It was probably the most debated topic this preseason for fantasy football, Zero RB or Robust RB? After 12 weeks of data, I think it’s starting to be clear that one was better than the other. Before I get into it, I want to outline what Zero RB means to me. When I say Zero RB, I am not advocating leaving a draft with zero running backs. Instead, I actually leave with a ton. In a basic single QB redraft league with 10 starters and 7 bench spots, I am aiming to leave the draft with 8-10 running backs. My Late RB strategy is to focus on other positions the first few rounds and then around round 5 to 6 start hammering running back. Follow along as I dive into the the Zero RB debate:
Caveats to Late RB
First, Zero RB should not be what you’re planning to go into a draft to do. The best draft strategy is to follow the board and to be reactionary. This year saw the popularization of the “Robust RB” strategy that took over drafts this preseason. Many times, we saw teams load up on two to three running backs in the first three rounds. The natural and logical reaction to this is to be different and avoid running backs in the early round. Zero RB was a reaction to drafts, not a strategy going in.
Second, your draft position greatly influences if Zero RB is for you. This preseason, I would never have advocated for drafting Michael Thomas or Davante Adams over Christian McCaffrey, Saquon Barkley, or Ezekiel Elliott. If you had a top-3 pick, you really had very little choice. You had three elite running backs that you should have taken, just all three of them didn’t pan out. After 1.03, I think it gets interesting. Michael Thomas was my pick at 1.04, and his season went just like the top guys, it just didn’t work out. Then it gets interesting at 1.05. I suggested anyone beyond pick 1.04 to at least consider Zero RB. After picks 1.07 or 1.08, I strongly recommended it as the best option. So no, not everyone should go Zero RB, but for those 5 people (in a 12 team league) that drafted pick 1.07 or later, it seems to have been a very successful method. Because of the “lock” of the three guys at the top of drafts, I believe this is where “Modified Zero RB” came from and why it was created; I actually fully support it, but that’s for another article.
Now those are out of the way, the reason for this article is a recent tweet I made:
So are we acknowledging that Zero RB is still the way to go or are we not ready to have that conversation yet?
— Brian O'Connell (@BpoFSU) November 30, 2020
It was meant to be a tongue in cheek tweet because I know how angry people get about this subject, but I couldn’t believe the massive amount of hate Zero RB received this year, especially after we’ve seen several late running backs break out and be top-10 players at the position. Below I will examine some of the responses I received and try and give them the response I feel they deserve that isn’t limited to 140 characters.
I'm anti Zero RB but still ended up with Antonio Gibson, James Robinson, Damien Harris, Gio Bernard, Carlos Hyde, Wayne Gallman, Chase Edmonds, Myles Gaskin & Devontae Booker on several teams. Many of these guys were basically off waivers or late in drafts. Steals are everywhere.
— ¢ʜᴀʟᴋ 🚫 (@101chalk) November 30, 2020
This was a response I got a lot and I think it’s valid. A lot of great fantasy football players like Chalk watch the wavier wire like a hawk and draft high upside players late. Almost all my teams regardless of draft strategy have a few of those players that Chalk mentioned. I know most smart fantasy football players won’t handcuff their top running backs because it’s disadvantageous. To a certain extent, these late running backs are acting as handcuffs to your high draft capital running backs if you go Zero RB. You’re adding unnecessary depth to a position you spent high draft capital on. Instead, there’s other positions that you should load up on so that these steals are not just adding depth, but are important pieces of your roster. And yes, as a final point, I know you can trade for better players if you have depth, but also good luck getting Tyreek or Davante Adams away from their current teams.
Great question for someone with Henry or Dalvin Cook on their squads. I have both on a 10-2 squad, so I’ll offer this: a victory lap in 2020, when injuries took out/held back guys like CMC, Barkley, Chubb, Ekeler, Sanders, & Mixon = a celebration of bad luck, not superior process
— Drew DeLuca (@DrewDeLaware) November 30, 2020
I got a lot of Derrick Henry and Dalvin Cook responses and I don’t think they invalidate Zero RB like they think it does. This person even offered the exact reason why. As outlined in this RotoViz article, running backs have a higher probability of being injured than wide receivers. Running backs are risky and with a first round full of running backs, that’s a full round of extremely expensive darts that you’re throwing. Yes, there are probably four running backs that hit this season: Cook, Henry, Alvin Kamara, and Josh Jacobs. You then have CMC, Barkley, Austin Ekeler, Nick Chubb, and Joe Mixon all missing serious time with injuries. Yes, this is horrible injury luck, but it’s not extremely out of the ordinary or unexpected. As for the top wide receivers, there is simply just not that level of injuries occurring. There is of course Michael Thomas but beyond that, almost every other top 10 wide receiver has played more than half of their games, with Julio and Godwin being the only players that have missed more than a game or two. Zero RB is not a celebration of bad luck, it’s an acknowledgment of it and an adjustment because of it.
Scarcity is why zero RB truthers are operating on a fallacy.
— Bo Knows Picante (@Bo_McBigTime) November 30, 2020
I absolutely love both of these tweets, especially the use of a fallacy to support a fallacy. I really don’t understand the argument for scarcity of running backs in the NFL. The week with the fewest running backs scoring 10+ PPR points, (an arbitrary cut off but I think decently captures “usable” players) was Week 5 with 23. Most weeks had over 25 RBs score at least 10 PP points, and several weeks had more than 30. Check out a weekly wavier article and there are running backs available every week. Scarcity of elite running backs? Sure, but there are also a scarcity of elite wide receivers so that argument also doesn’t hold any weight.
Petition to rename "Zero RB" to "Late RB".
— Marky Mark (@FF_FunkyBunch) November 30, 2020
I am going to end with this final comment I received because I think it will help stop the arguments. In no way is the Zero RB strategy actually drafting zero running backs. If anything, when I draft Zero RB, I draft many, many more running backs. Moving forward, I am going to try and refer to Zero RB as Late RB, because it captures the idea of it better. There are so many breakout running backs you can draft later than the first few rounds that will be usable and might just break out. You’re also making educated guesses on those running backs. You’re not just filling up your roster with any and every running back on the board. J.J. Zachariason does a fantastic podcast on this every preseason and gives you some trends to aim for in the middle to late parts of the draft. Yes, there will be plenty of misses, (I was very high on Matt Breida and Tarik Cohen) but that’s how Zero RB works. You take a few elite wide receivers, an elite tight end, and maybe even a quarterback before you just hammer running back and hope a few hit.
This argument is not going to end anytime soon, and I am not advocating that Late RB will be the way to go next season. We won’t know that until preseason when drafts start happening. For now, theoretical arguments about fantasy football only make us better fantasy football players. If you want to keep this debate going, feel free to find me at Twitter @BPOFSU.
