Is it better to take a RB2 before a WR1? My team for example. I took back to back RB. I have Jackson and Grant to anchor the backfield, then I had to "settle" for Burress as my WR1. If I had taken TO instead of Grant, I still could've grabbed someone like Johnathan Stewart or Michael Turner as my RB2. I guess it's a question of is TO that much better than Burress vs. the difference between Grant and Turner/Stewart.

I think RB is deeper this year than WR, as in more players in the upper tiers.

With so many WRs taken before my pick I was looking at two QBs. Brees is coming off of back-to-back 4400 yard seasons with the Saints and there is no reason to believe he won't be near the number again. Palmer on the other hand has watched most of his numbers steadily decline in the last three seasons. So, I think Brees is a more solid pick. Both round out the top tier of QBs.

As for RB vs. WR, it seems to me that the successful teams are throwing the ball more. The Patriots did most of their damage through the air last year. The 'stud' running backs are excellent receivers. And one of the reasons teams use RB by committee is to get the better receiving back in the game more often. So as receiving stats increase, the need for better WRs on your fantasy team increases.

And if you give me a day, I'll try to back that theory up with some real numbers.

I agree with Humbert, in that WR numbers have jumped hugely over the past two seasons, and more teams are going to the two-back system.  That both devalues the RB position, while adding more depth to it.  That being said, I still believe that RB is the lifeblood of a fantasy football team.  I tried two years ago to go against that theory, and I got killed.  Last year, I made sure to have plenty of RB depth, including watching the waiver wire closely every week, and when the playoffs came around I had rostered guys like Justin Fargas and Aaron Stecker.  That ultimately led to my winning the championship.  It certainly wasn't Sidney Rice getting it done for me.

As to this draft, picking dead last and having to do the whole two-at-a-time-then-wait-forever deal has altered my strategy.  Instead of arguing with myself (which I do often.  What of it?) about whether I should take an upper tier WR, rather than a RB2 or QB1, at a certain point, I'm having to fill starting roles by position.

The first two picks I went RB (duh!) with Portis and Lynch.  Then with Rounds 3 and 4, I filled in WR with Colston and Houshmanzadeh.  So far, I'm pretty happy with what I've got.  Two top tier RBs and two top tier WRs.  

I could have gone say top tier RB (Portis) and top tier WR (Owens/Moss) in the first two rounds.  But then I figured with that huge wait, and all the picks that I would have to endure, I would be left with mediocre choices in Rounds 3/4.  So far it's turned out that way.  Had I split up the positions, I would still have been able to grab a Colston/Houshmanzadeh to go along with Owens.  But my RB choices would have been a little thin.  To me, guys like Darren McFadden, Rudi Johnson, Julius Jones, Jonathan Stewart, etc. all have question marks.  I don't want question marks for my second starting RB.  My flex/utility slot?  Sure.  But not my second starter.  Those are the RBs that would have been available in Rounds 3/4 when my picks returned, had I chosen to go RB1/WR1 with my first two rounds.

Now comes the challenge.  The top tier QBs have gone off the board already; I have filled starting RB/WR.  So do I go ahead and nab a second tier QB with Round 5?  Do I add RB/WR depth?  Do I fill another need, like TE?  These are the questions you have to ask yourself at this point in the game.

I don't think McFadden was a reach here for me. Yes, he is going to be playing for a lousy team. But he'll be the focal point of the offense most likely and with the skills he has, he could almost have an Adrian Peterson like season. OK, that might be over stating it a little, but he should have a quality season and I'd consider him to be a good RB2, especially considering some of the other guys that were still left out there, most of which are in RB by committee type situations. McFadden, unless he falls on his face during the pre-season, should be the sole back in Oakland this year and a good RB2 option in my opinion.

Now as far as filling positions goes, I feel by the end of the fifth round you should definitely have at least two RBs and two WRs. That should be the standard way of thinking in all fantasy football leagues. You may snag a QB somewhere in the first five rounds, or one of the top tiered TEs, and some like to go three RBs and two WRs or vice versa. My strategy has worked for me in every league I've actually gotten to do my own draft in...which leads me to this.

If you're going to do a fantasy football league, do one where you either draft online or in person with the rest of the league. Don't do an automated draft..not only does that take the fun out of the whole drafting process, but it doesn't allow you to change strategies at any point should a guy be taken that you thought you'd get because of where you ranked him in your pre rankings. And if you're in a league where you draft online or in person...do the commissioner and the rest of the league a favor...SHOW UP TO THE DRAFT!!!! I can't stress that enough. OK, sorry, I'm off my soapbox now.

Oh, and I like all the picks in this round with maybe the exception being the McNabb pick with Palmer and Brees sitting out there waiting to be drafted. I was hoping Palmer would fall to me actually...but it wasn't to be.