Inside the Dynasty War Room: DLF Reacts to Round One of the 2020 NFL Draft
Editor’s Note: Want even more DLF Draft Coverage? Get an edge and by joining us on Patreon.
It is no secret that the NFL Draft has a major impact on player value. This includes not only the incoming rookies but, in many cases, the veterans that are displaced as a result of the pick. From January through April, every fantasy football article, podcast, video focused on rookies will include a reminder that everything changes once we get the final piece of information that comes once players are drafted.
At DLF, this is our busiest time of year. Over the coming days, our team will be busy churning out written, audio, and video content, updating our dynasty rankings and rookie rankings, and finalizing our annual Rookie Draft Guide. To accomplish this, our team of writers has to quickly process the ever-changing player value. With round one in the books, I wanted to offer a look into the minds of the DLF team of writers. I asked our team six reflective questions as the night was winding down. The responses can teach all dynasty players a great deal as we process round one and prepare for more action over the weekend.
1. Which rookie gained the most value through the first round of the NFL Draft?
This is easily Jalen Reagor for me. The Eagles desperately need help in the wide receiver corps and Reagor should have a clear path to targets and a role in their offense. Already projected as a top-ten rookie, he gets an immediate bump by landing in the correct spot to be productive right away. (John Hesterman)
I really like the landing spot for Henry Ruggs, he is easily the best receiver on the Raiders and gained a lot of value considering he was seen as the third or fourth receiver coming into the draft. (Adam Tzikas)
Reagor. The Eagles had a MIGHTY need at wide receiver, and they get a dynamic playmaker. I expected Justin Jefferson instead, but Reagor is an analytics darling and now a locked and loaded top-three wide receiver in this class, if not the new WR1 overall. His pre-draft rookie ADP was at the back-end of the first, but he now enters the top-five overall conversation. Special shout out to Clyde Edwards-Helaire as well. (Addison Hayes)
Clyde Edwards-Helaire. I had him as a very late first prior to the draft but situation is huge for the running back position and this was the best situation out there for a back. I think you need to consider him as potentially going in the top third of the first round now. (Jacob Feldman)
Edwards-Helaire gained a ton of value, him landing on the Chiefs with first-round capital is HUGE. He is on the perfect offense to highlight what he brings to the table. (Dwight Peebles)
I think it’s got to be Edwards-Helaire. After a poor showing at the Combine, Edwards-Helaire wasn’t too high on my rookie board. There were and still are concerns about his size and athleticism translating into a premier running back role in the NFL. However, with first-round draft capital in the dream landing spot (KC), it’ll be hard to keep the LSU product out of the rookie top four when it’s all said and done. (Michael Zingone)
Reagor finds a superior landing spot in Philadelphia and his skillset matches up perfectly with what the Eagles needed. This offense was different with DeSean Jackson healthy early in the year and it shows what they can do with someone to stretch the field. (James Koutoulas)
Ruggs. With every year’s draft, the dynasty community is reminded of just how few promising landing spots there are for incoming rookies. We saw this most obviously this year with CeeDee Lamb who will now have to battle for targets against two established receivers and one of the league’s best running backs. Ruggs, however, finds himself in a wide-open receiver room and an offense that passed a fair amount in 2019 despite having some of the worst passing talent in the league. Further, Jon Gruden figures to be a plus for Ruggs, and should be able to scheme the rookie into uniquely advantageous looks. This point is crucial, as I was wary of Ruggs heading into the draft process due to how scheme-specific his skill set is, relative to other receivers. Of 2020’s top-flight receivers, Ruggs has the easiest path to targets, and has the coaching in place to make those targets efficient. (Stephen Gill)
Brandon Aiyuk. Many drafts had Aiyuk coming off the board in the second or third round. That said, he managed to sneak into the first round and to the NFC Champions no less. Aiyuk is one of my favorite wide receivers in this class and should now rocket into the first round of dynasty rookie drafts. (The FF Ghost)
It has to be Edwards-Helaire. While some draft analysts had CEH ranked as their RB1 or RB2 in this class, the consensus was that he was the fifth-best running back in this class from a fantasy perspective. Landing in Kansas City changes that, as he immediately becomes an option at the top of rookie drafts. In his press conference, Andy Reid mentioned he saw similarities to Brian Westbrook while watching CEH, except that he thought Edwards-Helaire was more talented. Damien Williams will still eat into some of his volumes, but CEH is a huge winner. (Joseph Nammour)
We know for the position, opportunity and situation is everything for early success and CEH checked both boxes on that front. Along with his receiving prowess, he has definitely launched himself into the RB1 conversation overall. (Michael Liu)
It has to be Clyde Edwards-Helaire, going higher than expected at 32 and RB1 and what was considered the best landing spot for a running back rightfully so. Tua Tagovailoa would be second as he is going to a team primed to be able to draft him everything he needs. (Nathan Powell)
Clyde Edwards-Helaire. Everybody knows that Andy Reid running backs are fantasy gold. Edwards-Helaire is likely going to end up rocketing up draft boards. (John DiBari)
2. Which veteran lost the most value as a result of the first round of the NFL Draft?
Alshon Jeffery takes the biggest hit here. With the presumed return of DeSean Jackson and the first-round selection of Jalen Reagor; Jeffery is headed for a decrease in value and most-likely, targets in the Eagles offense. (Hesterman)
Micheal Gallup practically lost all of his value with the drafting of CeeDee Lamb. (Tzikas)
Gallup. Done. RIP. (Hayes)
I’ll give it a tie between everyone who was in the Kansas City backfield and Gallup. He is likely to be the fourth target in the offense now behind Amari Cooper, Ezekiel Elliot, and now Lamb. (Feldman)
Damien Williams, to piggyback off the first answer. Williams is nearly dead in dynasty now. (Peebles)
Gallup will be a popular choice, but I don’t think the breakout star from 2018 is all of a sudden worthless. I’ll go instead here with Aaron Rodgers, particularly in super-flex leagues. Rodgers was lackluster at best in 2019, buoyed by a few huge games. He hasn’t been the same player over the last few years, and Jordan Love‘s entrance to Green Bay signals that the veteran quarterback may be on the out sooner rather than later. There’s little to justify him as a dynasty QB1. He’ll drop outside my top 15 at the position. (Zingone)
Gallup. CeeDee Lamb going 17 overall to the Dallas Cowboys was tremendous value. It was also a punch in the gut to those of us with Gallup rostered in our fantasy leagues. After signing Cooper to a five-year deal and now drafting Lamb, Gallup becomes a third pass-catching option on the Cowboys. (Koutoulas)
Gallup. Gallup had carved out a healthy role for himself in a talented offense, and there wasn’t much expectation for that role to be threatened by the draft. Instead, the Cowboys took Lamb, who wins in very similar areas of the field to Gallup. Both should see the field plenty — the Cowboys make extensive use of 11 personnel, and Cooper is the only other receiver at a comparable level of talent — but it’s hard to see these two very talented receivers putting up great numbers at the same time. (Gill)
Rodgers. It appears that the Packers may be looking to rebuild or could be grooming Rodgers’ replacement with the selection of Jordan Love, much in the same manner that Rodgers was groomed to be Brett Favre’s replacement. There are rumors that Rodgers may be on the trade block, a rumor I doubt at this point given the structure of his contract, age, and the glut of quarterbacks on the market. From a dynasty perspective, if Rodgers is injured or his production is less than what it has been in the past, there will be calls to get Love some playing time and the question marks surrounding his future could see Rodgers’ value drop significantly. (Ghost)
Going hand-in-hand with the biggest winner, Damien Williams is likely the biggest loser so far from the first round of the draft. Typically speaking, running back values are much more vulnerable in the draft compared to wide receiver or tight end because touches in the backfield is a zero-sum game so as CEH wins, Williams loses. Don’t even think this was a question but in case there were still any Darwin Thompson truthers there trying to grasp at last strings of hope, CEH laid all that into the grave today. (Liu)
Michael Gallup. A breakout 2020 season had many valuing him as a top 25 wide receiver. After the Cowboys invest a top 20 pick at the position, that will no longer be the case. (Powell)
The obvious answer is Tyrod Taylor or Andy Dalton, but they weren’t holding much value anyway. Damien Williams will probably see his stock take a serious dive too, and Arron Rodgers’ long-term value took a beating as well. (DiBari)
3. Entering day two, who would be your top three rookie picks in a dynasty rookie draft (1QB/PPR)?
1. CeeDee Lamb, 2. Joe Burrow, 3. Jonathan Taylor (Hesterman)
Still likely taking running backs over some of these receivers, but very interested in Henry Ruggs in Las Vegas. (Tzikas)
I am team rookie running backs. Edwards-Helaire has entered the top-three conversation with a strong argument for the 1.01. D’Andre Swift, Jonathan Taylor and JK Dobbins would be my next three picks, order to be determined. (Hayes)
Assuming it is only based on the players who were drafted in the first round, I think I might go Lamb, Jeudy, and Edwards-Helaire. All of them are very close together and the order might switch around a bit. (Feldman)
Edwards-Helaire, Jeudy, Taylor (Peebles)
Assuming this is for only players who have been drafted, I would go Edwards-Helaire, Reagor and Jefferson. If I had an honorable mention, it’d be Jerry Jeudy. (Zingone)
1.Lamb, 2. Edwards-Helaire, 3. Reagor (Koutoulas)
Ruggs, Taylor, and Swift. Each of the other top-tier receivers took steps back, and I don’t see second-round draft capital as a death knell for running backs, so Taylor and Swift benefit from Lamb and Jeudy’s falls. Of course, Taylor and Swift may very well suffer similar fates to Lamb and Jeudy, but that is a question for day two. Meanwhile, Ruggs is locked into a relatively solid situation, with the best draft capital of any rookie back or receiver. It’s tempting to push Edwards-Helaire into this tier; however, there’s little volume for running backs to go around in the Kansas City offense. Furthermore, it is unclear how quickly Edwards-Helaire overcomes Damien Williams on the depth chart, or if the Chiefs will even prioritize one back over the other. Andy Reid’s system emphasizes placing weapons on the field, but it does not ensure that they will see heaps of touches. (Gill)
In this order, Jeudy, Lamb and Aiyuk. (Ghost)
I ultimately think Swift and Taylor crash the top three, but based on the players that were selected in the first round, my first three picks would be as follows: 1.01: Edwards-Helaire, 1.02: Reagor, 1.03: Jeudy (Nammour)
My top three picks are still Jonathan Taylor, DeAndre Swift, and Clyde Edwards-Helaire although the rankings within that are still up the air as we don’t know the draft capital or landing spots for two out of the three. If both Taylor and Swift still get very good landing spots (i.e. Colts and Falcons), they would still remain in the same tier but less than ideal landing spots could vault CEH into the RB1 spot. (Liu)
1.Jeudy, 2. Lamb, 3. CEH (Powell)
I think it’s going to be Edwards-Helaire at No. 1, then Justin Jefferson and Jalen Reagor, in no particular order. Jonathan Taylor may squeeze into that third spot. (DiBari)
4. Even though he wasn’t drafted in the first round, would you still consider Jonathan Taylor with the 1.01 rookie pick?
Yes. Taylor is the top-to-bottom most complete running back in this draft class. While I still believe that landing spot is going to play a big factor, he should easily get a shot early on in his career to make a difference and has top-12 potential among his position. (Hesterman)
I would! Landing spot is going to be crucial for seeing where we put Taylor in rookie drafts. (Tzikas)
Absolutely. It was expected that Taylor would fall out of the first round, so this now being true has no effect on my evaluation of him. Ask me again if he falls into the third round though. (Hayes)
Consider, yes. Definitely take him, no. Situation is such a big deal for running backs, so we will need to wait and see where he gets drafted before deciding where he falls. (Feldman)
Yes, but he has to absolutely knock landing spot out of the park to be 1.01 (Peebles)
Yes, absolutely. Edwards-Helaire doesn’t profile as a 1.01 type running back. Taylor is a legit talent and worthy of the pick if drafted to the right team in round two. (Zingone)
Yes. Taylor is still the most talented player in this draft with the least amount of question marks. Running backs rarely have the draft capital of other positions and they are only becoming more devalued. (Koutoulas)
Yes. Absolute draft capital matters much less than relative draft capital for running backs, who have seen plenty of success even when picked outside of the first round. Two recent examples that come to mind immediately are Miles Sanders and Nick Chubb. As long as Taylor winds up being picked relatively early, a positive landing spot could very well make him worth the 1.01. Similar reasoning could justify Swift being the 1.01 post-draft, depending on how things turn out. (Gill)
So much would depend on his landing spot, I know that isn’t a popular view or belief in dynasty circles, but it really does matter. If Taylor went to a team like Carolina, New Orleans or Tennessee, his value would take a hit because he would likely be on the wrong side of a time-share for quite a while. Now if he landed in a place like Baltimore, Washington or Jacksonville, I could see scenarios where he takes over as the lead back and would deserve some consideration as the 1.01. Short answer, I’d consider it but wouldn’t book it just yet. (Ghost)
Taylor was my 1.02 pre-draft, so he wouldn’t be my first choice at 1.01, but any decent landing spot certainly puts that in his range of outcomes, yes. (Nammour)
I would still consider both Taylor and Swift with the 1.01 rookie pick assuming they get good landing spots above. Still to early to completely write them off the given talent and unknown for landing spot. (Liu)
Yes, he and Swift are still in the 1.01 conversation without going round one. (Powell)
Nope. That Kansas City landing spot locks Edwards-Helaire into my 1.01 slot. (DiBari)
5. How do you factor in landing spot and draft capital into your rookie rankings?
Landing spot is the first key factor I am looking for in rookie rankings. A clear path to offensive opportunity is a solid indicator of potential production. The second phase is draft capital. Teams indicate their intentions first with their wallets. Spending a high draft pick on a player shows their commitment to that player’s role in their offense. In terms of weight between these two factors, I typically lean towards the landing spot first as it directly ties into a player’s perceived opportunity. (Hesterman)
Over time I’ve moved to closer to a 50/50 split, I think talent tends to win out over time, but NFL careers are so short, and rookies are expected to start quickly, that landing spot is very important for fantasy value. (Tzikas)
Draft capital is the most important factor when it comes to predicting NFL success, no matter the position. A first-round pick makes a player like Ruggs significantly more valuable than if he was taken in the third or fourth-round pick. Landing spot is also important, but it is not the be-all-end-all. AJ Brown fell down rookie drafts last year as Tennessee was viewed as a negative landing spot. We know how that worked out. As long as players have draft capital, they will have opportunities to succeed, no matter the landing spot. (Hayes)
It depends on the position. First-round wide receivers historically have a much higher hit rate, so any receiver who goes in round one gets a little bump. For running backs, landing spot matters most to me. Draft capital with backs is all the same to me as long as they go in the first three rounds unless they are taken in the top ten picks. (Feldman)
It means a ton – there are so many players close together as far as talent and capital. (Peebles)
A lot, but I don’t look at it from any angle other than: “can this guy earn a starting impact role soon?” Team quality does not factor into my opinion of landing spot. For example, despite Prescott and the Cowboys being a better quarterback/team than Lock and the Broncos, the path to a starting spot is much more likely for Jeudy rather than Lamb. I won’t drop Lamb too far (my pre-draft WR1), but as of right now he’s my WR4. (Zingone)
Last season, I missed out on a player I liked a lot pre-draft (AJ Brown) because of landing spot. I can’t tell you how much I’ve been kicking myself for that. Draft spot matters, but more so for running backs than wide receivers. Running backs have a short shelf life and must contribute immediately, whereas wideouts can take a couple of years to mature. (Koutoulas)
As a dynasty scout, it’s disappointing to say, but landing spot and draft capital are critical. Some of my previous work has gone to show how college production, draft capital, and situational factors alone explain most of wide receivers’ prospects to break out. Running backs, meanwhile, will produce immediately if they get touches — landing spot — and will continue to produce if they can hold onto those roles — largely signaled by draft capital. Given backs’ short shelf lives, if they aren’t putting up numbers quickly, it’s not likely that they’ll ever do all that much. Quarterbacks, as we know, have exponentially more success as top picks. (Gill)
So, I kind of touched on it in the last answer. I’m more of the mindset that landing spot matters, for some positions more than others. For running backs it is a huge factor. We have seen tremendous talents squandered and thrown away like an old newspaper while relative unknowns can gain immense value by being in the right spot. Quarterbacks, it matters somewhat, the biggest talents end up facing the biggest challenges as they get drafted at the top of the first round, where teams that finished poorly the previous year pick. If they are as good as we think, they can turn a franchise around, if they falter, well, they might not have been as good as we thought, or the challenge was bigger than one man could tackle. Wide receivers and tight ends drafted high tend to be shielded somewhat because they are often a piece of a bigger puzzle or plan. They are afforded the chance to learn on the job a bit more than running backs and quarterbacks. So, in terms of rankings, the rules simply are not uniform, with the landing spot of quarterbacks and running backs factoring in much heavier and the landing spot of wide receivers and tight ends factoring in significantly less. (Ghost)
Data and analysis have shown that early draft capital correlates to fantasy success, and the earlier a player is selected, the higher the likelihood that they will produce for our fantasy teams. As such, I weigh draft capital to a moderate extent. I factor landing spot into my rankings as well, but I think it’s important not to overstate how much we think we know about landing spots at this point in April. Players can improve and situations can change rapidly. AJ Brown and Marquise Brown were discounted due to their landing spots last year, and both have been good investments to date. Having said that, volume (targets and touches) drive fantasy scoring, and “good” perceived landing spots can indicate a player will receive requisite volume to produce well. (Nammour)
I factor them in pretty heavily for the running back position because opportunity is everything. The talent gap for running back is pretty low so I want the guys who are put in the best situations (offensive, OL, vacated touches) to succeed early on. I weight landing spot and draft capital less for wide receiver. Still very important but they have a much longer shelf life and play a position where it’s much easier for talent to win out. As long as they are getting day two draft capital at a minimum, my rankings are impacted a lot less for the receiver position. (Liu)
Draft Capital is the major factor with my rookie rankings, landing spot is more subjective and can change quickly, so it only plays a small role. Â (Powell)
I’m the landing spot king. I’ll gladly take a lesser player in a better system or with a better role over a more talented player in a garbage system or no clear path to touches. (DiBari)
6. What is your actual process following the first round?
Following the first round, I want to dive into more film before anything else. After some film study and digging into the relevant stats of a player, I think we can see where a player’s strengths are going to fit in their new offense and where their weaknesses may hinder production. The focus for me is what type of projection can be assigned to a rookie in year-one at the NFL level and how they fit among their peers as far as depth chart goes. (Hesterman)
Definitely look at what teams saw in their evaluations of players who didn’t have first-round grades. Dig into the potential opportunities via depth charts as well. (Tzikas)
I do not have a process after round one. I like to wait until after rounds two and three are completed before re-evaluating rankings and rookie draft picks. While landing spot is important, the difference between a first-round pick and a second-round pick is minimal, especially for receivers. After Friday, I have a great understanding of players that the NFL believes in and those they feel are more risky or skeptical of. This allows me to create my post-draft rankings with a better view of the class. (Hayes)
I don’t do a ton in terms of re-doing rankings after the first round because a lot of the top running backs typically don’t go until day two of the draft. I do typically go back and look at the research I have on some of the wide receivers though because the NFL always seems to draft them in a vastly different order from how I have them ranked. (Feldman)
Once first-round capital is out of the way, I tend to trust my film and personal rankings more. You factor in landing spot, and depth chart, but I trust my own observations more. (Peebles)
I put the rookies into my top 200 rankings at DLF and will adjust them and the veterans they impact throughout the weekend. (Zingone)
Always need to update rankings and reevaluate landing spots for available prospects. Seeing where I missed on prospects and why is important to understand what teams might be looking for in the next two days of the draft. (Koutoulas)
I’ll review film for later-picked prospects who I may not have caught much of in my first run-through, but otherwise, depth charts are essential. So much of running back value is determined by whether there is an established back already in town. Similarly, receivers have to work hard in order to supplant established receivers on the depth chart. However, in receivers’ cases, a depth chart analysis requires more nuance, as not all talented receiving teammates have the same effects on rookies: Complementary receivers can help (see Chris Godwin‘s success in Tampa next to Mike Evans), while redundant receivers can stifle opportunities. (Gill)
Looking at the draft going forward, it is important to determine what team needs were met on day one and matching the outstanding needs to the players available. Available draft capital also plays a part as a team that may have started the draft with seven picks being suddenly left with three or four picks forces the evaluator the reweigh each team’s priorities, conversely, a team leaving the first round with eight or nine picks left can take more shots at filling the holes on their team, taking risks, or building up depth, each of which can alter perceived strategy for a team coming into the draft. Looking back at day one, I certainly look at depth charts and fit. Fit is so important and one that many evaluators tend to overlook in favor of landing spot. For instance, putting an excellent rusher on a pass-heavy team looks great initially because it is a high-powered offense, but if the running back isn’t a great receiver then the upside may not be as great as it seems. Additionally, if a team already has a dominant X receiver and drafts a wide receiver who has traditionally played as an X receiver and his new team suddenly asks him to move to the slot, the fit may not work and the production we saw in college may never materialize. Landing spot and fit matters and it’s something I try to decipher whenever possible, however, depth charts do play a factor in my process as well. (Ghost)
As someone who lives and breathes football, I usually have my evaluations complete by the time the draft rolls around. I usually have a firm grasp on team depth charts, so I have a general idea of how a player will slot into their team and I attempt to project the role he will play as a rookie and beyond. The first thing I do is update my rankings for these rookies and the other players on their teams that are impacted both positively and negatively. I like to get an early feel of where I think a player should be valued, then I take a few days to read analysis from talented writers across the industry to evaluate if they see things differently (and why). Then, I look for team/GM press conferences to see if they can shed any light on how they believe a player will be used or why they felt he was worth the selection at a given draft spot. Armed with that information, I then go back to my rankings and update accordingly. (Nammour)
I update my rankings live as I follow through the draft to see how draft capital and landing situations change. Personally don’t do much more film grinding as I rely more on analytics and the draft to tell me which players to move in my ranks. Given most 1st/2nd round talents are pretty widely known/covered, I don’t really feel the need to go back and watch film again just because they got picked a round earlier than I thought. (Liu)
I update rankings, run through various scenarios on how day two can and will impact my current rankings. Â (Powell)
I do lots of prep heading into the draft, so I don’t change much heading into day two. Most of the fantasy-relevant players, especially running backs, end up being taken on days two and three, so I don’t overhaul my rankings or make any changes until we get through the weekend. (DiBari)
- DLF’s April 1QB Trade Value Chart - April 24, 2024
- Monday Mocks: Expert 2024 Rookie Mock Draft - April 22, 2024
- Monday Mocks: 2024 Landing Spots - April 15, 2024
