Fantasy football analysis isn't about precision—it's about moving in the right direction. When I hear counterintuitive claims or interesting concepts in fantasy content, I want to understand the methodology behind them. This curiosity led me to build my own database and models to recreate what I was hearing, visualize the data myself, and explore topics in ways I hadn't seen before.
Fantasy football is a game of probabilities and game theory. What are the chances of Player A producing more than Player B at the same cost? What are my opportunity costs of drafting this position now versus waiting? There are many ways to answer these questions, and what follows is another attempt to do just that.
In this article, I will breakdown data for 20-round Fantasy Football Players Championship (FFPC) drafts using average draft position (ADP) data from Fantasy Mojo going back to 2016, showing which positions are most often drafted in which round, what percentage of time those players returned #1-#4 tier production at their position, and what the hit rate was of landing a #1-#4 in those rounds. Lastly, I will provide an additional layer of opportunity cost analysis, attempting to help further inform your decisions as you navigate through your fantasy drafts.
Positions By Round
Quarterback
Most of the elements in the visuals speak for themselves, but I will start by highlighting the key areas that will be touched on as we work through this article for each position.
The upper section has each of the 20 rounds, with the number of players at that position drafted in that round since 2016 and the average points per game (PPG) for those players.
Also included is the average ADP positional rank in that round, and the average positional finish using FFPC scoring for players taken in that round.
In the “heat map” section of the table, there are two columns for each of the #1 through #4 positional finish groups for each position. The first column is what percentage of #X players were drafted in that round, with the next column showing what percentage of players taken in that round returned #X production.
With nine seasons being evaluated, each positional tier will represent about 108 players (12 players x 9 seasons). Some seasons have ties and an extra player sneaks into a tier.
Lastly, the section below the 20-round table shows the “undrafted” players at that position, providing the same metrics as the drafted players' table.
Let’s see if I can provide clarity to each of the points by reviewing the quarterback data.
This shows 219 quarterbacks drafted through round 20, roughly 24 quarterbacks selected per season over the past nine seasons. You also have 493 additional undrafted quarterbacks who returned some level of production.
I won’t dissect the entire table, but I will review two specific rounds to add context to the evaluation. You will notice that there were three quarterbacks drafted in round two since 2016, which were 2020 and 2023 Patrick Mahomes, and 2023 Jalen Hurts.
Round two accounts for only 2.78% of all the top 12 quarterback (QB1) finishes over the past nine seasons (3 out of 108), but it has a 100% hit rate. Each of the two Mahomes’ seasons and the Hurts’ season returned QB5, QB8, and QB2 finishes, respectively, averaging out to QB5 overall at 24.55ppg. So while they weren’t values as they were drafted as the overall QB1, they did return top-12 production.
The last round I will highlight is round 10, where the largest percentage of QB1 seasons have been drafted. 16 quarterbacks in the sample were drafted in round 10, 10.19% of all QB1 seasons came from this round, and 11 of the 16 drafted here (68.75%) returned a QB1 finish with an average positional finish of QB11.
Regardless of which tier quarterbacks finished in this round, all of the quarterbacks drafted here averaged 22.15ppg. So while the hit rate wasn’t as strong as round two, you still have a great chance at returning a QB1 season at a much lower cost, with only about a 2ppg difference from those who drafted a quarterback eight rounds earlier.
Overall, you can see a decent concentration of quarterbacks returning QB1 finishes in rounds seven through 11, and if you are interested in drafting a quarterback returning QB2 level of production, you should start looking in round 12. Very few QB1 performances come from quarterbacks drafted after round 11.
Running Backs
Same info as with quarterbacks, so let’s dive in.
What jumps out here is the high concentration of green in the upper left of the table in rounds one and two. It shows us that 53.71% of all RB1 seasons came from running backs drafted in rounds one and two, and the combined chance of returning an RB1 season from these rounds is about 55%. Stay tuned for the wide receiver and tight ends to see how this hit rate stacks up.
After that, RB1 finishes are pretty sparse, though you see in rounds four and seven a little hope with 7.41% of RB1 finishes coming from those rounds, and a 24.24% and 20.51% hit rate, respectively. So if you are a “zero-rb” bro and your crystal ball works well in the mid-single-digit rounds, feel free to fade your running back selections until this point in the draft.
From there, you will see that the RB2, RB3, and RB4 seasons and the corresponding rounds they are drafted from follow predictably. It also explains why some fantasy managers don’t draft running backs in the early rounds. 10.19% of all RB2 seasons came from round one, not exactly the production you are hoping for when sinking top-12 draft capital into a player.
The concentration of players drafted and hit rates for the remaining RB-finish groups somewhat cluster together. Many of your RB2s and RB3s come from the same range of round four through round eight. And the undesirable yet too frequently relied upon RB4s are coming from rounds eight through 14, with decent hit rates throughout.
The last thing to point out is the undrafted guys. A large percentage of your RB3s and RB4s aren’t taken in the top 20 rounds, and these undrafted players account for nearly 13% and 18% of all RB3 and RB4 seasons, respectively. The waiver wire warriors love the sound of these returns.
Wide Receivers
On to the wide receivers, with 26.61% of all WR1 seasons coming from players drafted in the first round, with a hit rate of 65.91% (29/44 WRs drafted). This is a significantly higher hit rate than for RB1s, at only 57.89%. Wait until round two, though, and only 14.68% of WR1 seasons came from here with a modest hit rate of only 37.21%.
So the first round is a much better bet to hit on a WR1 than anywhere else; that is Captain obvious material. Relative to running backs, the hit rate is much better as well. Does this mean you should ALWAYS draft a wide receiver in the first round? Possibly, but we will dive into that specific argument a bit later.
The next interesting piece is that round two is not great for high-end wide receiver production. Only 7.41% of WR2s came from here, and only 8.33% of WR3s. Rounds three and four are decent for WR2 production, and if you skip a round, you can look for strong WR3 hit rates in rounds six and seven.
WR4s are pretty well spread throughout the draft, with the best round being the sixth, topping out at an 8.26% hit rate. It isn’t until you get all the way down to the undrafted player section that over 11% of WR3s and more than 17% of WR4s come from undrafted players. Very similar to running backs.
The difference is that WR4s historically out-produce RB4s by over 2ppg (and narrowly edge out RB3 production). Therefore, you are more likely to use WR4s in your flex spots than RB3s or RB4s. With a high percentage of WR4s coming off the waiver wire each year, if you are quick to pounce when the opportunity arises, you may find yourself with a player who can help contribute to winning weeks.
Tight Ends
What jumps out with the tight end position is that you can pretty much do whatever you want between rounds one and nine and have a similar chance at returning a TE1 finish. While that may be a bit hyperbolic, it’s not far off. Hit rates are strong from rounds one through six, with a decent concentration of TE1 seasons coming from rounds two through seven.
The golden round appears to be round nine, where 11% of all TE1 seasons were drafted at a 66.67% hit rate. And tied for the third highest percentage of TE1 seasons is the undrafted pool at 8.26%.
So the frustration with tight ends is elevated even more given this info. What remains clear is that investing early in a tight end can give you a PPG advantage if you choose correctly, but after that, the PPG drop-off across the remaining single-digit rounds is nominal.
If you are into drafting multiple tight ends (which I often am as a tight end premium (TEP) player), you (I) probably shouldn’t. A quick look at the undrafted pool reveals that 28.70% of all TE2 seasons came from undrafted tight ends. A truly disgusting reality.
Opportunity Cost
Early WR versus Early RB
I told you I would revisit whether or not the high hit rate for first-round WR1 seasons means you should always draft a wide receiver here, and I keep my promises. So I am sure you are asking me, “What should I do in my draft this year?” And as any good economist would answer, “It depends”.
Many things should factor into that answer for you and your particular drafts – league size, format, number of starters at each position, position in the draft, player preferences, etc. These are among the primary factors influencing your decisions about who you should (and do) draft in EVERY round of fantasy, not just round one. I will continue to say it, this is about moving in the right direction rather than precision, so here is some data to help guide you.
What is all this noise? Hopefully, the green cells help key you in on what is important in this table.
The previous data from the heat map tables told us that the percentage of RB1s and WR1s drafted in the first round is pretty strong, with the edge going to wide receivers. But there should be more to the analysis and your decision-making process than simple raw hit rates. What else is important when deciding who to draft, assuming you have the option between two similar players at both positions?
I included several things in this table, providing additional factors to consider:
CS – Consistency Score. How consistent are these players on a week-to-week basis in their fantasy production? The lower the number, the more consistent.
# of Players – Self-explanatory
PPG – Also self-explanatory
% Won Your Week Games – Based on numerous responses from fantasy managers, this is based on the number of games a running back or wide receiver scored 20+ fantasy points in a given week.
Avg Missed Games – Simply subtracting the number of games played from the total number of possible games played (16 before 2021, 17 starting in 2021)
% of Games Missed - Taking the number above and dividing by the total number of possible games played.
Risk/Reward Score – Incorporates all of the elements described above and weighs consistency and upside potential against injury risk and sample size, with bonuses for positional tier hit rates and week-winning performances. PPG, consistency, and bonus metrics are used as the numerator in the equation while the percentage of missed games and sample size metrics were used as “penalty” components in the denominator.
After factoring all of these metrics into a Risk/Reward Score, the table above shows that running backs score better in both the first and second rounds. Running backs’ first-round score is better than wide receivers by over four points, whereas the second-round score outpaces wide receivers by nearly seven points.
So while running backs drafted in the first round missed more games (2.64/season and 15.51%) compared to wide receivers (1.88/season and 11.08%), their better consistency score (.51 versus .54), PPG (18.67 versus 18.12) and percentage of week winning games (40.65% versus 37.83%) pushed their Risk/Reward Score over wide receivers. The first-round differential is slightly tighter than the second-round differential, presumably because of the bonus provided to wide receivers by the #1 hit rate percentage.
Wide receivers offer a distinct advantage after round two throughout the remainder of the draft. Except for rounds six and 14, the reward score for wide receivers suggests they are often the better choice compared to running backs in most cases.
Perhaps you don’t agree with the metrics I chose or the methodology I used, or you just love drafting who you love in the first and second rounds. That’s perfectly fine, fantasy football is about having fun and doing it in a way that is fun for you. Nonetheless, I will point this out – coincidentally, I came across this thread of tweets WHILE doing research for my article:
Austin Abbott, an extremely accomplished fantasy football and dynasty player, lays out his recipe for a winning draft strategy this year. In his strategy, he suggests fantasy managers target a top-tier running back in round one, and in round two, to directly quote Austin, “Draft Your Next ELITE RB”.
He argues that not only have you secured another “game-breaking” running back on your team, but you may also force other managers in your draft to panic and push up running backs earlier than they should be, resulting in other positional values falling to you. He continued to lay out the rest of his strategy throughout the thread, but of most significance for our conversation were the suggestions for the first two rounds.
As for quarterbacks and tight ends, this Risk/Reward Score system “works”, but it is not quite as relevant given the nature of the positions and the singular starting spots allocated to each. That said, I will note the scores are strong for quarterbacks in rounds four, six, and 10, and that tight ends score well in rounds one, two, and nine. Recalling back to our heat map charts for each of these positions, those results are not surprising.
Conclusion: Play the Probabilities
Unlike Austin’s thread, I won’t suggest WHO you “should” draft, nor am I telling you what position you should draft in which rounds. What I am doing is providing you with data to help you make informed decisions.
Fantasy football is a game of probabilities, almost exclusively decided by factors beyond our control. There is no winning formula – if there were, we would all be a lot better at this fake football game. However, there are formulas to provide insight into historical data, trends, and some predictive outcomes.
Fantasy football is a combination of art and science. Whichever one you lean into most, use it to your advantage during your drafts and in-season management. However, ignoring either one is a recipe for disaster. Allow data to help guide you during your fantasy drafts, but have fun and trust your instincts as well.