This article is about a 12-minute read.
Akin to Zero-RB, the Zero-WR strategy has gained popularity lately.
With its roots in Stud-RB Strategy (where fantasy players specifically target running backs early in their drafts), Zero-WR has recently gained some support. With this draft strategy, the drafter avoids wide receivers but doesn't only target running backs. Quarterbacks and tight ends are also fair game. The main idea behind this draft theory is that wide receiver is the deepest position so you can fill it later in the draft.
What are your thoughts on Zero-WR Strategy? Is this a good year to implement it? If so, how long are you willing to go before taking your first wide receiver? If you employ this strategy, who are some of your targets at the position? Are there draft spots more suitable than others for this technique?
Adam Harstad
As I mentioned in the discussion on Zero-RB, fantasy value is a function of three primary factors: positional differentiation (i.e. how much a player outscored his peers), scarcity (i.e. how hard it will be to find replacement production at the position), and predictability (i.e. how likely players are to perform like we expect).
Running back has the most positional differentiation, the most scarcity, and (by the slimmest of margins), the second-most predictability, so running back is the most valuable position in fantasy and it seems suboptimal to deliberately avoid it.
But by the same token, in leagues that require three starting receivers, wide receiver has the second-most positional differentiation, the second-most scarcity, and the most predictability. So it's easily the second-most-valuable position and planning on avoiding it also doesn't seem like a great idea.
But as always some important caveats need to be made. Most importantly, we don't draft positions, we draft players. If the best players on your board at any given moment happen to be non-wide receivers, you might go through the first six rounds without drafting any receivers, and if that happens it's fine. (Presumably, you will have gotten a bunch of value at other positions to make this worth your while. There's a difference between deciding before the fact you are going to ignore the position no matter who is on the board and deciding in the moment that the value simply isn't there.)
The other big caveat is that league settings matter a lot. In standard scoring, positional differentiation drops (though it still tends to rank higher than quarterback or tight end). In a league that only starts 2 WRs, both the positional differentiation and scarcity both drop by a lot and wide receiver isn't so far ahead of quarterback or tight end. (It does still win by a lot on predictability.) On the other hand, if your league only started one running back and four wide receivers, maybe receiver becomes the most valuable position.
The most important thing to remember about value is that it's always local. You never draft and compete against some theoretical average league. You always have to tailor your approach to your league with its specific settings and its specific owners and their specific preferences.
(Side note: this is a large part of what makes the Draft Dominator such a great tool because it will automatically adjust for all of the relevant factors and spit out values tailored to your specific setup.)
Jason Wood
I'm with Adam yet again. These "Zero-Positional" strategies are only as good as their scarcity and fit to the league in question. Any successful draft strategy involves a bit of luck, a healthy dose of correctly identifying players within a position, and an understanding of how the rest of your league mates are approaching the draft in real time.
Now, that said, I think this year, based on what I've seen in industry drafts, mocks, and best balls so far, waiting on wide receiver is a far easier strategy to pull off successfully than waiting on running back. Receiver is deep, and in particular, there are a ton of players who project to be around replacement value.
If you wait at the position and end up with a bunch of players in the WR25-WR35 range, it's probably not going to lead you to a title. But the point of any "Zero" strategy is more about waiting long enough but then happening into at least one player who far exceeds consensus rankings and ADP. I feel a lot better in grabbing a handful of consensus WR2 and WR3s and getting at least one to put up WR1 numbers than I do with running back.
Chad Parsons
Like with any strategy possessing a moniker, it comes down to the specific year of a player pool and the target players to implement the said strategy. 2020 is a strong case to go Zero-WR considering the age-pedigree combination of many of the early-round running backs plus the strong veteran wide receiver profiles available in the mid-rounds. A few of my favorites to target are Robert Woods, Keenan Allen, T.Y. Hilton, A.J. Green, Jarvis Landry, Brandin Cooks, and Emmanuel Sanders. They are established veterans with productive track records, but coming at a discount for 2020 specifically. None are of the flashy variety which will garner fanfare in the typical draft room. However, collecting 2-3-4 of this subset, mixing in potentially 1-2 younger upside plays is the perfect complement to a foundation of early running backs as the anchor points of a fantasy squad.
Jordan McNamara
I think there are values later in drafts this year that are uncommon. Jarvis Landry, Brandin Cooks, Will Fuller, and Marvin Jones are great examples with an ADP above 30 and top 15 seasonal finish upside. A strategy double dipping in this range is attractive. Ultimately with any strategy, the specifics can get lost in the moniker. Any strategy that recommends a high volume of wide receivers is not maximizing efficiency, so make sure if you pass on wide receiver early you are not hemorrhaging roster spots to make up the difference.
Andy Hicks
If someone told me I had to go Zero-RB or Zero-WR and they will pay for my entry, I will choose the wide receiver option. The depth is better, there are always waiver wire options and I will be very strong at the other positions.
That said it seems like madness to not take the best available player that results in your team scoring the highest possible amount each week.
I’m sure there are situations where you could end up with no receivers after five rounds, but to me, that would be poor planning or deliberately employing the Zero-WR strategy.
Sigmund Bloom
Zero-WR could just be called "the rational draft strategy for 2020"
The 2019 season had few true WR1s for fantasy and instead had a large group of WR2/WR3 types. We shouldn't expect 2020 to be that different. If you don't take a wide receiver until the fourth round, you won't be at a great disadvantage compared to teams that take two or three wide receivers in the first three rounds. The best draft slot to use this strategy is a late first because the quality of wide receivers around the 3/4 turn isn't significantly below the group going in the second round. It's possible to get two of Adam Thielen, Allen Robinson, Odell Beckham, and Juju Smith-Schuster as your WR1/WR2 if you go WR/WR at the 3/4 turn, which isn't truly Zero-WR, but still is in the vein of the strategy.
Other targets:
- 5th/6th - Tyler Lockett, D.J. Chark, Terry McLaurin, T.Y. Hilton
- 6th/7th - A.J. Green, DeVante Parker, Marquise Brown
- 7th/8th - Michael Gallup, Brandin Cooks, Tyler Boyd, Will Fuller
- Late rounds: Sammy Watkins, Corey Davis, Randall Cobb, Curtis Samuel, Robby Anderson
Jeff Haseley
Sigmund covers this well with his examples of possible wide receiver targets and when. He also shares why waiting on the wide receiver position is a good strategy, especially this year.
There are roughly 25-26 good fantasy running back options with a decreasing degree of appeal as more backs come off the board. It makes sense to roster at least one or two before the position thins out. As far as wide receivers go, there are plenty of good fantasy options. Each team has at least one good top wide receiver option. Some are elite and others are average or above average. Most teams have two fantasy-relevant wide receivers, and some even have three (Dallas, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Carolina, Arizona).
We're getting into 65-70 different players who are fantasy relevant compared to 25-26 running backs. It makes sense to secure the position with the least amount of options first and go from there. This is a passing league and teams have built their teams to accommodate that. Waiting on the wide receiver position, or at least focusing on it later in the draft is a viable strategy that makes sense. As Sigmund said, it's the rational draft strategy of 2020 and I completely agree.
Phil Alexander
I'm not on board with a zero-anything draft strategy, but as the guys have mentioned, drafting running backs early -- think three of your first four picks -- positions you to dip into the wid receiver honey pot that usually exists in Rounds 5-8 and come away with a competitive wide receiver corps.
The players Sigmund listed are mainstays on best-ball rosters I've drafted to this point. I'll throw one more name into the mix you can usually grab in the ninth or tenth round in 12-team leagues -- Henry Ruggs. The report he's set to start in the slot is a big deal. It means the Raiders aren't going to miscast him the way Carolina did to Curtis Samuel for most of last season. Ruggs' unnatural speed makes him a deep threat for sure, but now we know he's going to run plenty of routes designed to get the ball in his hands quickly so he can use his speed after the catch.
It's possible Mike Mayock and Jon Gruden knew what they were doing when they made Ruggs the first wide receiver drafted this year. If Derek Carr isn't willing to take chances downfield, why not get him a wide receiver who can do the heavy-lifting on his own? Don't be shocked when Ruggs is force-fed and finishes as a top-30 fantasy option at wide receiver.
Maurile Tremblay
The Zero-WR strategy makes less sense than the Zero-RB strategy. At any given position, you can at least sort of substitute quantity for quality. If you don't pick any RBs in the first few rounds, you can pick a lot of running backs in the later rounds and hope that one or two pan out. Every year, some late-round RB fills in for an injured starter and becomes one of the outstanding values in the draft. Picking a lot of running backs in the late rounds increases your chance of landing somebody like that.
It doesn't happen as often with wide receivers. When a star wide receiver is injured, his NFL offense usually adjusts by distributing a few more targets to the tight ends and running backs, and the WR2 moves up a bit, as does the WR3, and so on. It's rare that a relative nobody will jump all the way up to replace the WR1 and put up huge numbers. That can happen with running backs, but it generally doesn't with wide receivers.
So if you're hoping to land the best value in the draft with a late-round pick, it's better to pile up late-round running backs as your lottery tickets than late-round WRs.
Waiting on quarterbacks generally makes more sense than waiting on running backs or wide receivers -- which is why it's just considered regular drafting rather than getting a fancy nickname.
Dan Hindery
I would not advise waiting too long to start grabbing wide receivers. The way the board is stacking up in 2020, you do not have to grab a wide receiver in the first couple rounds because there is not a big drop off between the wide receiver WR5 and the WR30. But once the top 35 or so receivers are gone, there is a lot less to be excited about and you are putting yourself at an unnecessary disadvantage if you take a Zero-WR strategy to the extreme.
I am fine with waiting until the 4th round to take your WR1. Maybe even the 5th if you want to push it. But waiting any longer than that looks like a bad strategy given the way the board is shaping up.
Jeff Pasquino
My fellow staffers broke this down well, but I would like to add that in PPR leagues, volume does matter. That is where elite WR1s really separate championship-caliber fantasy teams from the rest of the pack. While it is true that there are plenty of solid WR2 and WR3 level caliber players this year (as it seems to be in several recent seasons), there is unlikely to be a wideout after Round 5 that will consistently see 10+ targets a week at the position. Come fantasy playoff time, the teams that spent at least one - if not two - earlier picks on WR1-caliber wideouts are going to be tough to beat. Adding to that would be the fact that if you decide to go Zero-WR in the first four rounds, the competition will have more talent falling to them in Rounds 3 and 4, increasing the likelihood 3-4 fantasy playoff teams will have a much better receiving corps than your squad. Lastly, the weekly lineup decisions could be a weekly nightmare of tough calls as to who to start - another reason to only attempt this strategy in Best Ball leagues.
Bob Henry
Like a few others, I'm really not a guy who uses a specific strategy like Zero-RB or Zero-WR. My draft strategy has always been to focus on value, be flexible, keep an open mind, get the players you like this year and want to have on your roster, and don't be afraid to go get them. In other words, read the room, watch where other teams have needs and how that could influence your ability to get a player at the next pick or two, or if you need to be bold and take them now.
With that said, I'm happy to share wide receivers that fit the Zero-WR strategy if you find yourself even remotely waiting on WRs and going RB heavy, or anchoring early around Mahomes/Jackson or Kelce/KIttle. Starting your draft with one of those elite QBs and TEs, along with a pair of RBs is a viable plan depending on your draft spot. Here are my favorite receiver targets and those I have the most shares of through best ball drafts this summer in various rounds whether I have a mild case of Zero-WR unfolding or I've found myself using this simply because that's how it played out.
This list isn't just a focus on ADP but combined with my projections. So, players that I happen to like, but whose ADP is higher than where I might have them relative to others won't show up here.
- 3rd round - Allen Robinson
- 4th round - Amari Cooper, Calvin Ridley, A.J. Brown
- 5th round - Robert Woods
- 6th round - Tyler Lockett, DK Metcalf, Terry McLaurin, A.J. Green, Tyler Boyd
- 7th round - T.Y. Hilton, DeVante Parker, Diontae Johnson, Michael Gallup, Marvin Jones
- 8th round - Deebo Samuel, Jerry Jeudy, CeeDee Lamb
The 6th and 7th rounds are loaded with prime targets but there is high variance so you just need to pick the ones you really want and prioritize them. McLaurin may not even last to the 6th, and Green/Boyd are nice targets but unpredictable if they'll last into the 6th round. Be prepared to pounce on the players you've targeted a round ahead of ADP if they complement your current roster better than other receivers on the board (bye weeks, same teams, quarterback situations, new offenses, etc.).
Deebo Samuel if falling 20-to-30 spots beyond his initial ADP and he could be a league winner if he makes it backs on schedule without setbacks.
Marvin Jones needs to stay healthy and concerns persist that he could be traded mid-season (like Golden Tate). When he and Kenny Golliday are both healthy, there isn't as much separation in targets, touchdowns or production but Jones is far cheaper and a great target at or ahead of ADP.
Later targets I focus on are Curtis Samuel, Henry Ruggs, Anthony Miller, Corey Davis, Michael Pittman, Parris Campbell, James Washington, Jalen Reagor, Laviska Shenault, Tee Higgins/John Ross and Bryan Edwards.
Jeff Tefertiller
With the Zero-WR strategy, undervalued veterans help lower the risk. Knowing that you can get guys like Marvin Jones and Emmanuel Sanders as WR3/4 much later gives a drafter flexibility in the rounds most target wide receivers: Rounds 4-8. This means you can go Zero-WR and still nab Lamar Jackson in the fourth after running backs in the first three or two backs and either Kelce or Kittle.
Packaging veterans with upside youngsters (e.g., Ruggs, Hardman, or Reagor) to go with fifth- and sixth-round receivers like those mentioned above offers a safe and upside roster build.
Consider this draft:
- Ezekiel Elliott
- George Kittle or another running back
- Melvin Gordon
- Lamar Jackson
- Tyler Lockett or Terry McLaurin
- T.Y. Hilton
With Jones, Sanders, and Mecole Hardman later.
Jeff Pasquino
I'm not sure Jackson reaches Round 4 based on ADP, but Lockett and Hilton is not a bad 1-2 punch there. I'd still prefer taking a WR in Round 4 with Jeff's list to have as a WR1. Replace Jackson with Robert Woods and go WR/WR/WR in Rounds 4-6 is a reasonable result.
It's quite possible this year to approach the semi-Zero-WR knowing that historical WR1s are available in Rounds 5 (Keenan Allen) and 6 (TY Hilton). If they get back to WR1 level, that'd be quite the team.
