| 0 |
Subject: RotoGuru Invitational Football Challenge
Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Mon, May 03, 2004, 10:08
It's time to start thinking about the third leg of the RotoGuru Invitational Challenge Leagues. Before deciding on manager invitations, I'd like to kick around ideas on league organization. Please provide feedback on the following issues:
1. I think the league should offer a traditional format, which is a head-to-head, points-based league. But what should the point formula be? I prefer one that isn't entirely slanted to scoring, so I think both scoring and yardage should be meaningful components. Maybe turnovers, too. Would anyone like to suggest a straw man?
2. Roster configuration, roster size, and league size. These are probably related. Also, because of bye weeks, benches need to be somewhat deep.
3. Playoff timing. League size will probably dictate. Should the final round of our playoffs be NFL Week #17? NFL playing patterns are often unusual that last week.
I would expect the draft for this league to occur in August, probably starting around the middle of the month The NFL season does not start until September 9th.
I expect to use Yahoo to administer the league. That means we are restricted to scoring and scheduling rules that are Yahoo-supported.
What are your thoughts? |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 35 | Tree
ID: 484391021
Sun, May 16, 2004, 12:41
|
after a few quick looks i still prefer a lineup like:
QB + 2RB + 2WR + WR/TE + K + DL + DB + 3IDP + 8 bench = 20 player roster
i like this two, with one minor change.
i'd have 2 DL, 2 DB, and one IDP. the reason for this is that linebackers also count as linemen in Yahoo football.
|
| 36 | Great One
ID: 141172214
Sun, May 16, 2004, 16:05
|
Last year was my first in a Yahoo league and I didn't draft a RB first... I just didn't know better. I never really recovered. Still managed 3rd, but I learned my lesson.
I will probably set up another Yahoo Belly league again with Ref's permission. Another possibility for us vets are don't qualify for this league (like me).
|
| 37 | Doug
ID: 57352917
Thu, May 20, 2004, 14:22
|
One thing to point out on the sack/safety issue is that often when someone scores a safety, they also score a sack (don't know the percentages on this, just going based on a general observation here). At the very least, a safety involves a tackle. So if tackle = 1, safety =2, sack = 3, then:
Tackle - 1 point
Sack - 3 points
Tackle someone for a safety - 3 points
Sack someone for a safety - 5 points
In short, the safety points are a bonus in addition to the sack/tackle points... NOT a replacement for those points. So to say a safety is worth "less" than a sack is not really true when you look at the complete picture.
|
| 39 | Eugene
ID: 550303118
Thu, May 20, 2004, 22:42
|
Would like to play please Guru
|
| 40 | Motley Crue
ID: 47449217
Fri, May 21, 2004, 08:56
|
Post 25 hits the nail on the head:
Yahoo is junk for a competitive league, pay the 10 bucks to espn or somebody to have a real waiver wire. That means no picking up Boldin in the middle of his 1st big game!
No serious FFL league can have an open wire.
I played in the Poli Board League last year, and this was it's biggest weakness. I refuse to camp out at Yahoo so that I can jump on the best players when they surface. A waiver wire with priority is an absolute must.
|
| 41 | Tree
Donor
ID: 599393013
Fri, May 21, 2004, 10:07
|
I played in the Poli Board League last year, and this was it's biggest weakness. I refuse to camp out at Yahoo so that I can jump on the best players when they surface. A waiver wire with priority is an absolute must.
Yahoo does have a waiver wire with priorities, but sooner or later everyone becomes a free agent.
unless i'm mistaken, the real sports world is like that. if a guy clears waivers, he becomes a free agent. yahoo mirrors that.
|
| 42 | Motley Crue
ID: 47449217
Fri, May 21, 2004, 11:54
|
Tree, it's a matter of preference. It doesn't feel "fair" to me when the manager with the best record can scoop the best available FA's just by being able to be online at that time. It is very true to real life and mirrors real professional sports. I am not saying it is invalid as a method. I just don't think it is a good way to play.
The most important thing is that people who play in those leagues know the rules beforehand and agree to them. As long as you have agreement, no one can complain. I prefer to play in leagues where there is a priority positioning method.
|
| 43 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, May 21, 2004, 11:58
|
Thanks to everyone for your thoughts on this league. With GuruGolf in development, I haven't been very focused on football recently, but will take all of these comments into consideration when the time comes.
Please continue to post comments as you think of things.
|
| 44 | Tree
Donor
ID: 599393013
Fri, May 21, 2004, 14:08
|
Tree, it's a matter of preference. It doesn't feel "fair" to me when the manager with the best record can scoop the best available FA's just by being able to be online at that time.
the way i look at it is that picking up Boldin was no sure thing. He has a studly first game, and could have just as easily trailed off and not had the kind of season he has.
i'll use Hee Seop Choi in baseball as an example. This guy has been picked up and dropped in some my leagues as often as a Times Square hooker. it just happens. it's the nature of the game.
|
| 45 | Doug
ID: 57352917
Fri, May 21, 2004, 15:19
|
I would argue that football is a bit of an anomaly in that there are fewer games, and injuries tend to play a bigger role. A starting RB goes down in the middle of a game... people will almost always scramble to get his backup, and frequently with good cause. Most of the private leagues I am in prevent anyone from getting online first and picking him up as a FA... instead, there are weekly waivers or other process such that once the first game starts each week you can't just go pick someone up because you happened to be first to see the injury. Only public leagues tend to take the "first come, first serve" approach in football. The Hee Seop Choi example is valid, but I still thing there is a fundamental difference in magnitude for waiver pickups when it comes to football. Also, the weekly cycle of games makes the "everybody goes on waivers" approach viable... it would not be as simple in baseball (it would have to occur daily rather than weekly, and be for some set number of hours overnight, etc... and it just seems like overkill in that case).
|
| 46 | Motley Crue
Sustainer
ID: 439372011
Wed, May 26, 2004, 09:39
|
Doug, where do I send that advocate fee check? Thanks for arguing my case for me. You got to the point of my argument.
Tree has spent so much time in the Politics Forum that I don't bother keeping up with him post-for-post anymore. I know I'll lose eventually.
|
| 47 | Trip
Donor
ID: 13961611
Wed, May 26, 2004, 10:01
|
That is a critical flaw with Yahoo. I want to watch the games (Thank you, Direct TV!) and not be glued to the computer. The league I manage with my friends switched to Fanball commissioner because of this reason, and we are about to be in our 3rd year using Fanball. They charge $100 for the league regardless of size and is fully customizable and live scoring is included in this fee. Their customer service has also been excellent.
Awaiting my advocate checks from Motley, Fanball, & Direct TV.
|
| 48 | leggestand
Sustainer
ID: 451036518
Wed, May 26, 2004, 10:26
|
I think this league can be run through Yahoo, with Guru implementing a commish run waiver process. It will be a little extra work for Guru to process requests each week, but its allows for the game to remain free. I also think that the bulk of gurupies/patrons abide by league rules and regulations and should have no problem with a commish policed waiver wire. If all waiver requests were sent to Guru on Sunday-Wednesday of each week, he can adjust the waiver priority accordingly. Also, Yahoo allows the commish to adjust lineups/transactions, as long as each manager has turned this feature "on," so, Guru can process the waiver requests each Thursday, and adjust each team accordingly.
I just think that if the league moves to a pay to play site, it will thin out the # of managers interested, as well as the # of qualifying leagues.
|
| 49 | youngroman
ID: 59242611
Wed, May 26, 2004, 18:40
|
i would do something similiar so that the commish hasn't to do the (complicated) waiver wire process. this process is well implemented in yahoo.
i would say everybody who wants to pick up a player nominates the player (in a forum-thread or by e-mail) and a day (or two) before the first game of the week the commish sets the nominated players on waivers and all managers can claim their players as usual.
this results in a 5 day nominating phase from kickoff of the first game until the commish sets the waivers and a 1 or 2 day trade phase with picking up the players from waivers (and only waivers)
if it is easy to do the commish could set all players on the waiver wire and we would need no nominating.
|
| 50 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 11:55
|
I just checked out the commissioner software at Fanball.com. It appears that the cost this year will be only $59.95 for a league. I'm inclined to try using it for the RIFC, with RotoGuru.com picking up the cost.
Have others been satisfied with Fanball.com? Are there other hosting options that should be under consideration? I am persuaded by the above discussion that a weekly waiver priority process for all free agents is a good idea.
|
| 51 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 12:03
|
One feature offered at Fanball is "doubleheaders". As I understand this, with a 14 team league, we could effectively play each team twice in a 13-week round robin, as each week you would have two head-to-head matchups. Does that sound like a good idea? It does seem it might diffuse some of the element of luck - which may be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on yours.
|
| 52 | PermDude
ID: 2343587
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 12:05
|
That's a great idea. Sounds like it would really help the better teams pull to the top.
|
| 53 | MadDOG
ID: 5952989
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 12:15
|
I don't know about FanBall leagues but I love their site and I especially love getting their Football Newsbreakers in my email.
Those guys know football.
|
| 54 | TB
Leader
ID: 31811922
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 13:05
|
I like Fanball and have been using the site for several years. Never saw or played with doubleheaders but sounds great. In one of my leagues last year there were many weeks where I was the 2nd or 3rd highest scoring team only to lose to the 1st or 2nd highest scoring team. I know I finished the year with the 2nd highest scoring team and had a losing record. Ugggh.
As far as the cost goes, what about every entrant kicking in 10 bucks to pay for the cost and the rest goes to the winner? Certainly an added incentive to do your best, not that most need an added reason to win a Guru League. I can't remember if something like that conflicts with certain rules or not.
|
| 55 | Tree
Donor
ID: 599393013
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 13:21
|
maybe this is a stupid question, but presumably you can go with different line ups in the double header?
or do you have to use the same lineup for both?
|
| 56 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 13:46
|
I dunno. The rationale for using different lineups would be to diversify when you have comparable choices?
I'll bet you have to use the same lineup for both. But I'll look into it.
|
| 57 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jun 08, 2004, 15:34
|
Fanball gets good marks for fast turnaround on inquiries. Regarding doubleheader rosters:"When you are using the Doubleheader feature you are required to set a lineup for each game. From the Set Lineup page you can select game 1 or game 2, then set the lineup. If you want both lineups to be the same you must set them both ( to be the same)."
|
| 58 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 46033123
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 01:28
|
I'll throw in some of my input.
1. 14 teams seems like the best option
2. Big fan of IDP, however I don't think there should be any flex spots. Every team should have to start a set number at each defensive position (2 DL, 2 LB, 1 DB)
3. Leave points for safety at 2. They may be rare and help the team out but if the NFL deems them only to be worth 2, then why should our league be any different. Perhaps the NFL should revisit the importance of a safety and adjust THEIR scoring accordingly.
4. I really like the idea of limiting the flex spot to WR/TE. Decreases the need to stockpile running back, increases the value of a sleeper TE (IMO, they exist :) )
5. I think PASSES DEFENDED is a stupid stat and i'd be in favor of eliminating it (if there are no flex spots allowed for IDP, otherwise I think you have to include it to help DB points).
6. Fanball looks good, I am in favour of a 3rd party controlled, weekly waiver process.
|
| 59 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 46033123
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 01:47
|
Good, nobody beat me too it. The more that I think about it, the more I think that the safety points SHOULD be increased.
Every scoring play (other than QB TDs) are awarded points in relation to the amount of points the score produced.
However, unlike all other scores, a safety also results in the return of possession to the scoring team (a result that is hard to quantify but really can't be deemed of no value). For this reason they should worth atleast 1 more point to reflect the benefit outside of the scoring of points.
|
| 60 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 46033123
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 02:00
|
Actually, maybe it can be quantified.
A blocked kick, INT and forced fumble are all worth 2 points. I think it is safe to say then that a turnover is given a value of 2.
Since most scoring plays are worth the amount of points scored I think a safety should be worth the 2 points resulting from the play and 2 points resulting from the turnover.
I vote that a safety is worth 4 and this is my final answer. :)
|
| 61 | Doug
ID: 57352917
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 02:24
|
Is that with or without the points for the sack or tackle that are credited on the same play to the player making the safety? If not, then a safety would really be worth 5 points if achieved via a tackle, and 7 points if achieved via a sack (depending on the points for those, I'm assuming 1 and 3). Remember, points for a safety are sort of "bonus" points for the play, they do not REPLACE the other points for the play... to me a sack for a safety being worth 7 points seems a little heavy, but not ridiculously so. Still, I think 5 points (3 for sack + 2 for safety) would also be adequate. Just my 2 points... err... cents.
|
| 62 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 46033123
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 02:50
|
True, but a player who rushes for a TD gets his rushing points along with his TD points.
A player that returns an INT for a TD gets his 2 points for the INT and 6 poins for his TD. This makes a INT returned for an TD worth 8 points.
I don't see why a safety should be any different. You get the amount of points award as a result of the play as well as any points awarded for events leading up to the play.
|
| 63 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 46033123
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 02:57
|
haha....it is an interesting debate.
It differs from my examples because a sack/tackle/forced fumble is necessary for a safety to occur. It can't exist on its own like an INT or rushing yards can.
Now i'm not sure what side I'm on....i guess I'll sleep on it.
:)
|
| 64 | Sludge
ID: 523482015
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 11:06
|
It differs from my examples because a sack/tackle/forced fumble is necessary for a safety to occur. It can't exist on its own like an INT or rushing yards can.
Neither does a touchdown. I can't think of a single way to score a touchdown that does not have some other scoreable event that leads up to it.
I would have no problems with a safety being worth 2 points in a fantasy scoring system when a touchdown is worth 6 points in that system. Really, that's fine with me. What I had a problem with was the lack of proper proportionality of the rest of the scoring. Two sacks worth a single touchdown, while three turnovers were required to equal a touchdown?
One could appeal to the idea of balance, that is it helps positions that normally get the sacks, but I would argue that once you seperate those positions that get sacks from those that get interceptions, that argument goes out the window. Scoring balance is more important to achieve within a position (intraposition). Once that's achieved, balance between positions (interposition) is much less important. What's most important in fantasy sports is your guy's position relative to his peers, not relative to everyone from every other position.
|
| 65 | Mike D
ID: 3355987
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 11:18
|
I never knew fantasy football could become this complicated. ;)
|
| 66 | Sludge
ID: 523482015
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 11:29
|
You don't know the half of it. A few years ago, Madman, Guru, and I were throwing around the idea of starting a journal focusing on strategy in fantasy sports.
|
| 67 | Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 11:50
|
Of all the sports, football is one I've delved into the least, playing only TSN in years past and Yahoo of late.
|
| 68 | culdeus
ID: 14452520
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 17:54
|
IDP scoring to me is really tough to nail down. You want IDPs to start showing up in rounds 7-9 and 100% of rounds 11-14. Massaging the scoring should be to that end.
I am thinking about starting an internet campaign to rid the TE from all live drafts and you all can help. The TE is worthless and they should all be lumped into the WR pool to get people to draft 4 WR/TE. When was the last time the 12th rated TE beat out the 36thWR? I plan on researching this to prove my point.
|
| 69 | Tree
ID: 48529917
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 18:32
|
IDP scoring to me is really tough to nail down. You want IDPs to start showing up in rounds 7-9 and 100% of rounds 11-14. Massaging the scoring should be to that end.
that's complete draft strategy, and depends on the manager/coach of the team
I am thinking about starting an internet campaign to rid the TE from all live drafts and you all can help. The TE is worthless and they should all be lumped into the WR pool to get people to draft 4 WR/TE. When was the last time the 12th rated TE beat out the 36thWR? I plan on researching this to prove my point.
come on - that's absurd. it's like campaigning to get rid of the Catcher position...hmmm...wait a minute!
no, seriously. that's more of the strategy. do you take a Gonzalez or a Shockey or a whoever early, or do you risk still having a decent guy later on....
|
| 70 | TB
Leader
ID: 31811922
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 18:47
|
TE is worthless for fantasy scoring unless you get one of the top 3-5 guys. When was the last time the 10th rated TE scored more than the 50th rated WR is the better question? If it is a 15 round draft, I get my TE in the 15th round and usually have a different one starting by the 2nd or 3rd week.
|
| 71 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 18:49
|
IDP scoring to me is really tough to nail down. You want IDPs to start showing up in rounds 7-9 and 100% of rounds 11-14. Massaging the scoring should be to that end.
Im very curious to see your reasoning for this.
Why stop at the TE position? When was the last time the 12th kicker outscored the 36th WR or 24th RB? How about defensive lineman; after the top five they're virtually identical from a FP perspective. Hell, why start 2 RBs?
|
| 72 | TB
Leader
ID: 31811922
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 19:15
|
Last year in fanball there were 3 TE who scored 4.5 points a game or more. There were 54 WR who scored 4.5 or more. The 12th ranked TE (Kleinsasser) scored 3.6, which is exactly the same amount as the 73rd ranked WR (Thrash). There were 64 WR who scored more than the 10th ranked TE.
Okay, in truth I like having the TE category only because 4-5 people in any league I am in end up drafting them way to early.
WR and TE get all of their points from receiving yards and receiving TD's (minus the occasional reverse or trick play). Not really sure where you were going with the kicker/RB comparisons but have seen you around the boards long enough I assume your being sarcastic.
FWIW, the 16th placed kicker (Cundiff 7.0) outscored the 26th rated WR (Rod Smith 6.8) and the 21st ranked kicker tied him (Aaron Elling 6.8). The 12th rated kicker (Vinatieri 7.3) outscored the 24th ranked WR (Robinson 7.1) and was only .1 behind the 22nd ranked WR.
I have to steal from Sludge in post #64 Scoring balance is more important to achieve within a position (intraposition). I would only argue that TE should be lumped in with WR because their function within fantasy scoring.
|
| 73 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 19:38
|
Ehh, my post was half joking, half serious. No, Im not advocating lumping Ks with RBs, but kickers are just as worthless a position as TE. Kickers are probably event more worthless as you will never see anyone take the first K where you see someone take the first TE (roughly 4th round).
As for your PPG numbers, they really only apply to one specific scoring system. Im guessing your scoring gives bonuses for FG length but gives no bonuses whatsoever to TEs.
Anyway, like you said, while it makes sense to lump TEs with WRs, comparing PPG across positions inst as valuable as comparing them within the same position.
|
| 74 | Tree
ID: 48529917
Wed, Jun 09, 2004, 20:19
|
why don't we just start counting home runs, and adding pitchers to the football teams while we're at it.
seriously - TE is a part of football, and having a good tight end can make the difference for not just a "real" football team, but also for your fantasy football team.
it's the 4th round. Someone already took Tony Gonzalez. Do you take Jeremy Shockey or Todd Heap, or do you hope one of them is around the next time you're up?
it's all part of the strategy...
|
| 75 | culdeus
ID: 14452520
Thu, Jun 10, 2004, 08:58
|
I was sort of half-joking myself about the TE. It's a necissary evil that just can't be eliminiated. I just like scouting the WR matchups and depth charts so much I'd like to start 4WR. It just kills me when a TE gets 7 points in a game on one dump off in the end zone catch.
About IDP the only thing I would definately stay away from is the Assist. I know from following FBG and having it in a league last year that that stat is arbitrary, some scorers I think give assists for giving someone a help up off the pile. Tons of other little quirks pop up in IDP scoring that you just can't control (FF + Saftey counts double an INT usually) The whole 2pt saftey debate (which probably has a sack with it)
I've helped tons of leagues up at my grad school set their scoring using the draft dominator. I usually just figure out what their goals are and work around it.
I always push to get 4 WR gone by the 2nd round 1 QB gone by the second round for a 12 team league. Anything less borderlines on unfair because if 12 straight RBs run off the board the guys at the back of the order are really left without any studs. The easist way to lessen the impact of the RB is to give points for catches. 1pt for or 2 pts per 5 is the standard thing I try to get people to work in. Then again I already said I love WR, so maybe it's my agenda...
2pts for 40yd TD's are great fun too and add to the WR spot as well.
|
| 76 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Thu, Jun 10, 2004, 19:04
|
The easist way to lessen the impact of the RB is to give points for catches.
This is actually false; awarding 1 point per reception only provides a very negligible boost in WR value. The top RBs grab enough receptions to counter the value this adds to the top WRs.
Plug 1 starting RB into the DD and see what happens.
2pts for 40yd TD's are great fun too and add to the WR spot as well.
I for one dont think bonus scoring for TDs is any fun.
|
| 77 | culdeus
ID: 14452520
Thu, Jun 10, 2004, 20:04
|
I know everyone in here has set up leagues, run leagues and won leagues. To each his own. I haven't started messing around with my DD yet, still looking at schedule strengths.
My favorite system last year did the 2pts/5receptions that took away the guys who just get the dump offs (like RB). You can't really simulate that in DD, it works though. I was able to change some things in DD to make certain columns be "5 reception games" and run that through, haven't done that yet.
I know 2pts/40yd TD isn't purist, but nothing starts up the smack calls like a big TD in a 3pm game. Good times, good times.
|
| 78 | Doug
Sustainer
ID: 2730280
Sat, Jun 12, 2004, 13:36
|
Regarding TEs, to me the solution is not to eliminate the position, but to adjust it's scoring... and lumping TEs into a flex position are tantamount to eliminating them IMHO. To reiterate a point in post #14, you could make earn 1 point per 5 yards rather than 15. Or maybe a point per reception for TEs only. Etc. Lots of options... but I like to see a creative solution to a problem rather than the "let's get rid of 'em" approach.
While a point per reception doesn't have a huge effect on WR valuation, it does have SOME effect, as it widens the intrapositional scoring difference between the top and 36th (or whichever) WR (moreso than it does for RBs), giving that position as a whole more relative value (similar to the TE proposals above).
|
| 79 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Sat, Jun 12, 2004, 17:19
|
To reiterate a point in post #14, you could make earn 1 point per 5 yards rather than 15. Or maybe a point per reception for TEs only.
All this really accomplishes is adding to the value of the top 3 or 4 TEs. It makes it look like the position is more valuable overall, but it does little to the separation between the remaining TEs. If thats what you want, then fine, but its not going to make those who wait on TEs grab one any sooner.
...it widens the intrapositional scoring difference between the top and 36th (or whichever) WR (moreso than it does for RBs), giving that position as a whole more relative value
As I said in post 76, this is false. Ive played with the numbers and have found that adding 1 point per reception only provides a negligible boost to WR value.
That isnt to say Im against awarding 1 point per reception; it just doesnt boost the value of the WR position as much any many of you seem to believe.
|
| 80 | Doug
ID: 422281412
Sun, Jun 13, 2004, 05:10
|
I know you said it post 76, and again in 79... but that doesn't make your statement true. ;-) I guess it depends on your interpretation of "negligible".
I'm having trouble pasting the table... so I'll write this out. I looked at last year's stats and assumed the following: 12 team league, 1 pt per 10 yds rush/rec, 6 pts per TD (leaving out fumbles or fumbles lost or other stats that I think are trivial for the purpose of this analysis). I compared the average scoring of the top RBs (1-6) with the last starter/first bench category (25-30). I prefer 25-30 to 19-24, because the top 24 backs are not evenly distributed 2 per team typically, and in short I think this is a more accurate measure of "last starter". The top backs averaged 318.6 vs. 125.1 for the lesser backs... for a 193.6 delta. If you add 1 pt. per reception, the numbers change to 377.2 vs. 158.9... for a 218.3 delta. Thus, the amount of "spread" in the position (or "delta") has grown by 24.7 points by adding receptions... a 13% increase.
Now let's look at WRs... here I used groups 1-6 as top starters and 37-42 as last starters (same reasons as above, assuming 3 WR per team). The top receivers averaged 164.6 vs. 79.7 for the lesser receivers... for a 84.9 delta. If you add 1 pt. per reception, the numbers change to 242.2 vs. 125.0... for a 117.2 delta. Thus, the amount of "spread" in the position (or "delta") has grown by 32.3 points by adding receptions... a 38% increase.
This analysis illustrates that adding a point per reception has more of an impact on the WR position than on the RB position, as you noted... the question is whether it is "negligible". That's a somewhat subjective term... in absolute numbers, the difference is very minor, but percentage-wise it is much more significant since WRs have a lower "base" spread at their position, so anything to help widen that spread takes on more significance accordingly. This is subject to interpretation obviously, as all statistics are... are they the "right" statistics, etc... anyway, just trying to keep the dialog open.
As for the 5 vs. 10 on TEs, looking at last year the delta between players 1 and 12 was 87.5 with 10 yard scoring, and 9.1 points between players 6 and 12. With 5 yard scoring those numbers changed to 139 and 22. So, yes, the biggest change is for the top few TEs... but the intention is not to make all 12 starting TEs get selected in the first 8 rounds or something like that. Instead, it probably means you'd see a top TE in round 2 rather than round 3, etc... which I think is a step in the right direction and adds yet another compelling strategic element to the draft. Just my .02, YMMV.
|
| 81 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Sun, Jun 13, 2004, 10:21
|
All very good points Doug; nothing there I really disagree with. The only part I question is your choice of criteria. In post 78, you talk about "the top WR" and "the 36th WR", but change it to the top 1-6 WRs and the 37th-42nd WRs in your analysis. To me (and I mean no offense becuase I definately respect you and your posts here), it looks like you adjusted your analysis to give your position the best possible light.
That in and of itself is not a big deal, and Im sure Ive done it plenty of times. The differences we're discussing are small [I found it to be around 16 points - why I said negligible], so I think my original point, that adding points for receptions is not the easiest way to lessen the impact of RBs, is still valid.
I also quesiton your use of the top 1-6 players, as the top 1-6 RBs will be closer in terms of production than the top 1-6 WRs.
I didnt post numbers in part because I didnt want my choice of criteria to become the topic of debate. I also only looked at one set of numbers, so I, like you, could've had sample size problems.
|
| 82 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jun 14, 2004, 14:10
|
CBS is by far the best football league I've seen. Guru, perhaps Gonos could hook you up with a free league?
CBS allows you to add about whatever stat you'd like. I think there are just to stats that we'd like that are not offered as of yet (blocked XP and the negative gained yds is capped at 1 so we have to manually adjust those). Anyhow, our 24 team league (that's right leggstand, 24 teams) is the best league and most fun I've ever had. We're entering our 3rd year as a keeper league format. The activity is very high. We have 14 players and 9 actives and with the bye weeks, trades and add/drops are all over the place.
Much prefer deeper leagues to those easy 12 team leagues where there are still good players in the FA pool and people have deep teams and even bye weeks are no problems for them as they pick up the positions they need each week with little thought about who they have to drop.
Anyhow, after a LOT of back and forth and throwing our likes and dislikes about previous leagues we'd been in, this is what rfs and myself came up with a couple years ago, adding the yds allowed element before last year:
Scoring for Offensive Categories
FG - Field Goals 3 points
Plus .5 points for a FG of 35 to 40 Yds
Plus 1 point for a FG of 41 to 45 Yds
Plus 1.5 points for a FG of 46 to 50 Yds
Plus 2 points for a FG of 51 to 55 Yds
Plus 3 points for a FG of 56 to 999 Yds
FL - Fumble Lost, Including ST plays -2 points
IKRTD - Individual Kick Return TD 6 points
IPRTD - Individual Punt Return TD 6 points
MFG - Missed Field Goal -2 points
Plus 1 point for a MFG of 35 to 40 Yds
Plus 2 points for a MFG of 41 to 99 Yds
MXP - Missed Extra Point -1 point
Pa2P - Passing Two-point Conversion 1 point
PaInt - Passing Interception -2 points
PaTD - Passing TD 4.0 points
PaYd - Passing Yards -400 - -1 PaYd = -.04 points for every -1 PaYd
1 - 400 PaYds = .04 points for every 1 PaYd
401 - 999 PaYds = .06 points for every 1 PaYd
Re2P - Receiving Two-point Conversion 2 points
ReTD - Receiving TD 6 points
ReYd - Receiving Yards -100 - -1 ReYd = -.10 points for every -1 ReYd
1 - 150 ReYds = .10 points for every 1 ReYd
151 - 999 ReYds = .125 points for every 1 ReYd
Ru2P - Rushing Two-point Conversion 2 points
RuTD - Rushing TD 6 points
RuYd - Rushing Yards -100 - -1 RuYd = -.10 points for every -1 RuYd
1 - 150 RuYds = .1 points for every 1 RuYd
151 - 999 RuYds = .125 points for every 1 RuYd
XP - Extra Points 1 point
Scoring for Defensive Categories
BFB - Blocked Field Goals (ID/ST/DST) 3 points
BP - Blocked Punts (ID/ST/DST) 3 points
DFR - Defensive Fumble Recovered 2 points
DTD - Total Defensive and Special Teams TD 6 points
Int - Interceptions 2 points
PA - Points Against, Total Points Scored 0 - 0 PAs = 21 points
2 - 5 PA = 14 points
6 - 10 PA = 10 points
11 - 14 PA = 7 points
15 - 15 PA = 6 points
16 - 16 PA = 5 points
17 - 17 PA = 4 points
18 - 18 PA = 3 points
19 - 19 PA = 2 points
20 - 20 PA = 1 point
21 - 24 PA = 0 points
25 - 28 PA = -1 point
29 - 35 PA = -3 points
36 - 42 PA = -5 points
43 - 56 PA = -7 points
57 - 99 PA = -10 points
SACK - Sack 1 point
STY - Safety 3 points
YDS - Yards Allowed 0 - 149 YDSs = 3.5 points
150 - 174 YDSs = 3.0 points
175 - 199 YDSs = 2.5 points
200 - 224 YDSs = 2.0 points
225 - 249 YDSs = 1.5 points
250 - 274 YDSs = 1.0 point
275 - 299 YDSs = .5 points
300 - 349 YDSs = 0 points
350 - 374 YDSs = -.5 points
375 - 399 YDSs = -1 point
400 - 424 YDSs = -1.5 points
425 - 449 YDSs = -2 points
450 - 474 YDSs = -2.5 points
475 - 499 YDSs = -3 points
500 - 9999 YDSs = -3.5 points
|
| 83 | dgrooves
ID: 513181020
Mon, Jun 14, 2004, 19:49
|
CBS is by far the best football league I've seen.
CBS is ok, but there are many other league hosting sites that rate better and are cheaper.
MFL
RTSports
Net-Commish
Fantasy Commisioner Web
Xpert Leagues
... to name a few.
|
| 85 | culdeus
ID: 14452520
Wed, Jun 23, 2004, 19:43
|
FWIW great historical FFL site for offense.
PFR
They say 2002
#36WR T Brown 108
#12TE E Conwell 63
01
J Grahm 111
W Walls 75
00
C Conway 104
J Harriss 61
So roughly a 40 point differential between the last WR and last TE started on a regular basis. Whether it's worth doing away with the TE is anyone's guess
|
| 86 | deepsnapper
ID: 2344179
Fri, Jul 09, 2004, 16:20
|
Sandbox is bringing back their SBX custom league hosting game this season after taking a year off to put together the football, basketball, & hockey games to go with their base Full "C" (count, contact, etc) series of games. SBX Baseball has been running the past couple of seasons.
I'm already signed up with a 12 team year-round SBX league and I'll be able to provide Guru more info about the game later this month.
ds
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|