Fantasy Football 2010 Mock Draft: Second Round
The second round is as important as the first, most notably because there is potential for drafting a bust. In addition, drafters need to focus on the other teams and their selections.
If a team selects a QB in Round Two, it is safe to assume that team will not select a QB again until much later in the draft. On the other hand, if a team selects a second running back, in all likelihood, they will go QB or WR in Round Three.
Fantasy football analysis revolves around measuring risk and reward. In the second round of a 2009 draft, most of the RBs taken were busts: Steve Slaton, Brandon Jacobs, and Clinton Portis.
Avoiding the busts and finding the next player who will make the leap into fantasy elite is the key to a great second round.
For first round mock draft analysis, click here .
11. WR Randy Moss (New England Patriots)
Moss is 33 years old, but still shows little sign of slowing down. He can still single-handedly win a fantasy game as evidenced by two 2009 games where he scored over 30 points in standard scoring leagues. It is difficult to imagine Moss falling off a cliff in production simply because he is a touchdown machine.
12. QB Aaron Rodgers (Green Bay Packers)
Rodgers exceeded expectations in a big way in 2009, leading all fantasy QBs by putting up 35 total TDs and 4,434 passing yards. There's no reason to expect a big drop-off in production, but it is reasonable to expect a slight one. Selecting a QB this high needs to be a can't-miss and Rodgers is not yet a bulletproof pick when taken in the top 15. The Packers face both the AFC East and NFC East teams in their schedule so it is possible Rodgers won't be the No. 1 fantasy QB in 2010.
Follow Matt on Twitter @mattkdelima and you'll get updates on fantasy sports at websites like OPENsports.com & SportsGrumblings.com . Matt also is the D.C. Sports Headlines Examiner & D.C. Dallas Cowboys Hater Examiner at Examiner.com.
PHOTO CREDIT: Avinash Kunnath
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?