WR vs RB in Flex

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:18 pm

The fact is WR production is far more inconsitent than RB production.

With a huge focus on WR for your squad, you'll score the 5th most points in your league and finish 7-6, 2 games out of the playoffs and wonder what happened.

You'll have games you win by 40 and games you lose by 30... and the RB owners will produce more consistent stats.

IF those RB owners also catch under-rated WR and mix and match them correctly based on matchups, then your small edge there is gone, too.

That's simply my opinion - I wish I had gone WR/WR/TE/WR/QB. Really, I do.

Dyv

MidasMike · Post by **MidasMike** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:09 pm

I guess the #'s lie then DYV. The fact is the most points gets in, then the most points wins 100 large. Nobody can control record, except to get the most points they can. You can lose a tough game 200-199 every week in theory. But u will still get in with 199 avg and be right in it! 3 catches for 31 yds still gets u 6 points. Incosistentcy with these types ?, lets see WARRICK points per game 8/24/10/10/14/14/13/18/7/24/3/10/26/16/6 just realized he missed a game , so his avg is higher! Not too bad for an 8th scrub vs. a 3rd rd back! Just 1 game under 6 points.And 11/15 games with ten pt or more! What else do you need here ? oh lets look at your(not yours but an example of what could be yous) 3 rd pick, Mr. Consistency RB C-Martin 6/5/12/16/7/9/14/12/7/14/17/14/13/26/14/15 less points overall, 11/16 ten or more =less consistent. This all adds up to one whopping "YOU ARE WRONG!" But once again try to spin it so in your warped minds ,so that you RB people can sleep at night! But the time for honoring yourselves will soon be at an end! Just 2 weeks from now u will know for sure!........i hope

FFMadMan · Post by **FFMadMan** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:16 pm

In using C. Martin as an example, dont forget that Testaverde was his QB for the first half of the year (never scored less than 14 after that). Not to mention, Kitna had a career year, which I think will be tough to match for young Palmer.

FFMadMan · Post by **FFMadMan** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:17 pm

Excuse me 13 - I thought I better correct that one before numerous angry responses came my way.

MidasMike · Post by **MidasMike** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:34 pm

Then why would anyone take Chad Johnson, and one would think the team would run more with Testaverde over Pennington. But don't forget 8th round vs 3rd, that is the bigger picture. I got Steve Smith in the 3rd and that is a whole new ballgame if i use him. Thats all i have to say about that!

seeferman · Post by **seeferman** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:05 pm

Midas Mike, you have an excellent argument BUT in taking Moss, Henry, and S. Smith don't just look at the FLEX position. You have to average your FLEX points with your #2 RB. Since you took one RB in the first 3 rounds I would assume your second RB is not a starter or of the T. Wheatley/E. George ilk. If you add T. Wheatley/E. George and P. Warrick versus somebody's #2 back (T. Henry) and their FLEX position (say Kev. Jones) then the #'s are pretty darned close. BUT, I repeat BUT in week where the guy with T. Henry as #1 back is on bye (week 3) T. Wheatley/E. George becomes #1 back and #2 is most likely a back up or 3rd down guy. Meanwhile the guy with 3 RBs can rotate and still have 2 solid RBs to start and put a WR at the FLEX.

Yes solid WR can score a ton of points. BUT, RBs are scarce. It's like the closers in Fantasy Baseball. You just have to take them early cuz they fly off the board.

I have 3 starting RBs. What are there, perhaps 25 "start worthy" RBs in fantasy land. I figure take out my 3 and that leaves 22 for the other 13 teams in my league. I know the guy that drafted in front of me went RB/RB/RB as well in the first 3 rounds. That leaves 19 "start worthy" RBs for 12 teams. SCARCITY is the key.

SCARCITY. There is a reason why RBs fly off the board. SCARCITY

Hell's Coming With Me · Post by **Hell's Coming With Me** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:11 pm

I'm not sure why you are comparing a top receiver like Peter Warrick to a poor running back like Curtis Martin ( who NEVER scores a touchdown ) . I don't think the question was asked "Would you play a lousy running back over a quality receiver"...it seems the question was meant to compare running back or receiver of relative equal quality.

Also I'm not sure what difference it makes when the receiver or running back was drafted....running backs are simply chosen first because there aren't many of them....where good receivers are not too difficult to get...so I'm not sure the debate about who was drafted where has any merit.

Hell's Coming With Me · Post by **Hell's Coming With Me** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:13 pm

Hi Seeferman,

You got in before me. My post was aimed at the fellas commenting in front of your post.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:41 pm

Originally posted by MidasMike:
I guess the #'s lie then DYV. The fact is the most points gets in, then the most points wins 100 large. Nobody can control record, except to get the most points they can. You can lose a tough game 200-199 every week in theory. But u will still get in with 199 avg and be right in it! 3 catches for 31 yds still gets u 6 points. Incosistentcy with these types ?, lets see WARRICK points per game 8/24/10/10/14/14/13/18/7/24/3/10/26/16/6 just realized he missed a game , so his avg is higher! Not too bad for an 8th scrub vs. a 3rd rd back! Just 1 game under 6 points.And 11/15 games with ten pt or more! What else do you need here ? oh lets look at your(not yours but an example of what could be yous) 3 rd pick, Mr. Consistency RB C-Martin 6/5/12/16/7/9/14/12/7/14/17/14/13/26/14/15 less points overall, 11/16 ten or more =less consistent. This all adds up to one whopping "YOU ARE WRONG!" But once again try to spin it so in your warped minds ,so that you RB people can sleep at night! But the time for honoring yourselves will soon be at an end! Just 2 weeks from now u will know for sure!........i hope LOL - so, let me get this straight here... based on last year's numbers and using Curtis Martin as some hero of the RB army you've proven to yourself that you're right here?

(You use the stat that 11/15 vs 11/16 = clearly more consistency? LOL... well done!)

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!

I didn't pick a 3rd RB in the main event until round 8 (Dayne) - so save your foaming at the mouth...

I would have gladly taken one, but the value wasn't there so I chose TE (Gonzo) instead.

I don't condone the blind choice of 3 RB for the sake of getting them in, but I absolutely prefer the RB.

You build up that "Shrine of the Wideout" and we'll see who comes to worship at it

Oh, Steve Smith points last year:

14.4/5.7/9.7/2.3/22.3/31.1/19/19.8/22.2/9/11.3/19/13.6/18.9/19.1/3.6

5 weeks below 10, 3 weeks above 20 variance from 3.6 to 31.1

I see your point on consistency... lol - did you catch your own math?

Dyv

[ September 08, 2004, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: Dyv ]

MidasMike · Post by **MidasMike** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 6:14 am

Ok A) Dyv , you stated that rb is clearly more consistent and so you were wrong as Warrick beat Martin 11/15 vs 11/16. This was your argument for the RB, not mine . I simply put down the facts , the #'s. B)I only used this example because it happens to be the fist week matchup i have at the flex position. C) yes my 2nd RB is obviously not strong, but i have 3, not 1, quality rec (Moss,S.Smith,Burress) All of whom are better than the #1 WR on the guy's team who went rb/rb/rb (keyshawn) . This should more than make up for Minor or Emmitt being my 2nd back. I'll take Moss,S.Smith , Burress, and Emmitt over Keyshawn,Wayne , Drew Bennett and D. Davis anyday. Not even close guys! And lastly. To "hell's coming" If you think so highly of Warrick , and i quote "a top reciever like Warrick" i wish i was in your league. Get off the POT son! And DYV since when do we count games above 20 as a negative against the Steve Smiths of the world? Oh he is just so inconsistent 9.7 and 9 are just so bad , plus he didn't play much in wk 17 so throw that out, so thats 2 bad games and one of them was 5.7! Not the end of the world. Show me a rb that didnt score under 10 all season buddy! More and more it must be sinking in on you guys! You fucked up Homes! Spin it back again , try to convince yourselves! Is their anyone who isn't plugged into the "RB MATRIX"