Cooley, Gonzo, Olsen, Miller, Keller, Boss and Carlson. TEs are just hard to predict and inconsistent in production. You're making a supposition based on the faulty logic that you'll hit on the best TE. This along with the fact that TEs production can rarely win you a week compared to a RBs and that even a top 4-8 TE average score is less than a Kickers......The opportunity cost for taking a TE in the first four rounds (I would argue first 6) is way too high.....

I didn't want to get into the all the problems with your analysis from a statistical perspective. Rest assured that Sir Ronald Fisher is turning over in his grave....

Like I said before, I didn't post this to be a valid statistical breakdown, but just an observation of the way last year's numbers ended up and they way this year's numbers are heading. Somebody with more time can do an actual statistical breakdown and prove me wrong all they want, I would actually appreciate that. I shouldn't have even posted this today because I don't even have time to properly respond and clarify what I am talking about at the moment.

Anyways, my whole point in making the post is that taking all the RBs off the board in the first few rounds isn't necessarily a good idea. Obviously the top 4-8 RBs are still going to be consensus first round picks, but after that it gets muddier because there is a huge group of RBs that aren't separated by very many points when all is said and done.

Noone is saying ignore RBs the entire draft and just pluck them off the WW. The point is that past the first 4-8 picks, RB might not be the best value because when all is said and done the #8 through #36 running backs aren't going to be separated by as much as we've been trained to think.

I agree, while the top four or five TEs might be valuable enough for third or fourth round picks, you really never have any idea of who those top few guys will be. And what's more, at least in my league, everybody has a different idea of who are going to be the next breakout TEs, so you don't really have to grab him fast because everyone's going for a different guy. For example, I thought V.Shiancoe was going to be a top TE this year, so I was able to wait all the way until round 12 for him because nobody else targeted him. It would have been hard to predict guys like V.Davis and B.Celek turning out to be stud TEs.

It's still a reasonable idea. In my league, QB is already worth more because passing TDs are 6 points rather than 4, so we are already going for top TD-throwing QBs in round 2 and 3. After my RB1, I drafted McFadden, Lynch, W.Parker and D.Brown and for what it's worth, I don't even still have any of them except for Lynch, and I think I've only played him once.

I don't know if this changes things, but along with what others said (removing outliers from one but not others, amount of starters, etc.), looking at the percentage of points might change things. I'm not sure if this makes any sense, but I just noticed how different the amount of points scored by the top at each position was and thought I would point this out, even if it doesn't really make sense.

I'm not going to pick apart your statistical analysis. I agree with your sentiments.

Man the first post made my head hurt. Anyways, in regards to the OP's first post "experts" advice on TE's is that if you aren't able to draft an elite TE, then you can wait since they are deep. Before it used to be Gates and eveyone else, now there is a few more that contribute. In a standard league, the true value of TEs are TDs, which is inconsistent. See below...



Plus, prefer having a nice set of RBs during fantasy playoffs over an elite QB or TE...

I've heard this argument from you before and to lump 12 Tight Ends into the category of "Top TEs" is disingenuous. This year, most sane and reasonable people had a top TE tier consisting of: Gates, Dallas Clark, Witten, Gonzo. In a 2nd tier were Greg Olsen, Owen Daniels, Winslow, Cooley, Shockey, and Carlson. The relevant comparison here is top tier TE vs. 2nd tier and again vs. 3rd tier. Of the top tier, 2 are having A seasons (Gates, Clark), 1 is having an A- season (Gonzo), and the other is having a D season (Witten, with the potential to turn it around). Of that 2nd tier, Olsen sucks, Daniels is hurt, Winslow is having a B+ season, Cooley is hurt, Shockey is having an A-/B+ season, and Carlson isn't having a good season.

The scorecard there says it's absolutely worth taking a sure-fire TE in the 4th or 5th round over a 2nd tier TE in the 7th or 8th.

Of the 3rd tier, Vernon Davis, Celek, Shiancoe, and Miller are having very good seasons. Which is a bit out of the norm, but not radically. So, if the argument is that you should wait even longer and take TE with a ton of upside (and others don't have the same plan), then I can't find too much fault in that. Even though both have lived up to their draft slot, I know that I wouldn't trade Gates for Kevin Smith right now, who was taken a full round earlier. Drafting a stud TE is almost like cell phones or DVR. Before you had one, you did fine without it. But once you get one, you can't go without one.

If you're going to wait for a TE, you really need to pick 2 or 3, and cross your fingers. And by picking 2 or 3, you're forgoing players at other positions who may provide better value. It's the same situation you run into when you wait until the 8th round to pick a QB. You're passing on Cedric Benson because you have to take Cutler, even though you don't want to.

Maybe it comes down to how shallow your league is... in my league, the top 10 TE in current scoring and 17 of the top 20 were drafted. So, I can't rely on waivers. And the Gates / Clark owner will ask for 2nd round RB value.

one of the challenges here is to consider variability as well observed results

I dont know that there are statistics - I bet there are - but a key element of drafting is how reliable, how confident can one be in production

take kickers - please take kickers - whats the correlation from year to year between kicker performance in fantasy terms - I bet it isnt all that high

high draft picks are best used on high value and high reliability/consistency - merely observing high value after the fact does not guide future action

all that being said, I think that RBBC does make a big difference, exactly how I'm not sure

I think we hashed this out on the Gates thread, reasonable minds disagree, however you've seemed to prove my point for me. With the top 5 TEs coming into the draft that would have been drafted in the 5th round or above generally (scoring systems vary, so it could be different for every league), 1 is having an outstanding season (Clark), 1 is having a good season (Gates, but take out the outlier game and he's having a rather average season), another is having a pretty good season (Gonzo) and two are having lousy seasons or now hurt (Cooley and Witten). The unreliability (just as unreliable as any other position) of a position class that typically can't win you multiple weeks like a RB, WR, or QB can, is in my opinion just too pricey for me. There also isn't a huge point differential from hitting on one of the TEs then there would be to getting an average or underdrafted TE. I would rather try and get a Davis (undrafted or late round pick), Celek (late round pick), or Shiancoe (undrafted or late round pick) late or trade for a top TE (as they aren't seen as a core piece) from a floundering manager later in the year. Example: I traded for Clark a couple of weeks ago to what amounted to Winslow and Mason b/c of assorted problems the manager was having. He wasn't a chump but he recognized that sureing up his WR corp was more important to him then having a dominant TE. I'm sure either strategy can work, but IMO, I think drafting a TE high is more risk for less reward. You've obviously had the opposite experience....And the scorecard doesn't absolutely say drafting a TE high is better then later in the draft. You're seeing what you want, as I probably am myself....

Obviously roster & scoring settings affect how you rank positions as well.

In my league for instance we start 2 QBs, so automatically the QB value goes way up. By the time I was picking near the end of the 2nd round Brady, Brees, Peyton & Rodgers were already gone. I was able to get Rivers(23rd) & Warner(26th) with my 2nd & 3rd picks though.

I don't know what rankings you used, but nobody I know had Cooley as a top tier TE. Why do you insist on including him here? 3 of the 4 elite TEs are living up to their draft position, and the other is likely to turn it around. Meanwhile, the 2nd tier are grossly underperforming. 4 of the 3rd tier fliers are having very good seasons, so if you nabbed one, then your strategy is vindicated. But if you took Dustin Keller and Jermichael Finley or Kevin Boss, then you're screwed and spotting the Gates owner 5 points every week.

You can't take out outlier games for Gates. Players like Gates put up that kind of production. Why don't we take out all of Brees' outlier games (>3 TD or >400 yards)? How about his 2004 season... are you going to throw out all of his 100 yard+, 1 TD+ games? Elite players have "outlier" games. Gates is notoriously streaky. He'll go on a 5-game stretch where he puts up 500 yards and 5 TDs. And other weeks, he'll have 60 yards and 0 TDs. There is no outlier.

My experience has been that elite TEs will cost you elite RBs late in the season (which I can't give up), so I draft them instead. It's just personal preference, I guess. I do know that the Dallas Clark owner would laugh at a Kellen Winslow and Derrick Mason offer. Every league is different, as you pointed out.

Sigh. I included Gates, just pointed out that his production most weeks was average to poor for those that may be thinking about trading for him. Again, you go with your thing, and I'll go with mine. Cooley was a top 5-6 option coming into most drafts and had an ADP in the top 75 or better depending what site you used. After Cooley there was a drop of about 25 spots to the next ADP for TEs, probably Olson, therefore just using the data, you could discern that there was a tier there and we were speaking in terms of cost of round 6 or above earlier. I'm glad that your Dallas Clark owner would laugh at that trade offer, I felt fortunate as well (it was part of a larger trade) to get him. Folks in my league laugh at folks that overdraft TEs in round 4.....See how that works.....Let's agree to disagree as I've stated previously and go on from there....

Look at how many double figure scoring games elite TE's have compared to double digits out of a RB2/Flex spot and convince yourselves that elite TE's are worth drafting early. Then look at how many stinker games they have. I pretty much hate it when anyone in my lineup scores less than 10 points and consider anything less than 8 a stinker.

I'll take a strong Flex play who scores double figures 8-12 times a year over an elite TE that does it 4-6 times.

The above is my stance on standard scoring leagues, PPR I can see the reasoning on grabbing a 70 catch a year TE earlier than normal.

If you take away his touchdowns? As if more wont come. Gates is still the man.