Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

DMD ... let's talk about the mocks


Grits and Shins
 Share

Recommended Posts

Both mocks have defensive scoring set up as follows:

 

6 points for any defensive or special team score

2 points for any safety

6 points for any shut out

 

NO points for a turnover

NO points for a sack

NO yardage points

 

I noticed that when Green Dragons drafted both Detroit and Green Bay in the first mock your comments were

 

"DEF and PK are mostly throw ins that will not make any difference and could even be a liability since none of them are clearly better than the other."

 

However, under the outlined scoring system Detroit ranked 4th in 2004 and 3rd in 2003.

 

Some of the defenses we think of as the "good defenses" don't fair very well in this type of scoring. For instance you were very upbeat about the Steelers who finished 17th in 2003 and 7th in 2004.

 

I know you don't like defenses, but what gives here?

Edited by Grits and Shins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not out to "get him" just curious about how he ranked them.

 

Does he have a feeling about Detroit for instance that would lead him to believe that the last 2 years (with Mooch as coach) were a fluke and won't be repeated this year?

 

Did he forget to include points for sacks and turnovers when he set up the mocks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not out to "get him" just curious about how he ranked them.

 

Does he have a feeling about Detroit for instance that would lead him to believe that the last 2 years (with Mooch as coach) were a fluke and won't be repeated this year? 

 

Did he forget to include points for sacks and turnovers when he set up the mocks?

 

857293[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I know, I'm just mimicking a local radio host, severe inside joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the defenses we think of as the "good defenses" don't fair very well in this type of scoring. For instance you were very upbeat about the Steelers who finished 17th in 2003 and 7th in 2004.

 

I know you don't like defenses, but what gives here?

 

I'm sorry... do I even know you? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, okay...

 

First off, understand what the mocks are about. Just a way to show people what drafts are looking like this season in terms of "who goes where" and how teams can be put together. My only part in it is to comment on how well I think "the plan" worked for each team drafted considering the draft slot on what was available at the time of each pick. A commentary on overall how it worked out in draft slot X if a person followed the path of the person who drafted.

 

This is why I will assign grades that seem to be skewed from what popular opinion of a team may be. I am not rating the team per se, just how well it came together in the draft.

 

Now then, defenses are incredibly hard to predict outside of BAL and NE the last few years (throw BUF into that mix so far). Problem with commenting too much on individual defenses being really good or really bad is that the person reading the mock will likely have defensive scoring much different than what the draft was. BAL, NE and BUF should do well in most any scoring scenario but with the huge range of scoring options league's use, what makes a defense #4 in one league might have them be #24 in another.

 

Defenses get a rather casual eye in the review of mock teams because of this. It is nice to see a top DEF there since you will know that they will likely end up well, but I wouldn't "ding" a team on having bad defenses unless they were just really obivously bad. Most leagues see DEF get drafted very late in drafts anyway.

 

My comment on DET and GB was related to the fact that most teams select a defense that is clearly their best and another that is merely a backup. In the case of DET and GB (in most leagues of the readers), you could end up having to mix and match defenses which is not ideal.

 

Given the huge range of how leagues handle defenses, I am more worried that including them is as much misleading as it is helpful. But they need to be there in order to look complete.

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's okay ... we all know you despise defenses and use last year's cheat magazines to rank them for this year :D

 

857369[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I don't despise them, they are just far more difficult to predict over the course of a season than an individual player (in fantasy terms). What I despise is putting a win bet on a horse that only places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay you listed 3 defenses that are "top" ... BAL, NE and BUF.

 

I agree defenses are hard to predict, ESPECIALLY if the only scoring you get fantasy wise is actual scores. It becomes a bit easier to predict defenses when you include turnovers and sacks because those can be predicted with a small degree of accuracy.

 

2003 FINISH

1. NE

2. KC

3. DET

4. BAL

5. STL

6. TEN

7. TB

8. CAR

9. OAK

10. BUF

 

2004 FINISH

1. BUF

2. BAL

3. CHI

4. DET

5. ATL

6. HOU

7. PIT

8. CIN

9. TB

10. IND

 

Notice that only 4 teams repeat in the top 10 from 2003 to 2004 ... DET 4th and 3rd, BAL 2nd and 4th, BUF 1st and 10th, TB 7th and 9th

 

I wish I had the 2002 numbers but I don't.

 

So why is NE one of the 'solid' picks when they finished out of the top 10 last year? DET and BAL look like the most solid picks when you consider this scoring and the last 2 years track record. Should TB be considered stong because of their top 10 finish the last 2 years?

Edited by Grits and Shins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why is NE one of the 'solid' picks when they finished out of the top 10 last year?  DET and BAL look like the most solid picks when you consider this scoring and the last 2 years track record.

 

857380[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Because in most fantasy leagues, they are lower risk to repeat from year to year and turn in decent numbers in most fantasy defenses scoring scenarios. It is about risk, reward and consistency as much as last year's stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because in most fantasy leagues, they are lower risk to repeat from year to year and turn in decent numbers in most fantasy defenses scoring scenarios. It is about risk, reward and consistency as much as last year's stats.

 

857385[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Aren't we talking about mock 1 NOT most leagues? I'd think most leagues award points for turnovers and sacks.

 

Mock 1 was based on a different scoring and as such shouldn't it be graded on that basis ... OR ... shouldn't the mocks be set up like 'most leagues'?

 

Detroit has been in the top 5 the last 2 years (under the mock scoring system) and I don't see that their special teams is any worse than the last 2 years?

 

New England is certainly as solid defense but I wouldn't say so solid on special teams ... and the scoring in these mocks seems more geared to special teams than to defenses.

Edited by Grits and Shins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess my point is ... you set up one criteria for the draft (the league scoring system) and then grade on another criteria (most other scoring systems).

 

I assume the drafters are using the scoring system entered in the site to base their drafting decisions on and not the scoring system their individual leagues use ... right? If they were all using their own individual scoring systems wouldn't that invalidate the mock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't we talking about mock 1 NOT most leagues?  I'd think most leagues award points for turnovers and sacks.

 

857386[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

For the most part, I am considering most leagues, not specifically the mock at hand. This is for the benefit of those who read the mock and determine how it might help them draft better. 99% of anyone like that would never go look to see, nor even really consider, the specific scoring rule for a defense.

 

:D You're just being yappy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the most part, I am considering most leagues, not specifically the mock at hand. This is for the benefit of those who read the mock and determine how it might help them draft better. 99% of anyone like that would never go look to see, nor even really consider, the specific scoring rule for a defense.

 

  :D You're just being yappy.

 

857415[/snapback]

 

 

 

I just did in mock 2............oops :D :doah: :D:D

I usually like to know the scoring before I draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the scoring rules affected my defense drafting in mock 2. Given "normal" scoring, I would not have drafted KC and probably would have looked at defense a little sooner.

 

857598[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

My point exactly ... in doing the mock you adjust based on the scoring of the mock. This mock probably doesn't represent most leagues because defense score higher and the first defense is normally taken in the 5th round or so. In these mocks the first was taken in the 6th and was considered earlier ... the next was taken in the 10th ... that is not very representative of the leagues I play in with defenses.

 

Last year in F-OFF 5 defenses were taken before round 11 ... 2 in the 7th, 2 in the 9th, 1 in the 10th - http://football17.myfantasyleague.com/2004...&FRANCHISE=0000

 

Last yer in my local EIGHT defenses were taken before the 9th round ... 1 in the 6th, 1 in the 7th, and then 6 in the 8th - http://football2.myfantasyleague.com/2004/...&FRANCHISE=0000

 

In Hannibals last year ... where we must keep 3 players the first defense was taken in the 4th (7th) round with 3 taken before the 7th (10th) round, another 2 in the 7th (10th) round.

 

So I don't see how these mocks are an accurate reflection of most leagues. I can tell you if I was drafting under the rules of these mocks I would not draft a defense until very late ... but in my other leagues I consider them around the 5th or 6th round.

 

http://football2.myfantasyleague.com/2004/...&FRANCHISE=0000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information