We sometimes take it for granted that everyone has been doing this for a long time. Certainly Fantasy Index has a lot of longtime readers, and I suspect most have been playing this little game for a lot of years. But not everyone.

This column is mainly for you newbies. Mainly! The fact is, even those of us who've been playing since 1999 (me) or even earlier (Ian) occasionally can learn something from some very basic advice. And if you're just now playing fantasy football in your first or second year, like the guy who asked me to write this column, you can maybe learn a lot more. So let's get to it, with some very basic questions and answers.

(If after a couple of questions you've decided you know all this already, it's cool. I'll be back here in the future with something a bit more technical, I'm sure.)

What makes some players more valuable than others in fantasy? And a related question, What positions to draft first, and which are important from a fantasy perspective?

With quarterbacks signing contracts averaging upwards of $50 million per year, they're quite obviously the NFL's most important players. So why aren't people filling the first round of drafts with those quarterbacks? There are multiple reasons.

Most fantasy leagues have 12 teams starting only 1 quarterback, compared to 2-3 running backs, 3-4 wide receivers and 1-2 tight ends. In these leagues, everyone can pretty easily get one of the top 12 starting quarterbacks in the league, because teams aren't selecting 2-3 of those players early in drafts -- there's no point. Running backs and wide receivers, the top 20 at each of those positions will be gone after four rounds. People are starting 2 or 3 or 4, and running backs (especially) get hurt a lot.

Moreover, the statistical gap between the top starters and the last starters is not as large at quarterback as other positions. Last year No. 1 Lamar Jackson averaged 28 points per game. Six other quarterbacks finished within 5 points of him. Two guys not even drafted in most leagues (Sam Darnold, Bo Nix) were just 6 points behind, finishing 8th and 10th at the position. You could get 20 points per week from starting Geno Smith (14th) all season.

Consider running back. The top 4 starters (Barkley, Gibbs, Bijan, King Henry) averaged 20-23 points per week. The last 4 starters (20-24 in typical, 2-RB leagues) averaged just over half as much (12-14 points per week. The difference between landing a top-10 option and guys outside the top 20 was 6-7 points per week. Getting two such standout running backs goes a long way to winning a league, and looking at the top 20 last year, I see only two guys who weren't drafted early in most leagues: rookies Bucky Irving, and Tyrone Tracy. Maybe Chuba Hubbard. Injuries are common at the position and you can find usable running backs or even solid starters over the course of the year, but it requires a lot more work and luck than drafting the top options early and letting them do their thing.

The comparative lack of value of quarterbacks -- if it's easy to land a top-10 option, why reach for a top-3 one? -- has fostered the rise of Superflex leagues. In these leagues, you have a flex spot where you can start a second quarterback, and since quarterbacks score the most points, you'll always want to do that. Suddenly 24 quarterbacks are starting each week, and as a result a handful of these players will be going in the first and second rounds of drafts. Personally I still prefer 1-QB leagues, old school I guess, but no one can deny Superflex brings the value of quarterbacks in fantasy closer to how they're valued in real life.

Regardless, quarterbacks aren't drafted as early as other positions because standard leagues start a lot fewer. They score the most points, but the fantasy difference between the best starting quarterback and the last starter is a lot less than it is at running back, wide receiver and tight end.

How do you figure out scoring system and how does that impact player selection?

Talked a little about this question above, but I'm going to go even simpler here. Really old-school leagues only give points for touchdowns. Not quite as common these days so I don't want to dwell on them, but the kind of league where someone like Gus Edwards (who doesn't have a passing game role and typically operates in a committee even as a runner) has value, because he's scored 17 touchdowns in his last 28 games. Slightly more common, standard leagues give points for both yards and touchdowns. Many old-school players prefer these leagues over PPR (point per reception) leagues, since players get credit simply for yards and touchdowns, the actual lifeblood of NFL games. In these leagues, running backs are definitely king, and maybe 10 years ago you'd see 12-15 runners going in the top 20 picks of drafts.

As Superflex leagues arose to help out quarterback values, PPR leagues arose in part to help out wide receiver values relative to running backs. Suddenly franchise wide receivers catching 8-plus passes per game, guys like Marvin Harrison the elder, were as valuable as the top running backs. Another reason that PPR leagues arose was to increase the number of viable running backs. The Danny Woodheads and James Whites of the world who were averaging 40-50 total yards per week weren't that great in standard leagues. But if they're catching 5-7 passes, they become starters, thanks to that PPR boost. (Seven catches for 50 yards is a 12-point running back rather than a 5-point one.) And the elite pass catching running backs, like LaDainian Tomlinson and Christian McCaffrey, become even more important.

I sympathize with the arguments against PPR. A guy who catches a pass for 10 yards already gets a point for that; why give him another just for catching an easy pitch? Worse, if a guy catches a pass and gets flattened in the backfield for a 5-yard loss, that negative NFL play is a positive one in PPR leagues. That's ridiculous. As a result, there are modifications. There are "half-PPR" leagues, where you get only half a point per catch. There are leagues where running backs (or everyone) get only half a point per catch, wide receivers get a point, and tight ends get 1.5 points (TE-premium). Know your scoring system before you draft! You don't want to be overvaluing some 3rd-down back averaging 5 yards per catch only to find you're not even playing in a PPR league.

What makes people overvalue certain players?

I remember thinking about this when someone wrote in to complain about how low Darrelle Revis was ranked in my defensive back rankings. At the time, Revis was the best cover corner in the league -- Revis Island. Nobody threw his way. And that was the problem in fantasy: nobody threw his way. Scoring systems for defensive players relying on things like tackles and takeaways don't work out so hot for players who offenses avoid. The best players in the actual NFL aren't always the best players in fantasy leagues.

A good example of this with offensive players is Najee Harris. I have a soft spot for him because he helped win me some money in his rookie season, even though his actual season wasn't overly impressive in NFL terms. He averaged 3.9 yards per carry, and just 6.3 yards per catch. Four years in, that's the story of his career. And yet, Najee has finished 3rd, 14th, 23rd, and 25th in PPR leagues those seasons -- a good to great starter each year. Maybe he's not actually a great back, but availability and usage counts for a lot -- he's played in all 17 games four years in a row (rare for a running back), he's averaged nearly 1,400 total yards, 45 catches, and 9 touchdowns. A large percentage of being successful is simply showing up. Najee might not be one of the top 25 running backs in the league, but he's been that good (and considerably better twice in the last four years) in fantasy leagues. That's the kind of player worth valuing over a sportscar type who limps off the field or is in the shop several times a year. This year most expect he'll be pushed into a secondary role by first-rounder Omarion Hampton pretty quickly, but we'll see. Might be worth drafting late and seeing him outperform that position.

Entering the draft: What approach to have depending on your draft position?

Here's my big draft secret: I'm just trying to get great players. I don't need to have the No. 1 QB, or the No. 1 RB, or the No. 2 WR or TE. I feel that if I get my No. 4, 5, or 7 guy at each position, I have a really good chance at having the best overall team. Because generally, the guy who drafts the No. 1 QB or No. 1 TE is going to have a weakness at RB or WR. That's not to say I don't want to land the top player at each position, but I don't go into drafts locked in on a certain position, no matter where I'm picking. I use an overall draft board, with positions mixed together, and am selecting the best available player each time. If that happens to be a running back and a tight end the first two rounds, or two wide receivers, or a running back and a quarterback, so be it. I just want great players, and if the season starts and I have too many great wide receivers and not enough great running backs, I'll find a way to work it out as I go.

This year, I'm taking a running back or a wide receiver in the first round, depending on where I make my selection, and who's left. In the second, it seems to be a wide receiver or tight end. In the third and fourth, it's probably a running back and receiver, or maybe two running backs. It varies. I don't go into a draft or a round trying to force a position. See what players are there, check your overall rankings, draft accordingly.

During the draft: When to pick hyped rookies versus established players?

Since we were little kids, we all loved shiny new toys. Those are the rookies: Ashton Jeanty (pictured), Omarion Hampton, maybe RJ Harvey or TreVeyon Henderson. Here's the thing: guys we've seen in the league the past few years, we have a pretty good idea what their ceiling is, and how good they might or will be. With rookies, the sky's the limit. Probably he'll be (at best) the next Tyrone Tracy, to use an example from last year of a pretty good rookie. But maybe he'll be the next Ezekiel Elliott or LaDainian Tomlinson! Point is that if you want to land a hyped rookie, you have to draft him at the ceiling, which is where Jeanty is definitely going and Hampton might be going. I don't advise it, but this game is supposed to be fun, and I understand people who crave the excitement of maybe getting the Next Big Thing. Personally, I like drafting rookies, but I like drafting the ones everyone isn't over-drafting -- maybe Harvey, maybe Jacksonville rookie Bhayshul Tuten. Past examples for me include Najee Harris, Evan Engram and Sam LaPorta. Sometimes those guys hit right away, and I didn't have to draft them way too early to benefit.

To answer the question: if you're selecting a hyped rookie over a veteran who you're a lot more confident will hit the numbers you're hoping for -- because he's already done it -- you're probably drafting him too soon. Malik Nabers hit last year, even working with nothing at quarterback. Tetairoa McMillan in Carolina? Maybe, but it won't be on my team.

Risk factors associated with a player's age?

I do tend to shy away from older players. I'm getting older myself, and I know how little things that I used to shrug off can keep me laid up or at least in pain for days. And we have plenty of empirical and anecdotal evidence that older players tend to get hurt more frequently, and in some cases are just limited by their teams in hopes of keeping them healthy. There are exceptions (Derrick Henry last year), but plenty of guys that prove the rule, like Cooper Kupp (missing at least five games three years in a row).

Larry Fitzgerald led the league in receptions at 33 years old. It happens. But in general, I think it's best to keep in your mind that older players are less likely to be the same players they were 2 and 3 years ago. When older veterans change teams, we tend to think of their best years. People drafting Stefon Diggs in some leagues. I say, don't think of Diggs at his best year in Buffalo. Think of him at his last year in Buffalo. Still good! But worse as the year went on. For two years now Kansas City has been ratcheting down Travis Kelce's role in some late-season games (the most important ones in most fantasy leagues), saving him for the more important playoff games (when fantasy leagues are done). It will probably happen again this year.

Talent vs situation: how the team impacts a player's fantasy value?

There's a desire from some fantasy coaches looking at some teams to get a lot of those players. People get excited about maybe getting Patrick Mahomes' or Aaron Rodgers' top targets, or pieces of the Lions or Bucs offense, that kind of thing.

There can be value in that, and there are times I will chase it. It's usually when considering similar players in the rankings: If I don't know exactly which one I like more, I might favor the one catching passes from Mahomes over Russell Wilson.

But (as we saw with Rodgers two years ago) guys get hurt. Mahomes' No. 1 could become Gardner Minshew's No. 1 in an instant. And with a team that's playing for Super Bowls, you sometimes get one that plays things a little conservative, not taking a lot of chances while punching out wins over the Raiders, saving themselves for the more important battles with the Bills and Ravens. Kansas City has turned things on in the playoffs the last couple of years. That didn't help anyone who had those players on their rosters in Weeks 12 and 13.

In general, winning teams score more points and have most of the better fantasy players -- running backs, kickers, etc. Lots of data to support that. But Breece Hall's talent doesn't make him necessarily better than Chuba Hubbard, if Hubbard is playing full-time and getting all the goal-line carries, even in a worse offense. Back to rookie year Najee Harris: the full-time guy playing more on a mediocre team might help your lineup a lot more than the part-time guy on a division-winner chipping in more explosive plays but not touching the ball quite as often.

I could do this all day, but that's long enough for now. I hope I answered some questions people had. If you have others I didn't address, feel free to post them below, and I will do my best to answer them as I see them.

Good luck in upcoming drafts!