A:

In general, logic says that you want to have the highest draft spot possible. If you could either pick first in the 10th round or first in the 11th round, which would you choose? The 10th round. The players selected in the 10th round are better by definition – they’re all chosen before any of the players in the 11th round. And if you break a draft into two-round chunks, you can see that those with the highest draft picks get this advantage over and over. The first round is more valuable than the second, the third more valuable than the fourth, the fifth more valuable than the sixth, and so on.

But 2009 may be a different year. There doesn’t appear to be that knockout player available at the top of round one. Maybe Adrian Peterson is that guy, but there are questions about his durability and he doesn’t catch many passes. There really isn’t much difference, it seems between the top half-dozen running backs. Or do you go with a difference maker quarterback or wide receiver in the first round? So to me, this isn’t one of those years where you throw up your hands and complain about Jimmy getting the No. 1 overall pick again – how he’s going to take Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes or LaDainian Tomlinson and everyone else starts off behind the eight ball.

Using my overall top 48, I compared the overall production of the four players each team should have after the first four rounds of a draft. The No. 1 pick projects to be the best, but not by as much as in previous years – I’ve got it as 10 percent better when comparing the bang-for-buck stats for each player. Then there’s very little difference between the other 11 draft slots.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

Going with 6 points for touchdown passes makes a huge difference. In that format, I believe the top 3 overall players are Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Peyton Manning. There’s not a lot of difference between those three, so the trade-down option could be the route to go. Move down to No. 8, pick up maybe an extra third- or fourth-round pick, and then maybe get the player you might have taken at No. 2 anyway.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

It definitely makes them more valuable. If your league required every team to start 10 wide receivers (and only one player at the other positions), then every player chosen in the first round would be a wide receiver. This is a step in that direction. In a standard-type league with two starting receivers, the best wide receivers show up in my overall 40 at 8, 9, 14, 16, 19, 21, 22, 31, 34, 35 and 40. By declaring that each team must start three wide receivers, you’re increasing the demand for that product, and they rise to 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 22, 24, 26, 29, 36 and 37. On average, those top-10 wide receivers rise 6 draft spots. If you want to play around with these numbers for yourself, you can use the custom scoring and auction tools at the website. It’s all available under the “Custom Rankings” tab at the top of the page. You just need to define your scoring system, then go into “Auction Profile” section and answer a few setup questions.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

I’m not as optimistic as you that Seattle’s running game will see a big spike. The Seahawks may have gone 4-12 last year, but they actually ran the ball well at times. They ranked 19th in rushing (111 yards per game) and scored 10 rushing TDs. They’ll definitely score more touchdowns on the ground, but they won’t necessarily run for many more yards. How good, after all, is this team? Maybe they can claw their way back into playoff contention, but they also could drop all the way down into the basement of the NFC West.

Julius Jones will be their starting tailback, but he’s an lesser guy – doesn’t break a lot of tackles. If you look at the 32 tailbacks who’ll start on opening day, I think Jones is the worst of those players. Maybe you can sneak him ahead of Jamal Lewis, but there’s no arguing that he’s a lesser guy. I think you are correct in projecting T.J. Duckett for a nice increase in production. He’ll be heavily used as a change-of-pace guy, will get all of the goal-line carries, and he knows this system – he played for Jim Mora and Greg Knapp in Atlanta. In the 2005 season, Duckett averaged 27 rushing yards and scored 8 TDs in 14 games. So a season with 500-600 yards and 8-9 TDs definitely looks possible. Neither Jones nor Duckett is much of a pass catcher, so I think you’ll see the Seahawks also work in a third-down back. Entering camp, Justin Forsett is the front-runner to fill that role.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

I drew that same No. 2 pick in the Fanexfootball.com draft that begins tomorrow. I traded the pick. Moved down to choice 1.10 and pick up and extra choice in the fourth round. Had I kept the pick, I would have selected Larry Fitzgerald. Had I targeted a running back, I would see very little difference between Steven Jackson and the three running backs you mention. One factor with Forte to consider: he caught 63 passes last year, but Jay Cutler doesn’t have a strong history of throwing to running backs. Denver completed a league-low 11 percent of its passes to running backs last year (every other team was up at 16 percent or higher). It seems to make sense, therefore, to project Forte to catch only about 45 passes, which hurts him in your format.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

If Romo gets hurt or turns into a below-average quarterback, I suppose it’s possible. But under that scenario, the Cowboys probably would have a new coach in 2010. That new coach would probably be implementing an entirely new offense and have a substantial say in whether Vick would fit in. If Jones winds up hiring Mike Shanahan, for example, I don’t think Vick would be a player they’d be targeting. As for this year, teams that have been at least loosely connected with Vick include New England, Seattle, Minnesota and Washington. And I think it’s Daniel Snyder, not Jerry Jones, who is the ultimate big splash owner right now. Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith, Clinton Portis, Jason Taylor, Albert Haynesworth – Snyder goes after a big-name player almost every year. Jason Campbell has been struggling and is in a contract year, so Vick might be a fit there – maybe he takes over in the second half of the season and then is their starter in 2010.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

It would take brass balls to make such a deal. There is, however, some logic in it. Jackson is far more productive as a pass catcher and doesn’t have Chester Taylor spelling him. And the Rams dramatically improved their offensive line in the offseason, drafting Jason Smith and signing Jason Brown to the big contract. Both running backs are high-contact bangers, so the winner in the deal would probably be determined by injury – no way are both of those backs staying healthy. If I could get the Jackson owner to throw in a second-round pick, I would take the gamble. Straight off the numbers, it makes sense to try the trade for a choice a couple of rounds later.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

I’ll go with Fitzgerald – younger, and he plays a more valuable position. I will concede, however, that’s it’s possible that you’ll look back on that decision and wish you’d hung onto Manning. Fitzgerald makes more sense, but it also might blow up in your face. As for the custom rankings deal, it’s highlighting the different type of stats White brings to the table. He’s in good shape and is the goal-line runner on one of the league’s better teams. That, I think, makes him a good candidate to punch in about a dozen touchdowns. In a league based solely on touchdowns, I consider White to be a top-5 running back. But if you’re in a league giving 1 point for every 10 yards, that drops White down to about 20th – he doesn’t catch any passes, and he should also by the No. 2 runner there behind Chris Johnson. Your league is a mixture of those two formats, giving only small credit for yards; so it makes sense that White would then show up around 10th.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

Marshawn Lynch, at least for now, has been ruled out for the first three games. Plaxico Burress should face some kind of suspension or jail time (or both). And you may see Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson fall a few spots out of fear they may be suspended at some point. Both Marshall and Jackson, however, appear to be in the clear for now.

• Comments
• Add Comment