"Who's been better for Dynasty owners this year" is phrased in a way that makes me think you mostly play redraft.
I do. And it was phrased that was intentionally. but there was also some long-term view there. I used to have a dynasty team though.
Yes, the current season matters a lot, but the fact remains that WRs are worth more in dynasty leagues because they have a much longer shelf life.
That's the theory I see often - WR have a longer shelf life. But I question the validity of that. Seems like WRs not only also get hurt, but the ones who stay healthy suffer swings of greater inconsistency. I wonder how many Julio Jones dynasty owners have championships under their belts? Dude puts up monster numbers seemingly in a handful of games, but also puts up duds and gets hurt. Yet he's considered a top dynasty asset and annual 1st rounder in redraft.
I took him 5th last year and when he had his 300 yard game it was incredible! Unfortunately it only counted as 1 win, and he wasn't that great for many more games. But his end of season #s looked good - good enough to again make him a redraft 1st rounder. Now his back is hurt. Meanwhile Hunt has touched the ball many more times and he seems pretty healthy. So it's kind of a crap shoot on injuries - football is a dangerous sport. Any hit could be the one. Or in Jones case, landing badly on a foot or tweaking a back could mean reduced production for a season or more.
I've been playing this game a long time, and I've had players at every position get hurt. One could say RBs get hurt more compared to WR. One could also point out that most teams in the NFL use more receivers than RBs, skewing that comparison a bit.
For dynasty I'm just not sure you're truly going to get more longevity, and more importantly, more production over a longer time from a WR vs a RB. It's an interesting discussion, and hardly one I see as purely fact-based.
I'm not sure anyone would trade Beckham for Hunt in a redraft league, either. At the end of the season it is far more likely that Beckham outscores Hunt, simply because RBs get hurt at a much higher rate (and to a lesser extent because Hunt is a rookie who will probably hit the wall in November).
It's a fine speculation. You may end up being correct. Then again, you may not. From what I see, KC is managing Hunt's workload pretty effectively. Right around 20 touches a game.
Not every rookie RB hits the rookie wall - some play well all year. Some of those players go on to great careers. Then again, some are named Olandis Gary. There's a whole range of possible outcomes between the two. Hunt will be somewhere on that spectrum.
There do seem to be more "flash in the pan" RBs than WR. I'll concede that. Many RB have 1 great season then crap the bed. But then historically WRs tend to take a couple years to ramp up and then go on for a while comparatively. The RB position transitions easier from college to the pros, as I understand it. Far more rare that a year 1 WR is a stud compared to a year 1 RB.
So even if it's true that WRs have longer careers, if the first 2-3 years are learning curve compared to 2-3 years of feature back usage, it seems to average out, no?
I have serious doubts that ODB will outscore Hunt this year, but that's just an opinion as well.
It is an interesting debate though.