Board Meeting: Tier 2 QBs

[gandalas]

Depends on the scoring options. If it is a QB-heavy scoring system, such as 6 pts per TD throw, then QBs are invaluable. If not, then you can wait.

 

Also, is this for a dynasty, or redraft?

 

I would definitely not go for warner that early in a dynasty, although in a redraft he is a definite option.

 

Philip Rivers in R5-R6

Tony Romo in R5-R6

 

Both of those are definite options in dynasty leagues, although Ryan is also a possibility.

[Bronco Billy]

Depends on the scoring options. If it is a QB-heavy scoring system, such as 6 pts per TD throw, then QBs are invaluable. If not, then you can wait.

 

Unless QB scoring is prohibitively heavy, this is untrue. If QB scoring is similar to most leagues except for 6 pts/TD, QB value should only move up 1/2 a round, give or take.

[Big Country]

Depends on the scoring options. If it is a QB-heavy scoring system, such as 6 pts per TD throw, then QBs are invaluable. If not, then you can wait.

 

Going from 4 to 6 pt passing TDs has an extremely minimal impact on value.

 

now, going from 1 pt per 25 yards passing to 1 pt per 10 yards passing and keeping rushing/receiving at 1 pt per 10 yards will have a strong affect on value.

 

Going from 1 required QB to 2 will have a big affect on value.

[IamGod]

Going from 4 to 6 pt passing TDs has an extremely minimal impact on value.

 

now, going from 1 pt per 25 yards passing to 1 pt per 10 yards passing and keeping rushing/receiving at 1 pt per 10 yards will have a strong affect on value.

 

Going from 1 required QB to 2 will have a big affect on value.

 

What if you play in a league that has fewer roster spots? One of the leagues I'm in starts 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 K, 1 D/ST. Scoring system is 6pts for all TDs, 1 pt. per reception, 1 pt./10 yards rushing, receiving. 1 pt/25 yards passing.

 

In this system, QBs generally score more points than any other position and the drop-off from the elite QBs to the second tier is substantial. How does having one less WR (or no flex position, if you will) affect the landscape here, and subsequently the drafting strategy?

[Big Country]

What if you play in a league that has fewer roster spots? One of the leagues I'm in starts 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 K, 1 D/ST. Scoring system is 6pts for all TDs, 1 pt. per reception, 1 pt./10 yards rushing, receiving. 1 pt/25 yards passing.

 

In this system, QBs generally score more points than any other position and the drop-off from the elite QBs to the second tier is substantial. How does having one less WR (or no flex position, if you will) affect the landscape here, and subsequently the drafting strategy?

 

Only having two WRs severely limits their value. RBs will still have strong value, and you will see QB value go up vs. WRs mainly because the number of WR starters has decreased. Pretty much no matter what system you use, you see 2-3 elite Qbs stand out, then a large bunching of the rest below that with much smaller drops.

[Bronco Billy]

What if you play in a league that has fewer roster spots? One of the leagues I'm in starts 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 K, 1 D/ST. Scoring system is 6pts for all TDs, 1 pt. per reception, 1 pt./10 yards rushing, receiving. 1 pt/25 yards passing.

 

In this system, QBs generally score more points than any other position and the drop-off from the elite QBs to the second tier is substantial. How does having one less WR (or no flex position, if you will) affect the landscape here, and subsequently the drafting strategy?

 

You need to get yourself out of your overall scoring concept and look instead at scoring differential. It's a fundamental mistake that you're making and it is very common among FF owners to view things this way. You win by outscoring your opponent, meaning you want to maximize scoring differential between yourself and other teams in the league.

 

Let's look at your scoring system and use a very simplistic "worst starter" value based system. In you league, every team will start 1 QB, 2 RBs, 2 WRs, and 1 TE. Let's ignore K & D to make this lesson even more simplistic. So worst starter would mean you would set your QB baseline at QB12 and TE12, and your RB and WR baseline at RB24 and WR24.

 

Using some generic sscoring projections, your top 3 players at QB/TE, top 6 at RB/WR and worst starting player at each position might look something like this:

 

QB

 

QB1 368 pts

QB2 362 pts

QB3 348 pts

...

QB12 285 pts

 

RB

 

RB1 296 pts

RB2 286 pts

RB3 278 pts

RB4 277 pts

RB5 264 pts

RB6 262 pts

...

RB24 184 pts

 

WR

 

WR1 292 pts

WR2 290 pts

WR3 279 pts

WR4 272 pts

WR5 271 pts

WR6 270 pts

...

WR24 201 pts

 

TE

 

TE1 216 pts

TE2 200 pts

TE3 196 pts

...

TE12 117 pts

 

Using the worst starter at each position (QB12, RB24, WR24, TE12) as your baseline, and then subtracting that baseline number from the projected points scored from all players above and below them, you end up with point differentials at each position that look like this (this is what is called player value):

 

QB value

 

QB1 83

QB2 77

QB3 63

...

QB12 0 (baseline)

 

RB value

 

RB1 112

RB2 102

RB3 94

RB4 93

RB5 80

RB6 78

...

RB24 0 (baseline)

 

WR value

 

WR1 91

WR2 89

WR3 78

WR4 71

WR5 70

WR6 69

...

WR24 0 (baseline)

 

TE value

 

TE1 99

TE2 83

TE3 79

...

TE12 0 (baseline)

 

So you can see that the QB position does outscore all other players by a wide margin - in fact, QB12 is in the top 20 scorers in the league overall. But top QBs don't outscore other starting QBs by quite as wide a margin as top players at other positions. In other words, it would optimize your scoring more to have the top RB or top WR and a lower QB than to have the top QB with a lower RB or WR - you score more cumulative points by all of your starters that way. This is why stud RBs are so valuable - its not that they outscore all other players in the league, it's that the top RBs have a substantial difference in scoring when compared to starters at that posiiton.

 

You can also see that by starting only 2 WRs instead of 3 that the baseline WR scores more points (obviously - he's WR24 instead of WR36, which reduces the margin between the upper WRs and the WR baseline). If your league would start 3 WRs, WR value would increase by about 26 pts, or the difference between WR24 and WR36. So the more players that you start at a position, the more valuable the top players become. That's why when people here ask about a desire for more balanced scoring in their league that people will often respond with increasing starting requirements at a position rather than changing the scoring in the league.

 

Note that you should also use some common sense when drafting using VBD - and use tools like ADPs. The top TE value is very high - but no one drafts TEs in the first or second round. So even though their value is high, you can afford to wait a couple of rounds before grabbing up a top TE - meaning you are getting outstanding value for that player when you draft them (or, in other words, their value far exceeds their draft position).

 

Again - this is pretty simplistic, but hopefully it helps accentuate drafting to optimize your team as a whole, not just getting 1 or 2 top players. Your very best QBs probably shouldn't be looked at until around the top/middle of your 2nd round even with the scoring system that you use.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Bronco Billy

[bushwacked]

Whether skill or luck, in standard scoring leagues, I've almost always have gotten a decent scoring QB late. Typically won't take a QB before round 7 or so.

[IamGod]

Thanks for the analysis! That was all extremely helpful. I appreciate it.

[Square]

I guess I'm having a little trouble interpreting what to take from this in my own league. Mainly, the top player at a few positions is dramatically higher than the others.

 

For example, Gonzo scored a lot last year so his TE1 value (using the method BB described) would be 113 in one of my leagues. But the TE2 & TE3 numbers are well below that (Witten & Clark are at 59.5 & 57.5 respectively). So would the TE scoring in my league (.5 ppr) mean that the overall TE is weak so I should avoid it until later than others? Or would you throw out the top guys because there isn't a Gonzo or Brees that goes crazy every year? QB1 = 156.5 while QB2 is 101.5 & QB3 is 97.5. We have 2 point bonuses for a QB throwing 300 yards or a RB/WR having over 100 yards. I'm trying to decide if I should try to get the league to drop the bonuses as I'm thinking that may cause the #s to skew. Any help is appreciated.

[Big Country]

I guess I'm having a little trouble interpreting what to take from this in my own league. Mainly, the top player at a few positions is dramatically higher than the others.

 

For example, Gonzo scored a lot last year so his TE1 value (using the method BB described) would be 113 in one of my leagues. But the TE2 & TE3 numbers are well below that (Witten & Clark are at 59.5 & 57.5 respectively). So would the TE scoring in my league (.5 ppr) mean that the overall TE is weak so I should avoid it until later than others? Or would you throw out the top guys because there isn't a Gonzo or Brees that goes crazy every year? QB1 = 156.5 while QB2 is 101.5 & QB3 is 97.5. We have 2 point bonuses for a QB throwing 300 yards or a RB/WR having over 100 yards. I'm trying to decide if I should try to get the league to drop the bonuses as I'm thinking that may cause the #s to skew. Any help is appreciated.

 

One way I have approached it when utilizing historical numbers and not projections for the upcoming years is to look at 3-5 year averages to smooth any one year anomalies. Throw out the names. Top QB each year is QB1, and you average those numbers. 2nd QB is QB2, etc. Repeat for each position. The names are unimportant, you want to see how the positions stack up in general.

[Bronco Billy]

One way I have approached it when utilizing historical numbers and not projections for the upcoming years is to look at 3-5 year averages to smooth any one year anomalies. Throw out the names. Top QB each year is QB1, and you average those numbers. 2nd QB is QB2, etc. Repeat for each position. The names are unimportant, you want to see how the positions stack up in general.

 

This is very good advice. I do essentially the exact same thing - look at historical data 5 yrs deep and project player performance by the rank in position (I also intentionally block out names when doing this). I then only have to rank this year's players by position rather than project performance. Not that projection is a bad thing, but historically accurate data rather then educated speculation has always been preferrable IMO when I am evaluating player value.

 

You can go to FFLM, load all of your league's parameters, and get scoring data for each of the past few years in a relatively short time.

Edited July 20, 2009 by Bronco Billy