I’ve seen a lot of talk over the past few months about taking Kyle Pitts in the 1.04-1.06 range in Superflex rookie drafts come May.

I’ve felt like the opportunity cost of this is too much to pass up an RB but didn’t have any numbers to back it up. So I thought I’d dig into it.

Looking at the past four years in term of PPG. To be a difference-maker at the TE position you need to average over 12 points per game and essentially be a top 5 TE. Across the past 4 years, there is a tier drop off to streaming level options averaging around 10 points per game

If you look at the RB position the number to be a difference-maker is 15 points per game which equates to roughly a top 12 option. After that, you’re in a tier of replacement or streaming level options.

So looking at it what are the chances a draft pick will be a top 5 TE or a top 12 RB?

This is where @pahowdy and his hit rates come in

He has the hit rate of a 1st rd TE as a top 5 player 50%.
The hit rate of a 2nd rd RB as a top 12 option is 31.43% 3and rd rd RB is 25%.

So if you’re purely looking for the safest pick then yes Pitts likely has a 50% chance of being a top 5 TE at some point in his career.

Whilst the likes of Harris and Etienne have a 31.43% chance of being a top 12 option.

I came into this expecting to prove that Pitts as a high first-round pick is too high and am surprised to see that actually, he’s a higher floor option.

Personally, I think I’m still leaning RB in the early to mid-first but it’s certainly food for thought.

If Pitts gets 1st round draft capital whilst the RBs fall to the 2nd and 3rd come April history shows Pitts could be the better option.

@MyFantasyLeague