2019 Football Draft Kit: Best-Ball Strategy

Author's note: The general strategy talk in this article is meant to apply generally, but some of the ADPs cited refer specifically to the markets as they existed back in April. For the latest, up-to-date thoughts on the best and worst player values as the markets change, keep up with our best ball coverage under the Best Ball Journal column series by clicking here.

Best-ball fantasy football has gone from a relative niche to increasingly mainstream in recent years, catering to diehard fantasy players with its "No Offseason" ethos and reeling in even casual players with its offer of instant gratification at zero commitment. As much as fantasy owners long to hoist the trophy after months of trades and waiver maneuvers in season-long leagues, many find the most fun part of fantasy is the draft itself. Since best-ball owners simply draft and then leave the league software to assemble the highest-scoring combination of players each week — making no transactions otherwise — best ball offers the high of the draft without any of the resulting homework, allowing owners to run up serious league volume without additional stress. 

Best ball was introduced to the fantasy mainstream several years ago by MyFantasyLeague's MFL10 formats of yore, named for the site and the $10 buy-in. The MFL game has since been acquired and renamed BestBall10s. Between BestBall10s, DRAFT and FFPC, several big operators now offer the format, and with more buy-in options than ever and payout variations. Owners can buy in at prices much higher than $10 now, and in addition to the classic payout of $100 for first place, you can also find a "cash game" variation that pays out more spots at lower yields.  

The payout structure can, of course, affect draft strategy. A "tournament" payout structure of just first place or the top three places will merit more risk-taking than 2x-type payouts. As of this writing, all best-ball formats entail 18 or 20 draft rounds, depending on whether defenses are included in the player pool. The standard otherwise is your weekly highest scorers for a QB/2RB/3WR/TE/FLEX lineup.   

DRAFT STRATEGY: Target Weekly Upside Over Consistency 

There's no single correct strategy to cash in best ball. The goal is to accumulate the most points, so we're still in the business of selecting the best players with the picks given. But points are tallied weekly, so we more specifically want players capable of the most weekly top-12 finishes. Because we need those high-placing finishers, weekly upside is more valuable than consistency, particularly in our later picks. Pursue elite players early as always, but once the middle rounds arrive it's time to shed fears about player consistency and durability.  

We'd, of course, love to have both consistent and high-upside production, but if forced to make the choice then you'd rather have an inconsistent player who at least has the categorical ability to acquire cashing point totals, instead of a player who is always available but lacks the upside to propel you into cashing territory. You can get burned by volatility if the ball bounces the wrong way, but if you don't have the juice to finish high in a week then it doesn't matter which way the ball bounces.  

In best ball, there's no difference between losing and losing — we don't value a seventh-place finish any more than a 12th-place one. Besides, the traditional gripe with inconsistent players is they're often sitting on your bench when they go off. In best ball, there is no such concern — if they produce, you'll get the points. If they're a dud, anyone who outproduces them will start instead. It's easy to pick the wrong week to start big-play-dependent players like Josh Allen, Kenyan Drake or DeSean Jackson in season-long leagues, but it's impossible to in best ball.  

ROSTER CONSTRUCTION: Let the Market Decide 

Another general rule lies in the question of roster construction. While opinions differ slightly on the specifics, most agree that 2-3 quarterbacks, 5-6 running backs, 6-8 wide receivers and 2-3 tight ends is a reasonable framework, and your particular outcome might be determined by your team's strengths and weaknesses. You're more likely to pick a third quarterback if your first two are questionable, you're more likely to pick a sixth running back if you only have one starter among the previously selected five, and so on. 

Beyond those general principles, specific considerations should narrow based on a combination of league format, market developments in the league draft and your league volume.  

Some have more determined approaches than others on the question of whether to go Zero RB or otherwise target/avoid whatever positions on whatever basis, but I try to let the league market decide my approach. I think there's a case to make for various approaches depending on draft position and what options the draft presents. If I have the 10th pick and I think everyone is hitting running backs harder than usual, then I'll absolutely consider a Zero-RB approach rather than reaching for a James Conner type. If owners are hammering wide receivers and I don't like who's on the board, I'm willing to hammer running backs in response and hopefully get the other teams chasing Jerick McKinnon types by the sixth round.  

TOURNAMENT-STYLE PAYOUTS:  Shoot for the Moon 

In tournament-style payouts I'm probably less likely to consider Zero-RB. We need that top-3 finish. Therefore, it makes sense to shoot for the moon, and to me that ideally means getting at least one elite running back. It's simply not easy to finish first if you lack a standout RB1 while the league's other competitive teams have the advantage of weekly 35-point upside from players like Saquon Barkley and Todd Gurley. 

I'm also likely to take two quarterbacks rather than three in tournament-style payouts. Three solid starters is reassuring for your weekly floor, but if I need that top spot I'd rather swallow the injury risk that comes with only two quarterbacks because if they both stay healthy then I give myself a chance to hit another gem at wide receiver. 

I think the case for a Zero-RB approach is stronger for those with high league volume. It's theoretically a way to manage injury risk since running backs get hurt more than receivers, and the inconsistency complaint that sometimes comes up with receivers isn't applicable given the best-ball scoring. Zero-RB is also an easier sell to me in cash-game type payouts, because when the fifth spot is just as good as the first, then there's more to be said for risk aversion. 

You'll also want to reflect on the number of teams you have and how many shares of which players you own. You need to account for risks if you choose to draft many teams because injuries play a major role and it's possible to lose even if you make the "right" picks. The people who picked Le'Veon Bell last year weren't wrong, but they lost anyway. So if you play a lot of leagues, consider hedging at some point, sprinkling in some of your second or third preferences to spread the risk across your best-ball portfolio. I expect Davante Adams to outscore Michael Thomas this year, but if I'm picking 10 times I'm still taking Thomas in four. It's better to be lucky than smart, but certain situations are more likely to invite bad luck than others.  

STACKING: Corner an Offense 

Finally, it should be noted that while team-stacking is sometimes undesirable in season-long leagues, it's often valuable in best ball, particularly among pass catchers. It's easier to predict a generalization like "Patrick Mahomes will throw touchdowns this week" than it is to name the specific players who will score. In best-ball scoring, the prediction aspect is removed, so it makes sense to corner an offense if the prices of the players in question are favorable relative to the team's projection.  

It would be a hassle to own Will Fuller and Keke Coutee in a season-long league, but they're an advantageous stack in best ball. Deshaun Watson likely will produce at a standout level over the course of the year, and therefore any given week. DeAndre Hopkins will always feast, but only one of Fuller or Coutee is likely to produce otherwise for the game in question. You can get both at reasonable prices (seventh round for Fuller, eighth to ninth round for Coutee), and in the process you're locking in what should be profitable shares of Watson's production.  

Similarly, it makes sense to pair Julio Jones with Calvin Ridley or Mohamed Sanu, Keenan Allen with Mike Williams, or D.J. Moore with Curtis Samuel. If the price gets low enough I'll even stack two of Kenny Stills, Albert Wilson and DeVante Parker in the late rounds. Stacking two receivers in one offense is simply a way of limiting uncertainty, and if the acquisition price is less than what the offense's aggregate production would merit, then you should gain ground. 

There's also nothing wrong with stacking a quarterback with his pass catchers, though the benefit in that case is less related to structure and has more to do with betting on the right offense. It's more like doubling down than exploiting a loophole. A profitable wideout stack can occur even in a below-average offense so long as the acquisition price is low enough. To go back to that Miami example, I don't have high hopes for Ryan Fitzpatrick or Josh Rosen this year, but I'll keep drafting Stills, Wilson or Parker if the market keeps fading them into the 15th-round range.  

READING THE 2019 MARKET: Draft RB/TE Early 

I have some clear targets in mind given current markets, though the ADPs cited likely will change over summer. 

I love most of the typical first- and second-round targets. It's cool to own the top running backs and wide receivers, and I aspire to own basically all of them up to a certain percentage. But as a general rule I want to leave the first two rounds with a killer running back and then Travis Kelce or Zach Ertz. George Kittle is close, of course, but I think of him more as an early Round 3 target.  It's desirable to own any of the three because there's a sharp drop at tight end afterward, and the remaining top targets — Evan Engram, Eric Ebron, Hunter Henry, O.J. Howard and Jared Cook — are plenty expensive themselves. You'll see Engram, Ebron, Howard and Henry go as high as the fifth these days, while Cook rarely falls past the seventh round. Each of those following the Big 3 has an upside scenario, but I think Kelce and Ertz have floors worth chasing given their own substantial ceilings.  

Generally speaking, if I don't get Kelce or Ertz then I corner myself into taking Vance McDonald in the eighth or ninth, sprinkling in Jack Doyle, Delanie Walker and Gerald Everett otherwise. I see Kelce/Ertz as borderline WR1 production, particularly in PPR scoring, and they're a different category of player than their tight end peers. 

If I'm going into the third with a tight end and a running back, then I need to go wide receiver for at least two of the next three rounds. In that case I'd target Amari Cooper or A.J. Green in the third round, players like Tyler Boyd, Robert Woods and Julian Edelman in the fourth, and then Calvin Ridley, Mike Williams and Sammy Watkins in the fifth. 

If I'm going into the sixth round with something like Barkley, Ertz, Cooper, Woods and Ridley, then I think that's close to the best-case scenario for me. But you have to find a way to make it work from wherever you're picking, so I have some other constructions in mind in case I don't like my first-round RB options. It's good to have an idea of the most likely values in any particular round, reconstructing your board as the situation changes. 

I also like Latavius Murray's RB2 upside in what should be Mark Ingram's former role in New Orleans. He's my most-owned running back as of this writing, drafting as late as the eighth round. If I can spend more, I'm a big fan of David Johnson any later than the seventh pick, particularly in PPR leagues. One of my favorite Zero-RB targets is Jamaal Williams in the 13th round. He's only replacement level, but Williams is skilled in passing-down tasks and Aaron Jones has durability concerns. I've bought a lot of Devin Funchess around the 11th and 12th rounds, and I plan to target the previously named Miami receivers a decent amount late in drafts.  

A FINAL WORD 

Since I draft plenty of best-ball teams, I try to keep risk in mind and occasionally pass on my favorite players for other ones similarly projected. If you're doing just a handful of tournament-style payouts, then it's probably easier to cut loose with your selections. It's important in whatever playing context to keep a centered but dynamic perspective, watching the big picture to spot opportunities that initial rankings might miss. 

If nothing else, best-ball drafts give you useful insight into the ADP scenarios of the class, helping you understand how position markets shift in various cases in ways that premade rankings can't anticipate. Because there's money on the line in best-ball drafts, the resulting ADP is a direct signal to actual player markets. You can prepare for season-long drafts with free mock drafts, but because there's no skin in the game it's more like preseason than the real stuff.       

This article appears in the 2019 RotoWire Fantasy Football magazine. Order the magazine now.