1 PPR vs. 0.5 PPR

[gsmayes]

I'm considering changing the well established keeper league I commish (entering our 8th season) to a PPR and WR/RB (currently 3 WRs) flex league. I've only played a 1 PPR league for the first time last year in a work league, and I liked how it equalized the RB and WR positions.

 

For those of you well versed in this format, do you prefer 1 PPR or 0.50 PPR. I don't know, it just seems to me that 6 recs should not count as much as a TD. Also, how many prefer having the same PPR for both RB/WR versus having 1 PPR for WRs and 0.5 PPR for RBs? You opinions are appreciated.

 

P.S. With these changes I'm also considering going to a 4 pt passing TD (vs. 6), eliminating the 5 pt 100/300 yardage bonuses and toning down our long TD bonus (max 2 pts instead of max 4).

[The Irish Doggy]

I think WR and RB PPR should be at a different levels.

 

RB lengths of reception tend to be much less than 10 yards per catch, while WR receptions are more than 10 (talking averages here). There are a few exceptions of course, but I like 1.0 for WR and 0.5 for RB for a quick and fast rule.

[Scourge]

First, I am interested... If you are in a long established keeper league, why would you be messing with the scoring structure? People could be basing a tough decision on who they keep based on the existing scoring structure.

 

Second, I was talked into making the secondary league I commish a 0.5 PPR league last year and I did not like it. Makes it harder to prepare and research for the draft when you start fractioning points. In my opinion, it should be 1 point or 0 points. I put that to a vote this year and it was voted 8-2 to make it a 1 PPR league over a 0 PPR league. And a reception is a reception. RB and WR score the same.

 

I like the flex option. Personally, I like 2RB, 3WR, and 1 Flex. It adds another roster spot and raises the weekly points your team can get. More scoring = more fun in my opinion. Plus, you have a little room to strategize.

 

The 4 point QB TDs will really even out all the positions, but again, will that not impact someone's keeper decision?

 

Leave the TD distance bonus alone and get rid of the 100/300 bonus.

 

Please consider everyone else when making these decisions. When it comes to a keeperor Dynasty league especially.

[Bronco Billy]

The first question I'd ask before going any further is whether your league mates want to make changes in the scoring? If they do, let's explore this for you. If you haven't asked them for their opinions yet or they are mixed in their interest, I'd suggest we put the discussion on hold...

Edited July 21, 2008 by Bronco Billy

[MikesVikes]

I like PPR leagues and prefer them now to others. But when Keepers are in question, changing the rules like you want to can get a little touchy. With the extra hit the QBs are getting with reduced TD passes, it sounds like to me that you aren't considering keeping a QB for yourself. Is that correct?

[gsmayes]

First, when we started the league back in 2001 in college, I had only played FF one year, and everyone else was new to the game. So, not knowing any better, we pretty much went with the default cbs sportsline performance scoring system (back when it was free), which is kind of wacky: 5 pt bonuses at 100/300 yards, 6 pts passing TDs, 6 pt bonus for 80+ yard TDs (we've since scaled that down), 1pt per 25 passing yards. I think that just because we started with a jacked up scoring system, and have pretty much stuck with it making small tweaks along the way, it doesn't mean that we have to be stuck with it.

 

I have sent out an email to the league just throwing out these possible scoring changes for discussion. One owner has said that if we switch we should do both PPR and flex, and that he's slightly against one or the other, but less so for both. He's also probably the most opinionated owner in the league when it comes to rules, but doesn't really have a strong opinion on this topic. There are a couple other owners that contribute to rules discussions, but most aren't that interested in the "theory" of fantasy football and usually default to my judgment. We've been a limited keeper league (3 players) for for three years now, and I did consider that these changes would affect keeper worth; but I don't want being a keeper league to mean that we can never make changes.

 

I think that my first email was too broad in that it mentioned general concepts, and that a better approach would be to outline the potential new scoring system, which would make for a more focused discussion. Then we could discuss *that* scoring system, tweak it as discussed, and then vote on it.

 

For the record, my keepers are Jay Culter (13th), Colston (10th) and Witten (6th). I make a conscious effort to do what's best for the league, though I realize that you can accuse me of impropriety because I have Colston and Witten, but no keeper RB. I also have the 12th pick from winning the league last year, so you could say that since my odds of getting a decent RB are low, I want the PPR so the WR I draft will be more valuable. But, that didn't really occur to me until after the fact. There have also been complaints by other owners about having a "scrub draft" where a lot of the "good" rbs are kept, making the WRs more even would limit that. People have also claimed that owners are being overly rewarded for "getting lucky" by getting the Ryan Grants of the world (UFA are kept for a 12th).

Edited July 21, 2008 by gsmayes

[gsmayes]

Also, at one point or another different parts of these changes have been brought up by a owner, so this isn't just out of the blue. Also, when I throw out this scoring system, if there is a lukewarm response and no disscussion, I probably won't even put it to a vote and just scrap it. I'm not going to be upset if we don't make these changes. But, I do think it's a superior scoring system to what we're using now.

 

Just to clarify, keepers are kept for a draft pick 2 rounds higher then they were drafted last year, top 2 rounds can't be kept. RBs I think could be kept: Fargas (12), Gore (7), Jones-Drew (10), Graham (12), Barber (12), Tuner (14), Peterson (1), Lewis (2), Grant (12), Parker (9th).

 

All in all this is a really laid back league, we're all friends, the entry fee is only $35 and we've never had a problem with cheating. None of my owners are the dicks you read about in other threads, usually I have trouble understanding why someone would act that way to win a fantasy football league, especially a free or low-money league.

Edited July 21, 2008 by gsmayes

[Scourge]

Sounds like a fun league. I would think as long as you are diplomatic, the vote goes through, and there is no one that is really pissed about the changes, then by all means, mix it up. A little change in a fantasy league that could use some tweaking is not a bad thing as long as everyone is on board. Good luck!

[Bronco Billy]

People have also claimed that owners are being overly rewarded for "getting lucky" by getting the Ryan Grants of the world (UFA are kept for a 12th).

 

 

I assume that as a UFA that every owner in the league had a chance to roster Grant at some point during the season? Why should the first guy to recognize that he might have value & take a chance on him be considered "lucky"?

 

Hard to believe that you guys have been playing for a while and that some still have this kind of mentality...

Edited July 21, 2008 by Bronco Billy

[Bronco Billy]

Okay, if you want my opinion:

 

First off, make all scoring rule changes to be implemented next season instead of this season unless an owner vote is unanimous to implement them this season .

 

Second, use a graduated scoring system: 0.5 ppr for RBs, 1.5 ppr for TEs, 1.0 ppr for all other players. While you may not agree that 6 receptions = a TD, the counter arguments to this point are that if you want to take this stance, then the only scoring you should have in your league is 6 pts/TD, 3 pts/FG, 1 pt/XP, & 2 pts/safety, since that's the only way teams in football actually score points. There is a lot more to winning games than simply putting points on the board. In the last 2 minutes of a 4 pt game, 6 receptions in a drive that results in the winning score is at least as valuable as a winning 1 yd TD plunge by a FB. Secondly, recognize that this is a game, and the more variability that you add to scoring, the more you can manipulate player value, which in turn makes your league a much greater opportunity to be more competitive. Reducing one positions scoring when they heavily dominate value and bringing up a couple of "lesser" positions makes your league that much better.

 

Include flex players (again, more variability = better competition). Changing QB TDs from 6 pts to 4 pts won't change their value a whole lot, but it will bring their scoring down to being more equitable with other players. Reduce or dump bonuses - they don't make sense when a QB can earn 5.04 more points for throwing for 300 yds than he did for 299 yds. If your league really likes plateaus of acheivement, make them worth a couple of points, maximum, for each plateau (allows for some slight separation for "studly" players - guys who regularly hit those plateaus).

 

You'll end up with more equitable player value among different positions, and that makes drafts and the season much more fun, as well as allowing teams to be competitive by using different strategies.

Edited July 21, 2008 by Bronco Billy

[gsmayes]

 

I assume that as a UFA that every owner in the league had a chance to roster Grant at some point during the season? Why should the first guy to recognize that he might have value & take a chance on him be considered "lucky"?

 

Hard to believe that you guys have been playing for a while and that some still have this kind of mentality...

 

Well, it's pretty much one very vocal guy, and he's been terrible at acquiring keepers, so it's mostly just sour grapes. He just likes stirring the pot, for all his talk he really isn't very good, he's been in the league for 4 years and hasn't broken .500 yet. Of course, he's always having bad luck with his picks.

[gsmayes]

Okay, if you want my opinion:

 

First off, make all scoring rule changes to be implemented next season instead of this season unless an owner vote is unanimous to implement them this season.

 

I think this is a good idea, it will give owners a 1-year buffer on how they handle their keepers.

[loaf]

after working on this for a couple years, I think the scoring system in place for a couple of my leagues is the most equitable:

 

 

Pa2P - Passing Two-point Conversion 1 point PaInt - Passing Interception -1 point PaTD - Passing TD 6 points PaYd - Passing Yards 1+ PaYd = .03 points for every 1 PaYdRe2P - Receiving Two-point Conversion 2 points ReTD - Receiving TD 6 points ReYd - Receiving Yards 1+ ReYd = .06 points for every 1 ReYdRecpt - Reception .6 points Ru2P - Rushing Two-point Conversion 2 points RuAtt - Rushing Attempt .2 points RuTD - Rushing TD 6 points RuYd - Rushing Yards 1+ RuYd = .06 points for every 1 RuYd

 

[muck]

Personal opinion ... which is pretty similar to BB's and Loaf's (fwiw):

 

0.5pts / RB reception

1.5pts / WR reception

2.0pts / all other receptions

 

0.2pts / all rushing attempts

 

0.1pt all rushing or receiving yards

0.05pts all passing yards

 

6pts all TDs

-2pts for INTs and fumbles lost

 

...absolutely NO bonuses for long TDs, 100yds rushing, 300yds passing, etc...

 

...after having run the math and after having commished a league with this coring for three or four years, this is the most balanced scoring I've ever seen...

Edited July 21, 2008 by muck

[gsmayes]

I think you've convinced me on the different ppr values for RB (0.5) and WR (1.0). However, I don't like the 2.0 PPR for TEs. It seems like every year you have 2-3 top tier TEs, then the position drops off a cliff. I think the difference between the #1 and #10 TE is much larger than that for WRs. The huddle's perfect scoring of 2.0 ppr and .20 pt/yd for TEs is too much I think. I could see going 1.5ppr for TEs and keeping it the same yardage scoring as WRs.

[muck]

I think you've convinced me on the different ppr values for RB (0.5) and WR (1.0). However, I don't like the 2.0 PPR for TEs. It seems like every year you have 2-3 top tier TEs, then the position drops off a cliff. I think the difference between the #1 and #10 TE is much larger than that for WRs. The huddle's perfect scoring of 2.0 ppr and .20 pt/yd for TEs is too much I think. I could see going 1.5ppr for TEs and keeping it the same yardage scoring as WRs.

 

Instead of guessing, I would encourage you to do the math and tweak it ... rather than just simply pulling numbers out of your butt.

 

...and, use at least three years' worth of data to make sure that what happened last year wasn't an anomoly (sp?)... I used three years of data when putting the scoring together above, and each year we had the league, performance from one position to the next was within expectations and performance within positions was within expectations.

 

Anyhow, figure out what sort of spread you want to have within a position and then across positions, and then build the scoring rules appropriately.

Edited July 21, 2008 by muck

[Bronco Billy]

Instead of guessing, I would encourage you to do the math and tweak it ... rather than just simply pulling numbers out of your butt.

 

Figure out what sort of spread you want to have within a position and then across positions, and then build the scoring rules appropriately.

 

Use FFLM and you can crank the numbers on all sorts of different scoring scenarios in very short order, and you can go back historically a significant amount of time to see how it trends out. In a couple of hours, given what you're trying to do, you can make the league top notch, just the way you want it, and know how it will work over time.

[BeeR]

For those of you well versed in this format, do you prefer 1 PPR or 0.50 PPR. I don't know, it just seems to me that 6 recs should not count as much as a TD.

Why not? It's about as common, I think. 6 per game = 96 per year. Very few get that.

 

Plus I really hate fractions or "half points" etc. 1 per catch is just easier to deal with IMO.

[gsmayes]

 

I whipped up three line graphs to compare the scoring systems. The variable ppr narrows the gap slightly between the top 4 RBs and WRs, but after that the WRs are more valuable than the similar ranked RBs. I think I like the 1 ppr format, the top 3-4 at each position separate, but after that all positions are similar.

[FishFreak]

I think you can always over analyze scoring but to me the important thing is to make sure your fantasy scoring is a true reflection of the actual game. WR's and TE's (for the most part) are paid to catch the ball and should be awarded appropriately in fantasy scoring with 1 point per reception. QB's should be rewarded for their passing totals and rushing totals accordingly. The thing I think pisses people off about PPR is the scoring amounts RB's can rack up. But in reality I think this is fair because the RB's get the most touches and take the most pounding. Therefore, they should be rewarded the most IMO.

 

Lastly, PPR simply even the playing field and is a must for WR's otherwise leagues don't properly reward dominant, big yardage games like a 8 catch 120 yard day. League scoring shouldn't always be so focused on TD's but rather the yardage and offensive plays the "skill" positions make in route to scoring a TD. 1 PPR scoring is ideal in my book.

[Riffraff]

how many prefer having the same PPR for both RB/WR versus having 1 PPR for WRs and 0.5 PPR for RBs? You opinions are appreciated.

I like PPR and prefer .5 for RBs, 1 for WRs, and 1.5 for TEs.

- Equals the positions out and doesn't overly inflate the Tomlinson/Westbrook types.

- Makes a nice option for decision making when it comes to flex positions (instead of automatically using another RB if you have them).

- Makes the draft much more interesting instead of a RB hogfest.

- Rounds you out as a fantasy player to use different scoring rules in different leagues.

[Riffraff]

 

I whipped up three line graphs to compare the scoring systems. The variable ppr narrows the gap slightly between the top 4 RBs and WRs, but after that the WRs are more valuable than the similar ranked RBs. I think I like the 1 ppr format, the top 3-4 at each position separate, but after that all positions are similar.

Don't look at the top of the list, look at the last starting positions (top 36 WRs versus top 24 RBs, etc)

You want the equality near the last starting positions and flex options.

[Bronco Billy]

Don't look at the top of the list, look at the last starting positions (top 36 WRs versus top 24 RBs, etc)

You want the equality near the last starting positions and flex options.

 

I'd respectfully disagree with that. WRs usually catch RBs in regard to overall scoring right around the 15th to 20th players at each position, and after that WRs tend to score more. It's part of the reason top RBs are so valuable - the scarcity of really good ones in the league.

 

I'd recommend looking for equivalent value near the top, mosty probably some time after the top 5 players at each position. There are various ways of gaging value, the simplest probably being the lowest starter baseline method - which is what I think riff is advocating. Use the lowest starter at each position and subtract their pts scored from each player above & below them at the respective positions to determine each player's value, and then make comparisons between values of players rather than direct comparison of scoring. Remember, it's not how much you score that wins in FF, it's how much you outscore your opponent by. That difference is value, and value allows meaningful comparsions between differeing positions in FF.

 

Pardon me, riff, if I'm putting words in your mouth. I may be presuming too much, but I also know that you've been doing this stuff well for a long time.