Who should be the #1 RB drafted in Fantasy Football?

1420sports · August 12, 2006 2:37AM

I am actually hoping I do not get the #1 pick this year. These are in no certain order ...

Larry Johnson? Roaf may not play, and he has yet to put together a few years like Priest has done.

Tomlinson? Perhaps, as he did it prior to Brees and I think Rivers will be pretty decent actually.

Portis? I can separate fantasy from rooting against the skins but is Brunell getting any better besides older?

Alexander? It seems to be the trend that the losing NFC team from the prev SB usually is jinxed ... see Philly, Carolina, TB, and NYG

Edge? I actually would like to get this guy in the mid first, as I think he is not going to miss a beat.

Thoughts?

ArnyVee · August 12, 2006 2:57AM

I would assume that the top 5 picks in most leagues will consist of....

1a - Larry Johnson
1b - Shaun Alexander
1c - Ladanian Tomlinson
4 - Clinton Portis
5 - Edgerrin James

....first QB taken will be Peyton and first WR will more than likely be S.Smith, although he's a little hurt now which might boost T.Holt above him in some/most leagues.

Axtell · August 12, 2006 3:05AM

I'd say the order I'd pick:

Shaun Alexander
Ladanian Tomlinson
Larry Johnson (o-line questions knocks him to 3 for me)

joestalin · August 12, 2006 3:44AM

How can you not go Caddy Williams #1?

JS

ToppsCo1lector · August 12, 2006 3:57AM

^^
B/c there is atleast 8 RB's who are better and will put up better numbers, that's why.

joestalin · August 12, 2006 4:26AM

He faired pretty well as a rookie last year and hurt some of the season. Still a first round pick I think in a 16 team league!

JS

perkdog · August 12, 2006 4:58AM

I do have the # 1 pick this year and Im about 90% sure Im going with Larry Johnson. Checking last year Johnson actually faired a bit better with Roaf out, Richardson is a tough loss but I am banking that he can at least put up the same #'s as last year through 16 games.

Alexander would seem to be the safest pick, but he has got the big bucks now and did lose his best o-lineman as well in Hutchinson. (Not to mention the Madden cover jinx

)

Tomlinson should have a great year once again but a unproven QB scares me.

As far as the rest I think Portis is without a doubt a great pick but not worth taking in front of the top three, Al Saunders taking the offense over in Wash could meen some hefty #'s for Portis.

I put Barber, Jordan, Rudi Johnson and Steven Jackson as the next tier. Caddy needs to prove he can stay healthy before you put him in the same category as a second tier back. EDGE scares me. That Arizona line is just god-awful
and Dennis Green loves to air it out too.

Dallas88 · August 12, 2006 5:59AM

LJ - Priest needed Willie roaf more, as he was an "outside" the tackle back. LJ really uses power in his game between the tackles. I doubt that having Roaf gone will make a significant difference in his rushing totals.

Roaf's retirement WILL impact Tony G, as he'll be called to block more....plus he's at that magical age of decreased numbers for TEs.

Take LJ first, and let some other sucker take Tony G this year.

My 2 cents

-dal-

grote15 · August 12, 2006 8:05AM

Roaf's retirement WILL impact Tony G, as he'll be called to block more

Very true. That is why Gonzo's production declined markedly last year while Roaf was out.

Petescorner · August 12, 2006 9:06AM

I'll tell you who I really like is Steven Jackson. I think he's going to have a great year as the Rams #1 back.

Edge scares me. He flourished in Indy but it's not gonna be quite the same in Arizona. The Colts ran the ball in 2&10, a normal passing situation, more than any team I've ever seen and James got the bulk of his 7 & 8 yard runs that way. Great back, just not sure about the new situation.

Sleeper pick would be Laurence Maroney. He looks like he could be a beast in New England.

1420sports · August 12, 2006 9:42AM

All I can say about Steven Jackson is I was very happy that the cowboys did not pick him ... and I am an ND fan!

Joe - the caddy is on my wantlist, and I would pick him in the first round (12 teams) if the other backs go first.

Perk - can you trade down?

joestalin · August 12, 2006 10:13AM

Steven Jackson is great, but he has to share the wealth on a pass happy team. That kills his value.

I had Portis last year and did NOTHING the first quarter of the season. Beware!

LJ is a beast, KC has no defense so they have to score a lot of points. Can't hurt to take him 1st overall. Shaun will not put up the numbers he
did last yeat. You can either look at Rivers two ways. If he sucks that throws the whole offense off...but then again, if he sucks they are
going to run it more than pass. Of course if they know River's sucks, they are going to be teeing off on LT.

The real question is when does Peyton go? 4 overall? 6 overall? Is a guy like Tiki a better pick? What about TO...first round? early second?
I will pass on TO and get someone like Holt who seems to score in every game.

JS

Anyone thought of opening an all smack league here?

perkdog · August 12, 2006 11:07AM

<< 
Perk - can you trade down? >>

Neal,
Actually I traded up this year. I drew the 12th pick for the 3rd year in a row! (12 team ) I wanted a stud back after last years misery...(A.Green and J. Lewis destroyed me last season) I traded my 3rd round picks for his 4th round picks, so I end up with #1, #13, #48, #49 for my first 4 picks. I gave up a bit much but I am banking on a Stud RB at # 1 and a stud WR at #13 or if a RB that exites me falls into # 13 I will grab it. Maybe a bad move, time will tell.

1420sports · August 12, 2006 1:10PM

Good luck - I do not have the confidence to make a #1 pick.

I am in a 12 team league, and I am picking 10. Looking for Jackson or Ronnie Brown possibly, then getting Chad Johnson on the turn.

Axtell · August 12, 2006 2:46PM

I would always prefer to draft lower than higher, as you are going to get 2 solid players rather than one great and one so-so.

I'd take the #10 pick over #1 any day.

oddball · August 13, 2006 4:57AM

<< I would assume that the top 5 picks in most leagues will consist of....

1a - Larry Johnson
1b - Shaun Alexander
1c - Ladanian Tomlinson
4 - Clinton Portis
5 - Edgerrin James >>

agree

bri2327 · August 13, 2006 6:10AM

it amazes me that nobody ever mentions Tiki in the RB discussions. How can he not be in the top 5 ?

BTW, oddball, turn that flag right side up ya punk.

Axtell · August 13, 2006 6:39AM

<< it amazes me that nobody ever mentions Tiki in the RB discussions. How can he not be in the top 5 ? >>

Because he's had a propensity to put the ball on the ground in the past and last year was likely a fluke year in terms of what he's capable of. Throw in the number of carries he's had, his age, and his talking retirement this year, and the fact there are 5 other, better, younger backs out there. Nothing personal.

bri2327 · August 13, 2006 6:55AM

I hear what you are saying Ax, but since Tiki became a full time back he has had the same knocks...too small, too this, too that, etc. Meanwhile he has had 4 years in a row with over 1200 yds running, including over 1800 last year and 1500 the year before. In the past 2 years he has lost a total of 3 fumbles. That is hardly fluke numbers, and hardly a guy who has had a propensity of putting the ball on the ground. Add in his receving numbers and he is consistently at the very top of the NFL in all purpose yards. In my mind he is the most underrated back the league has seen in a very, very long time. Amazing considering the market he plays in.

1420sports · August 13, 2006 11:43AM

Tiki is in "tier 2" ... same with Westbrook.

Portis may be out awhile after dislocating his shoulder. We'll see

ToppsCo1lector · August 13, 2006 12:00PM

lol, Westbrook shouldn't be consider a "tier 2" running back until he actually stays healthy for a season and is able to pass the 1K mark on the ground rushing. He's never been the goto back in Philly(Only topped 150 carries 2 times) and has only topped 800 yards rushing 1 time so far. Much of his "value" is placed on his potential, but he's very valuable coming out the backfield as a reciever. If I was drafting, he would fall behind probably 15-17 backs.

Axtell · August 13, 2006 3:49PM

Why are you only looking at westbrook's rushing numbers, and discounting his receiving numbers? Last time I checked, and every league I've ever been in, 10 yards receiving is scored the same as 10 yards rushing.

1200+ all purpose yards last year, 1500+ the year before that. To discount westbrook out of tier 2 status based on his rushing numbers is ignorant at best.

ToppsCo1lector · August 13, 2006 4:20PM

Look at my second to last sentence, "Much of his "value" is placed on his potential, but he's very valuable coming out the backfield as a reciever."

I realize that is the draw that Westbrook has; he's as large of a threat coming out the backfield as he is in the backfield. I'm not saying he's not a good back. Hell I have him on my fantasy team(albeit I did not pick him, and got him in the third round I believe). Comparing him to Barber is not a competition though. Barber hasn't had less than 1400+ combined rushing/recieving since the 1999 season. That's all I'm saying, that no matter how anyone talks up Westbrook he is not as good as Barber(who, is a second tier back).

2000-1006 Rushing yards, 719 recieving
2001-865 rushing yards, 577 recieving(His lowest overall total since he took over as the main back; he missed 2 games which cost him getting to the 1K rushing mark, he averaged 5.2 ypc that season; only matched by his 2005 average)
2002-1387 rushing yards, 597 recieving
2003-1216 rushing yards, 461 recieving
2004-1518 rushing yards, 578 recieving
2005-1860 rushing yards, 530 recieving

Ax, I'm not saying Westbrook isn't a good back to have, but their are quite a few back that do the same thing. He hasn't done enough to earn a comparison to Barber yet. He is though, entering what should be his prime and with the loss of TO and such a solid(and large) O-line he can make something special out of his time in Philly. But again, that's potential talking.

1420sports · August 14, 2006 1:02AM

Tier 2, at least to me, doesn't mean RB's are equal .... Tiki is a much better fantasy back, but both are in the same group.

15-17 backs ahead of Westbrook??? name em ...

ToppsCo1lector · August 14, 2006 2:16AM

1420-Here's my list of backs I'd take ahead of Westbrook(Note; I'm not listing in order of which I'd take these backs, but listing them simply as the pop into my mind)
Tomlinson
L. Johnson
Edgerrin James
Portis
Tiki
Droughns
McGahee
Alexander
Rudi Johnson
Lamont Jordan(Similar numbers, but he is nowhere near the focus of opposing defenses, as Westbrook will be)
Steven Jackson(Once again, similar numbers but has Torry Holt and Bruce to take attention off of him)
Ronnie Brown(No question he'll get more yards if he's healthy, plus the addition of Culpepper will spread that offense)

Now, there are another 3-4 I can list that are very similar in production(overall production that is) to Westbrook. The guys I listed above are there due to the fact that(besides McGahee) non are their teams only standout weapon(I'm not including, of course McNabb in this...speaking of other position players). Now, yes it can be argued that with more weapons numbers can coviecably(sp, way off) go down. But, on the same hand defenses will not be focused in on that player with more weapons around him.

Also, I have NOTHING against Westbrook. Like I said, he's on my fantasy team(albeit I did not pick him, and wouldn't have as high as the pc drafted him for me). His brother Bryon and I are cool, too. We kicked it a ton last fall when I had a place by the college he plays for.

Axtell · August 14, 2006 3:02AM

You'd take McGahee over Westbrook? On that terrible team? Lamont Jordan?

I'd say Westbrook is a top 15 back, but saying there are 15-17 guys ahead of him, especially when you can't name them, is bad imo.

ToppsCo1lector · August 14, 2006 3:20AM

I'd also take Warrick Dunn, Cadillac, and Julius Jones(I say JJ, because of the addition of TO and the fact that I'm an ND fan, plus he ain't half bad). So theres 15 guys I'd take ahead of Westbrook. The last few(that I listed here in this post) are guys that are on the same tier as Westbrook in my book.

Lamont Jordan cracked the 1K mark his first season as a starter, and he has a team with weapons that NEED to be double teamed. He'll get his.

McGahee, yes it's a terrible Buffalo team. He and Lee Evans are the bright spots, but that team has a defense that CAN be quite formadable. He hasn't been 100% yet, as it typically takes 2 full years to get back to pre-injury abilities(Look at Edge's numbers for example). I wouldn't be the least suprised to see McGahee put up 1400+ on the ground this season.

1420sports · August 14, 2006 4:17AM

I predict that Westbrook has the following numbers this season:

850ish yds rushing
800ish yds receiving

11 total TD's (at least)

and I think those fantasy numbers will be better than Droughns, Jordan, McGahee, Dunn, Jones (I am an ND fan as well), and maybe Ronnie Brown

Axtell · August 14, 2006 4:29AM

Probably Portis, too, since he seperated his shoulder last night (and there's word it's even more damage than that, but the Redskins are keeping it under wraps).

ToppsCo1lector · August 14, 2006 4:45AM

Ax, I'll get the 411 on Portis before most. I live not 15 minutes from FedEx field and my company is in talks to help open a business with a current teammember.

perkdog · August 14, 2006 6:05AM

Westbrook is not really counted on to run for a 1000yds, his value as stated is to be a dual threat for 750 + rush and 750+ receiving yards, that being said he is a very valuable commodity in fantasy terms. Tiki IMO is a notch below the big 3.. ie: L J, LT, Alex. Westbrook falls in with the rest of the lower end "tier 2" backs.

Big 3 (any order)

Tiki, Portis are second tier IMO

Rudi, Jordan, Caddy, Edge, Westbrook, R.Brown, Steven Jackson, are the best of the rest IMO

Droughns is a tuff call with that decimated Browns O-Line, McGahee as well with that sluggish Bills offense.

Skinpinch · August 14, 2006 7:07AM

Paul Ott Carruth

stown · August 14, 2006 7:35AM

I, along with many others, play in leagues where TDs are king and yards are only secondary.

A TD caught or rushed is 6 points with the QB getting a minimum of 3 plus yardage on a passing TD (explained below).

For example on RB / WR stats:

75 - 99 yds 1
100 - 124 yds 2
125 - 149 yds 3
150 - 174 yds 4
175 - 199 yds 5
200 + yds 6

And for QBs:

275 - 299 yds 1
300 - 324 yds 2
325 - 349 yds 3
350 - 374 yds 4
375 - 399 yds 5
400 + yds 6

Bonus on distance for TD pass:

20 - 29 yds 1
30 - 39 yds 2
40 - 49 yds 3
50 + yds 4

So if your RB has 74 yards rushing and 74 yards receiving with no TDs, you get a big, fat 0. The flip side is a "vulture" who has 2 carries, 2 yards, and 2 TDs gets 12

I actually enjoy these more realistic game results (27-23) than steriod-like games (124-103).

Axtell · August 14, 2006 7:42AM

Less than 100 yards and they get 1 point?

Lame.

74 yards receiving and 74 yards rushing should be 14 points, and every league I've ever been in has been scored this way.

stown · August 14, 2006 8:00AM

<< Less than 100 yards and they get 1 point?

Lame.

74 yards receiving and 74 yards rushing should be 14 points, and every league I've ever been in has been scored this way. >>

:yawns:

Glad to see you are adding absolutely nothing to the conversation and only attempting to start a flame war with me, Tinkerbell

Back on topic:

Having #1 and #13 in a 12-team league is a powerful 1-2 punch. Depending on your scoring system, I would go with LT, Grandmama Jr, and then Alexander.

ToppsCo1lector · August 14, 2006 8:46AM

Here's my fantasy team from the Yahoo boards.

1. C. Portis
2. T. Holt
3. B. Westbrook
4. W. Dunn
5. E. Manning
6. A. Crumpler
7. D. Mason
8. J. Elam
9. Indianapolis
10. L. Maroney
11. B. Favre
12. G. Jones
13. B. Troupe
14. A. Toomer
15. Philadelphia
16. B. Johnson

Axtell · August 14, 2006 11:33AM

<< 
Glad to see you are adding absolutely nothing to the conversation and only attempting to start a flame war with me, Tinkerbell

>>

No, you have added nothing dipchit, other than bring up an obscure scoring system that no one uses.

<< Back on topic:

Having #1 and #13 in a 12-team league is a powerful 1-2 punch. Depending on your scoring system, I would go with LT, Grandmama Jr, and then Alexander. >>

But if you are picking #1 you aren't picking #13 in the second round, you are picking 1 and #24. I've never seen nor heard of a draft system that goes 1-12, 1-12, etc. Everyone I've ever seen has been 1-12, then 12-1.

stown · August 14, 2006 11:43AM

<< No, you have added nothing dipchit, other than bring up an obscure scoring system that no one uses. >>

Oh that's right, I forgot the world revolves around Tinkerbell.. How dare anyone do or say anything differently than her. Get real, putz.

<< But if you are picking #1 you aren't picking #13 in the second round, you are picking 1 and #24. I've never seen nor heard of a draft system that goes 1-12, 1-12, etc. Everyone I've ever seen has been 1-12, then 12-1. >>

Bad case of ADD, huh Tinkerbell?

<< so I end up with #1, #13, #48, #49 for my first 4 picks. >>

Go back to your D&D game and stop instigating flame wars.

Axtell · August 14, 2006 11:49AM

<< Oh that's right, I forgot the world revolves around Tinkerbell.. How dare anyone do or say anything differently than her. Get real, putz.
>>

Did I say that? I simple pointed out I've never seen anyone use such a ridiculous scoring system.

<< Bad case of ADD, huh Tinkerbell?

so I end up with #1, #13, #48, #49 for my first 4 picks. >>

Let me guess, this is your league where YOU set the draft rules? How fair is it to the guy drafting 12th that he gets the 12th, then 24th pick?No wonder you win your league...it's rigged!

<< Go back to your D&D game and stop instigating flame wars. >>

(a) I don't play D&D and (b) I am not instigating, simply saying your justification for RBs based on some obscure scoring system no one outside your basement's ever heard of is absurd.

stown · August 14, 2006 11:58AM

This is coming from someone who is a HUGE advocate of something different. Guess it's okay to have Brokeback relationships (like your nightly dreams of A-Rod) but to have a different scoring system is unheard of. I laugh at your flip-flopping, Tinkerbell

In regards to your ADD, I appreciate the fact that it's soooooooo easy to show you being wrong over and over and over and over and again and again and again

perkdog said on Saturday August 12, 2006 9:07 PM

<<
Perk - can you trade down? >>

Neal,
Actually I traded up this year. I drew the 12th pick for the 3rd year in a row! (12 team ) I wanted a stud back after last years misery...(A.Green and J. Lewis destroyed me last season) I traded my 3rd round picks for his 4th round picks, so I end up with #1, #13, #48, #49 for my first 4 picks. I gave up a bit much but I am banking on a Stud RB at # 1 and a stud WR at #13 or if a RB that exites me falls into # 13 I will grab it. Maybe a bad move, time will tell.

Axtell · August 14, 2006 1:13PM

<< This is coming from someone who is a HUGE advocate of something different. Guess it's okay to have Brokeback relationships (like your nightly dreams of A-Rod) but to have a different scoring system is unheard of. I laugh at your flip-flopping, Tinkerbell

>>

When are you going to grow up and get past the gay jokes? What are you, 12?

<< In regards to your ADD, I appreciate the fact that it's soooooooo easy to show you being wrong over and over and over and over and again and again and again

>>

What exactly did you prove me wrong on? Your scoring system sucks, your drafting system sucks and is overly biased towards the top picks.

But then, what do you care about fair? I am sure its a system that allows you to be competitive - unlike your overly mismanaged and absolutely inept texans team you follow.

1420sports · August 14, 2006 1:34PM

I would have pulled that trade as well ... #1 and #13? Man, that is a STEAL!

perkdog · August 15, 2006 12:25AM

Ax, Im not sure why you are confused. I drew the 12th pick. So I get # 12, and #13. I traded the 12th pick for # 1 and switched my 3rd rounders for his 4th rounders.

Neal, glad you think thats a good trade, I figured with a #1 pick AND #13 I can hold off till #48 and #49 to pick again. Im looking at # 1 back and hopefully # 1 WR at # 13. It could be huge.

Axtell · August 15, 2006 2:16AM

<< Ax, Im not sure why you are confused. I drew the 12th pick. So I get # 12, and #13. I traded the 12th pick for # 1 and switched my 3rd rounders for his 4th rounders. >>

My mistake. I thought the #1 pick got to pick #1, then #13 too, which I thought meant the #12 guy got the #24 pick. My mistake.

<< Neal, glad you think thats a good trade, I figured with a #1 pick AND #13 I can hold off till #48 and #49 to pick again. Im looking at # 1 back and hopefully # 1 WR at # 13. It could be huge. >>

So the guy who had #1 seems to be going quantity over quality? Not sure if I had the #1 pick I would have made that deal, but looks to be a sweet deal for you...you should definitely be able to pick up 2 great RBs at those spots. I'd hold off of WRs until 48/49, I always draft RBs in my first 2 picks.

perkdog · August 15, 2006 8:29AM

Ax, I always grab 2 backs as well, depending on who falls to me at # 13, I might (MIGHT) grab a Holt or Harrison there, I say those two guys because of consistency. I cannot mess up at # 13 so I need a reliable guy who will get me points week in and week out.

Axtell · August 15, 2006 8:54AM

<< Ax, I always grab 2 backs as well, depending on who falls to me at # 13, I might (MIGHT) grab a Holt or Harrison there, I say those two guys because of consistency. I cannot mess up at # 13 so I need a reliable guy who will get me points week in and week out. >>

I doubt in a 12 man league Harrison will still be there at 13. Holt likely will be, but in a new offense that is going to feature the run a ton more than before, I don't know if both Holt and Bruce will be producing like in years past.

Who should be the #1 RB drafted in Fantasy Football?

Comments