Wide Receivers - Rounds 4 through 6 - mistake?

[TKOSpikes]

By season's end, I'd really like to know the actual truth to this, but for now, we can have a discussion.

After the "consensus" top 10-12 WR, usually taken within the first three rounds, I find it difficult to choose between the options. I mean, how do you pick between 20 guys that are about the same? Wouldn't it make sense to draft 3 players at different positions during this time of the draft? I understand the "chance" of missing all of them, but if you can get the real consistent (better) options earlier, or just as good options later, why bother?
So what makes you decide on the receiver you do during this time, potential top 10 if everything aligns? Just to have someone in the top (ranked) 30? Or do you totally agree with this?

The consensus top 10-12 can be flipped and flopped, but for the most part, let's try and agree on these players, since they were taken in the first three rounds of our MBBRL leagues. (for those of us in the leagues)

in no particular order...

1. Calvin
2. Marshall
3. A.J.
4. Demaryius
5. Dez
6. Julio
7. V-Jax
8. Larry
9. Roddy
10. Cobb
11. Andre


So that leaves, starting with the 4th round, (again, just using the MBBRL right now) Cruz, Welker, Colston, Amendola, Nicks... etc. VS the consensus receivers taken in the 7th round and beyond. I'm not looking specifically at our leagues, but they can be used as guidelines. I guess as to how many WR were taken during 4-6, we can take the top performers from the 7th and beyond?


I don't have it in me tonight to go into detail about who the cutoff WR would be in and around the 7th round (hey, it's not like I'm Wil, or Joe!), but it's something we can keep a general eye on all season... well, at least I will, because I'm intrigued.

 

[TKOSpikes]

The consensus top 10-12 can be flipped and flopped, but for the most part, let's try and agree on these players, since they were taken in the first three rounds of our MBBRL leagues. (for those of us in the leagues)

and for those not in our leagues, join in as well... didn't mean to sound like I was not inviting anyone to join in the conversation...

 

[wilwhite]

That's very true, Monkey... but what are you gonna do instead? The WRs you'll be taking there are at least guys you can start, and not crummy bench RBs you hope you'll never start. You can take a TE or QB, but you may not be gaining much there, either.

Unless you went WR/WR to start (like somebody I know), and then you're chasing those crummy RBs.

What you're really looking for in those rounds is guys you rate higher than everybody else, though, regardless of position.

 

[TREFF]

I know for me personally, when I'm both staring at a pool of similar WR's, and in need of one..I will base the choice of which one to go with mostly on his QB, the offensive system, and what the supporting cast is like. I'd take a Patriots/Packer/Lions/Saints /Cowboy WR before a lot of other guys who are projected similarly.
If all else fails, and guys are still equal..then maybe I'd go with untapped potential, like a rook or second year type who is due more opportunity this season.
Lastly..I'll take a guy I enjoy rooting for on Sunday when all other means of logic have been exhausted

 

[TKOSpikes]

The WRs you'll be taking there are at least guys you can start, and not crummy bench RBs you hope you'll never start.

I guess that's the point I want to see. What is the difference between Colston, Wayne or Bowe and Hilton, Tate or Givens? I agree though, that you're much better off having at least one of the top 10 to start off... but I don't agree that the backs that can be taken in rounds 4-6 are crummy... at least not as crummy as the ones in rounds 7 and beyond... and especially when comparing it to the difference in WR talent, which I find to be much smaller.

I guess, in the end, you're probably right, where you want to have at least one in the litter.

 

[dblakejr7]

love the thought into this, i try to have the most level team as i can .. of course depending on the draft position.. as for picking 11th in the B league.. i wanted to try and get the top i could in three positions.. depending on value and the "tier" system with this year being wr heavy i wasnt overly concerned with depth
1. RB
2.WR
3. QB
4. RB
as it turns out i ended up going rb-wr-rb-wr-qb due to the people i had targeted were being taken off the board almost as soon as i qued them.. after the first wave of qbs went i felt safe taht i could get value later on and tried to find the best available also while watching the bye weeks.. wouldnt do me any good to have half the team with the same bye..

anyways thats my thought process on this years draft..

 

[dblakejr7]

someone posted before about average points per tier.. i still think that holds true once you figure out where the cut off is.. for instance if i remember correctly:
wr 1-6 average 15 ppg
wr 7-14 average 12 ppg
wr 13-18 average 10 ppg
wr 19-24 average 9 ppg
wr 25-30 average 8 ppg
wr 31-36 average 7 ppg
wr 37-42 average almost 7 ppg
wr 43-48 average 6 ppg..

i found this very interesting and very useful

 

[Sox33OSU]

What is the difference between Colston, Wayne or Bowe and Hilton, Tate or Givens?

Dude, you can't build your WR corp around guys that you HOPE turn out to be good. At this point, while Hilton, Tate and Givens have potential, they are not bonafide #1 guys and each of them is no higher than the #2 WR on his team. The difference is when you put out a Colston, Wayne or Bowe, you can normally expect a 10-15 point week (depending on your format), while when you start Hilton, Tate and Givens, you are hoping that's what you get. If you wait until late and take these 3 and they happen to all work out, then you look like a genius. Then again, if you go WR-WR-WR to start the draft and then draft Darryl Richardson and Shane Vereen as your RBs and they blow up you also look like a genius, but that's a steep risk.

 

[TKOSpikes]

First of all, I don't mean Colston, Wayne and Bowe are one team and Hilton, Tate and Givens are another team. I'm saying in general.

Colston, Wayne or Bowe, you can normally expect a 10-15 point week (depending on your format),

Leave out PPR numbers please. They are misleading. Or do you mean Bowe in a standard is expected to give you 10-15 points a week? Because if that's what you're saying, I give up. Bowe had 2 weeks of double digit points last year. Hilton had 7. Tate had 4. So, that is not an argument... you are just going by "names on paper"... heck, even Colston had only 6 double digit weeks. And that's my whole point, after the top 10ish, the consistency drops.

Now, on the flip side, when both sides are not scoring double digits, the rounds 4-6 guys would have the advantage it seems with 6-8 point games as opposed to 3-5 point games... so maybe that's the biggest difference.

 

[TKOSpikes]

wr 1-6 average 15 ppg
wr 7-14 average 12 ppg
wr 13-18 average 10 ppg
wr 19-24 average 9 ppg
wr 25-30 average 8 ppg
wr 31-36 average 7 ppg
wr 37-42 average almost 7 ppg
wr 43-48 average 6 ppg..

That is for point totals in order after the season, is it not? That's exactly what I'm asking for, except the order rankings I want are DRAFTED... so 1-12, 13-18 etc. are the order of how they were drafted. (p.s. if this is the order of drafted WR, my apologies)... but good stuff.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Leave out PPR numbers please. They are misleading. Or do you mean Bowe in a standard is expected to give you 10-15 points a week? Because if that's what you're saying, I give up. Bowe had 2 weeks of double digit points last year. Hilton had 7. Tate had 4. So, that is not an argument... you are just going by "names on paper"... heck, even Colston had only 6 double digit weeks. And that's my whole point, after the top 10ish, the consistency drops.

Now, on the flip side, when both sides are not scoring double digits, the rounds 4-6 guys would have the advantage it seems with 6-8 point games as opposed to 3-5 point games... so maybe that's the biggest difference.

I know you were talking about in general... I'm not sure where we had a disconnect there, but anyhow.

I'll leave out PPR numbers. The thing to remember about Bowe is that nothing from last year is the same. He has a new coach that has had no problem turning #1 WRs into solid fantasy WRs. He also has a new QB who is far less mistake-prone than Cassel. Smith will be looking to him a lot. I'm not saying Bowe is gonna rival CJ, but I think he has a really, really good year.

The problem with taking a flier on a #2 guy is that a lot of times they can be severely boom or bust. The odds of starting Marques Colston and getting 2 points are not likely. His lowest standard scoring week last year was 4. Usually he was getting somewhere between 6-9 points, while having 4 really good weeks and 2 amazing weeks. Meanwhile last year, Hilton had 8 weeks that were worse than Colston's worst week. That is the risk you take.

 

[TKOSpikes]

I'll leave out PPR numbers. The thing to remember about Bowe is that nothing from last year is the same. He has a new coach that has had no problem turning #1 WRs into solid fantasy WRs. He also has a new QB who is far less mistake-prone than Cassel. Smith will be looking to him a lot. I'm not saying Bowe is gonna rival CJ, but I think he has a really, really good year.

The problem with taking a flier on a #2 guy is that a lot of times they can be severely boom or bust. The odds of starting Marques Colston and getting 2 points are not likely. His lowest standard scoring week last year was 4. Usually he was getting somewhere between 6-9 points, while having 4 really good weeks and 2 amazing weeks. Meanwhile last year, Hilton had 8 weeks that were worse than Colston's worst week. That is the risk you take.

I totally agree, but that's what I want to find out in the end. And it's not limited to Hilton. Mike Williams had a great year, for instance. How many Crabtree's are out there this year? There is a general consensus of the 4th-6th round guys, but the field after the 7th is large.

 

[Sox33OSU]

I totally agree, but that's what I want to find out in the end. And it's not limited to Hilton. Mike Williams had a great year, for instance. How many Crabtree's are out there this year? There is a general consensus of the 4th-6th round guys, but the field after the 7th is large.

You're definitely right there. Plus with the amount of WR/TE injuries there have been this offseason, you can find some serious value in the late rounds and even on the FA wire. I guess for me it comes down to finding a guy that has proven for several seasons that he's dependable, which is what you're gonna get in rounds 4-6. I mean, Colston is just consistent. Even though he's battled some injuries, over the last 4 years he is getting somewhere around 1030-1150 yards and 7-10 TDs. As a WR1, that is not bad if you have a decent WR2 as well. As a WR2, those numbers are stellar. Now he's gonna have to start regressing at some point, but until it happens (and until the Saints stop throwing the ball all over the place), I have no problem grabbing him. I grabbed him at the tail end of rd 4 and could've likely had him with the 2nd pick in the 5th. For my draftings, I'm happy with that.

 

[Ram Tough]

I understand where your coming from TKO. But this year i have to say its all about the RBs int he first 4 rounds.. if you dont have atleast 2 rbs with your first 4 picks there's a good chance you will struggle at the RB position throughout the year.. There is so much value late with WRs especially in rounds 4-7

 

[Sox33OSU]

I understand where your coming from TKO. But this year i have to say its all about the RBs int he first 4 rounds.. if you dont have atleast 2 rbs with your first 4 picks there's a good chance you will struggle at the RB position throughout the year.. There is so much value late with WRs especially in rounds 4-7

 

[TKOSpikes]

I understand where your coming from TKO. But this year i have to say its all about the RBs int he first 4 rounds.. if you dont have atleast 2 rbs with your first 4 picks there's a good chance you will struggle at the RB position throughout the year.. There is so much value late with WRs especially in rounds 4-7

I don't consider 4-6 "late", but I agree because 7th and beyond is my whole point. And if you do have two RB in the first 4 rounds, that leaves a spot for a WR in rounds 1-3 where you'll get more consistency. Now, while the 4, 5 and 6 round WR are going, you can grab more backs, like the Bernards, Balls, Lacys, Mathews', Sproles', Wilsons and such, also great value at QB if you didn't get one in the first 3 rounds. Then, come the 7th, you have 4 RB, a QB and a WR, now you can look for value at WR, of which there is plenty, more than any other position. I drafted Cobb in the 10th last year (dropped him too, but that's just my stupid itchy trigger fingers).

 

[wilwhite]

Okay, here's your data for 2012, TKO.

Rounds 1-3
11 WRs taken
avg pts 155
9 of 11 made top 36 (81%),
avg of those 9: 174

Rounds 4-6
16 WRs taken
avg pts 129
11 of 16 made top 36 (69%)
avg of those 11: 149

Rounds 7-9
10 WRs taken
avg pts 95
6 of 10 made top 36 (60%)
avg of those 6: 119

Rounds 10-12
10 WRs taken
avg pts 95
4 of 10 made top 36 (40%)
avg of those 4: 136

(In most leagues the remaining 6 out of the top 36 WRs were waiver claims.)

Based on that, you don't want to wait to take WRs from the 7th on instead of 4-6 - your hit rate will be lower and the production of the guys that do hit will be less.

On the other hand getting 157 from Crabtree in the 10th beats getting 95 from Fitz in the first... it's not just when, of course, but who.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Very interesting, thanks Wil, I don't know how you do it!


10 of 20 in rounds 7-12 made the top 36 (plus a handful of free agents)... that's pretty good, although the reality of "hitting" all your late choices are slim, I agree... but for the 1-2 points a week on average you're losing by passing Reggie Wayne and taking Mike Williams, what do you gain by having 3rd and 4th RB options from the 4-6 rounds over 7th rounders and beyond which are basically handcuffs?


Good stuff though Wil. I'm not trying to be picky, or hit anything with specificity. All drafts are different as are the owners who draft them, and I'm sure there is no correct answer. Good to gather thoughts though.