OK, I've got to ask

[Cunning Runt]

I'm not in a league that uses IDPs, can you milk me?

 

"I have nipples Greg... can you milk me"?

 

Prolly my single favorite line from any movie. Freakin' cracks me up.

 

Well played.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

It's not better. It's just different scoring rules that people seem to like.

 

 

Well said

[Bronco Billy]

Just to play the devil's advocate and take it to an extreme, how would you compare the above to a person who makes 6 catches for 40 yards or even 20 yards? In PPR he just got 10 or 8 points to the 1 catch for 60 yards player's 7. In this hypothetical, at what yardage point do you switch the "more valuable asset" to the 1 for 60 player? Or don't you?

 

I don't. I always keep in mind that FF is a game and can't perfectly equate real life performance with FF game value. I can live with that.

[Bronco Billy]

And FYI women and fairies use the term SHOO, so which one are you?

 

I can state with absolute certainty that he's not a fairy. I haven't seen him at even one meeting in years.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

In the league I've been in for 14 years, we don't award points for receptions until the 5th catch (with one PPR after that) for a WR or RB and the 3rd catch for a TE (with one PPR after that). We also do the same for yardage with 70 yds. the mark for RB's and WR's and 50 yds. for TE. In other words a WR with 4 catches for 69 yards= 0 points.

[Grits and Shins]

Well it seems to me that the whole point of PPR is to level the playing field so to speak ... in fantasy football terms.

 

So if you aren't fortunate enough to be placed in the draft where you can nab two stud RBs it becomes a viable option to grab WRs. The whole idea is to increase the mix of players that score well in fantasy terms. Evaluating the contributions of a WR that goes 6 for 60 to the one that goes 1 for 60 to his NFL team is an entirely different discussion that is largely not relevant to fantasy scoring.

 

Most leagues choose PPR to increase the pool of players that score well. Some use gradulated PPR some use a straight PPR. My son is in a league where TEs score more per reception and more per yard than any other position. If you choose to use receiving yard as your mechanism there is nothing wrong with that approach but I don't see anything that makes it necessarily better or worse than PPR.

[Bronco Billy]

In the league I've been in for 14 years, we don't award points for receptions until the 5th catch (with one PPR after that) for a WR or RB and the 3rd catch for a TE (with one PPR after that). We also do the same for yardage with 70 yds. the mark for RB's and WR's and 50 yds. for TE. In other words a WR with 4 catches for 69 yards= 0 points.

 

But a WR who has 5 catches for 68 yds scores, or has 4 catches for 70 yds scores, and the WR who has 5 catches for 71 yds significantly outscores all 3?

 

Well, you certainly can't punch any holes in that kind of logic...

[Big Ernie McCracken]

But a WR who has 5 catches for 68 yds scores, or has 4 catches for 70 yds scores, and the WR who has 5 catches for 71 yds significantly outscores all 3?

 

Well, you certainly can't punch any holes in that kind of logic...

huh? I was just discuusing the PPR aspect and relating to our yardage scoring. We do award 6 pts. for touchdowns . And I wouldn't call 1 pt. significantly outscoring anyway, but whatever I'm not going to justify my scoring to someone who's not in my league. I just find it odd to criticize any scoring system, and have to laugh at detlef's hubris.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Big Ernie McCracken

[Grits and Shins]

But a WR who has 5 catches for 68 yds scores, or has 4 catches for 70 yds scores, and the WR who has 5 catches for 71 yds significantly outscores all 3?

 

Well, you certainly can't punch any holes in that kind of logic...

 

I agree that scoring system is convulted and I wouldn't play in a league with that type of skewed scoring.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

I agree that scoring system is convulted and I wouldn't play in a league with that type of skewed scoring.

 

 

[Big Ernie McCracken]

I agree that scoring system is convulted and I wouldn't play in a league with that type of skewed scoring.

 

 

What does convulted mean anyway

[Puddy]

What does convulted mean anyway

 

Convulted = state of the human body after suffering through an extended period of convulsions brought on by a real life beating induced by flexing internet muscles.

 

Used in a sentence. One must wonder if Big Ernie McCracken's convulted body will ever be the same after his visit to a Texas dojo.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

Convulted = state of the human body after suffering through an extended period of convulsions brought on by a real life beating induced by flexing internet muscles.

 

Used in a sentence. One must wonder if Big Ernie McCracken's convulted body will ever be the same after his visit to a Texas dojo.

 

[detlef]

I disagree completely with that argument.

 

First, a player that catches 6 passes for 60 in a ppr league scores 12 pts, while the player who catches 1 pass for 60 yds in a ppr league scores 7 pts, so the first player doesn't double the scoring of the second player.

 

Secondly, the player who catches 6 passes for 60 yds is a guy who sustains drives and keeps the chains moving. He's a very valuable asset to the team in regard to field position, time of possession, and control of the tempo of the game. Those intangibles are all extremely important to the success of the team. He's likely a go-to guy on a 3rd and 6 play, which can be critical in the overall flow of the game. On the other hand, the player who made the 1 catch for 60 yds provided a big play - but only for one drive. He didn't impact the team in regard to moving and controlling the ball for the rest of the game, and thus his impact is much more limited than the first player. I'd absolutely make the argument that the first guy is much more vaulable to his team.

 

It's the same argument with RBs. Would you rather have the guy who gains 110 yds in 5 carries, or the one who gains 110 yds in 24 carries? I'll take the second guy every time. He's a go-to drive sustainer who sets up all the other downs for the team. He allows my D to rest, forces the other team's D to stay on the field longer, moves the chains, sustains drives, and allows my team to control the entire pace of the game. He also keeps my QB in safer down & distance situations and makes my passing game a lot more effective, especially in regard to play action and keeping LBs from deeper drops. The homerun threat is nice, but the workhorse allows my team to dominate the game, not just make a couple of lightning strikes. In fact, the homerun hitter can actually have his impact marginalized because he can significantly increase the workload on the D. It doesn't make his contribution bad by any means, but it can reduce the impact of those one or two big plays in the overall scheme and flow of the game.

 

One only likes the homerun hitters over the workhorses if one doesn't understand that the game is about field position and time of possession at least as much as it is about scoring. With the exception of a team like the Greatest-Show-on-Turf Rams or the 2007 Patriots who move the ball through the air with incredible pace & ease and overwhelmed teams with early game scoring blitzkriegs, if you look at teams that are successful year in and year out, they will have significant advantages in time of possession and number of plays, whereas the weaker teams always are lagging in these categories.

Fine points indeed. Ultimately i suppose it is my goal to find a scoring system that as accurately as possible rewards a players contribution to his team. This, BTW, was my issue with the whole fumble/recovery net point gain from a week ago. of course, for the sake of gameplay, i can certainly see the logic behind leveling the playing field between RBs and WRs/TEs. mind you, I'm also aware of the fact that you can do that by simply upping yardage bonuses for receptions. none the less, it also seems clear to me now that, more often than not, guys aren't going to rack up high reception totals without putting up some yards, so the theoretical instance of a guy catching 5 passes for 20 yds or something is likely not worth throwing the baby out with the bath water over.

 

As for the "it doesn't need to be better, just different" argument that's been thrown around. Sure, of course you can score your league however you want. However, that logic is hardly compelling and could be just as easily used to reward QBs for incompletions. i mean, why not? It's no better, just different. From what I can tell, the evolution of FF scoring has typically been done to better reward true production. This is why yardage bonuses in most legit leagues start at 10 or even 1 yard, to reward the players who move the chains over the Leroy Hoards of the world. To, as accurately as possible determine which FF player put the best team on the field. To realize that, while nothing to do back flips over, rushing for 68 yds is, in fact, better than rushing for 15. So, I don't think it's outlandish to question any scoring rule that doesn't seem to do truly reward on-field contribution. At least far more often than not. Of course, as many have pointed out, PPR seems to do that quite well.

 

I'm not in a league that uses IDPs, can you milk me?

Nicely played.

[Bronco Billy]

Used in a sentence. One must wonder if Big Ernie McCracken's convulted body will ever be the same after his visit to a Texas dojo.

 

[Gopher]

This really shouldn't be an argument. There is no right or wrong answer. It's simply personal preference. Some leagues prefer that the scoring is more "even" across the board, which PPR helps accomplish. Others take it one step further and give TE's more points per reception, or per receiving yard, than RB's and WR's. This helps boost TE scoring into the same range as other positions.

 

On the flip side, some leagues' scoring is more of a reflection of how valuable the player is to their team. Leagues where 15 of the top 20 scorers are typically QB's can be validated with the argument that a QB is the most difficult position to replace, thus they're the most valuable. Likewise, a RB who is lost to injury usually has a larger impact than losing a WR... Thus, RB's outscore WR's in a lot of non-PPR leagues, and those league members are fine with it, because the argument can be made that RB's SHOULD score more than WR's.

 

So, I believe the question should not be which system is correct, but what are you trying to accomplish with your scoring... Are you trying to make all positions equal in scoring value, or is the intention to make the scoring a reflection of how those positions rank in value to their teams (NFL and fantasy both)? Either answer is fine... neither one is "correct."

 

Also, you have to take into consideration which statistics can be measured. Receptions just happen to be something that is easily quantified... you can find receptions anywhere. But, I think most would agree that a great block by a WR is a much more critical / valuable play than a reception for zero yards is. The problem is that some stats are less measurable, and are not tracked as easily... blocks, drops, missed blocks, yards after catch, etc. There is no question that fantasy scoring is intended to reflect how valuable the play was, to a degree. But another factor in the equation is definitely which statistics can be measured to make the scoring what you want it to be.

 

I am even in a league where QB completions are awarded points... Seems pretty redundant, since they're already getting points for the yards. But, is it really any different than points for receptions? You can argue that it is or that it isn't, but the bottom line is that it is a statistic that is easily measurable and available on any sports website. It's the same thing for defense... you are limited in what you can score points for because only certain statistics are tracked consistently... tackles, sacks, TO's, and passes defensed. It doesn't account for the defensive linemen who always demand double-teams, or the defensive backs who don't get very many tackles because QB's never throw to the guy that they're covering. So, really, the difference between a players actual value and their fantasy-value is directly related to the fact that only certain stats can be measured and tracked.

 

I may be stating the obvious here, and forgive me if I'm going off on a tangent. I just think the whole PPR vs. non-PPR shouldn't be much of an argument. It's like playing pickup basketball and arguing over whether we're scoring by 1's and 2's versus 2's and 3's. As long as everyone knows the rules ahead of time, there really isn't much to argue about. If you prefer non-PPR, don't join PPR leagues, and vice versa. Personally, I enjoy both, and the fact that I'm in several of each makes things more enjoyable (more variety).

[Big Ernie McCracken]

This really shouldn't be an argument. There is no right or wrong answer. It's simply personal preference. Some leagues prefer that the scoring is more "even" across the board, which PPR helps accomplish. Others take it one step further and give TE's more points per reception, or per receiving yard, than RB's and WR's. This helps boost TE scoring into the same range as other positions.

 

I just think the whole PPR vs. non-PPR shouldn't be much of an argument. It's like playing pickup basketball and arguing over whether we're scoring by 1's and 2's versus 2's and 3's. As long as everyone knows the rules ahead of time, there really isn't much to argue about. If you prefer non-PPR, don't join PPR leagues, and vice versa. Personally, I enjoy both, and the fact that I'm in several of each makes things more enjoyable (more variety).

 

Exactly

[detlef]

Can we simply agree that the "It's a free country you can do what you want" argument is implied and thus doesn't need to be brought up? Obviously the purpose of this thread was not to come to a consensus on how we should all be scoring our leagues, rather to simply have people explain their rationale for doing so. Plenty have done an outstanding job of doing so.

 

 

I mean, what's the point of debating anything here if you can just go back to, "Hey, we're all entitled to our opinion." Of course we're entitled to our opinion! But we come here to toss things around and debate the merits of our points. That's really all this is about.

 

I can say that Matt Ryan should be the 1st overall player taken in the draft. You can say I'm crazy. I say, "hey you never know, do you. Maybe Ryan will go off. Back off, I'm entitled to my opinion." Great. That was fun.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

Can we simply agree that the "It's a free country you can do what you want" argument is implied and thus doesn't need to be brought up? Obviously the purpose of this thread was not to come to a consensus on how we should all be scoring our leagues, rather to simply have people explain their rationale for doing so. Plenty have done an outstanding job of doing so.

 

 

I mean, what's the point of debating anything here if you can just go back to, "Hey, we're all entitled to our opinion." Of course we're entitled to our opinion! But we come here to toss things around and debate the merits of our points. That's really all this is about.

 

I can say that Matt Ryan should be the 1st overall player taken in the draft. You can say I'm crazy. I say, "hey you never know, do you. Maybe Ryan will go off. Back off, I'm entitled to my opinion." Great. That was fun.

 

How you don't see a reception as a positive or useful play over the course of the game is odd. To your point why include any passing statistics at all?

[Gopher]

Can we simply agree that the "It's a free country you can do what you want" argument is implied and thus doesn't need to be brought up? Obviously the purpose of this thread was not to come to a consensus on how we should all be scoring our leagues, rather to simply have people explain their rationale for doing so. Plenty have done an outstanding job of doing so.

 

 

I mean, what's the point of debating anything here if you can just go back to, "Hey, we're all entitled to our opinion." Of course we're entitled to our opinion! But we come here to toss things around and debate the merits of our points. That's really all this is about.

 

I can say that Matt Ryan should be the 1st overall player taken in the draft. You can say I'm crazy. I say, "hey you never know, do you. Maybe Ryan will go off. Back off, I'm entitled to my opinion." Great. That was fun.

Absolutely. I am not suggesting that it isn't worth discussing (or implying that you shouldn't have asked the question). My point was just that there is no "perfect" scoring system. Some people seem to be so for or against PPR that they feel there is something wrong with the other. There are obvious "faults" with both extremes. I agree... hearing people's rationale behind why they score their leagues the way that they do is both interesting and educational. I just don't think it needs to turn into an argument of which system is right and which one is wrong. I'm sorry, but nobody can make a flawless argument either way.

 

I feel the same way about the whole IDP thing. I do both IDP and non. Neither is better than the other. One is far-more time-consuming than the other, that's for sure, but that doesn't make it better or more challenging. The competition (who you play with) and the variety (all nine of my leagues are different in multiple ways from the rest) is what makes it fun. If I was in nine IDP or nine-PPR leagues, and nothing else, I think it would be quite boring, to be honest.

[hooknladder]

How you don't see a reception as a positive or useful play over the course of the game is odd. To your point why include any passing statistics at all?

 

in Detlef's view only certain plays are valuable...all the rest is just fill i guess

[Gopher]

Personally, I prefer a PPR system where it's not quite as extreme... somewhere in the neighborhood of a half-point (assuming 1 point per 10 yards, etc.). Receptions mean something, but not to the extent where guys like Mason and Engram are over-valued (which I believe they were last year in full-point PPR leagues). I also have no issue with a graduated PPR system, where different positions get different point values for receptions (RB .4 WR .6 TE .8). What I don't really enjoy is when the scoring goes overboard, so that it becomes an advantage to start two TE's (one as a flex position) because the system is heavily favored towards TE's. I'm not talking about starting Witten/Gonzalez, but guys like McMichael/Daniels.

[detlef]

in Detlef's view only certain plays are valuable...all the rest is just fill i guess

Wow, I guess if this thread hadn't been dredged up by the other one, I might have missed this. Why yes, I do only think that certain plays are valuable. In general, those would be the ones where good things happen, like TDs, FGs, gaining positive yards. You know, valuable stuff. The other ones? When nothing good happens for your team? Those would be the ones that I feel should be valued less or not at all.

 

Does this seem odd?

 

Now, I was once in a pre-school nap time fantasy league where we drafted little kids and, in keeping with the positive pre-school vibe, got points for basically everything they did. It was a great moral builder because everyone's team was pretty rad. We just had a hard time figuring out who actually won since all of us ended up with the same score.

Edited November 13, 2008 by detlef

[lkirc]

I appreciate the responses but don't see how PPR is better than simply giving out more points for receiving yards. Well besides the fact that possession WRs will get more love relative to those that catch the long ball. However, I would imagine that if you wanted to do that, you would do a combo of the two. Perhaps give 1/2 pt per reception and inflate the points for receiving yards.

 

As it stands catching 6 balls for 60 yds is worth twice as much as catching 1 ball for 60 and that seems a bit odd. 1 60 yd catch nearly insures that your team is going to come away with some points from the drive. On the other hand, 6 10 yd receptions can be sprinkled around a number of fruitless drives.

 

I think the best way to utilize ppr is to give WRs and TEs a point per reception and give RBs standard scoring (no PPR). Then the intent behind PPR systems will happen. WRs and TEs value will be closer to the value of RBs. Just my 2 cents, which usually is overpriced

[keggerz]

I think the best way to utilize ppr is to give WRs and TEs a point per reception and give RBs standard scoring (no PPR). Then the intent behind PPR systems will happen. WRs and TEs value will be closer to the value of RBs. Just my 2 cents, which usually is overpriced

but the idea is also to give 3rd down type RBs like Kevin Faulk more value since RB is such a thin thin pool (normally)