gilthorp Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 I was looking at the thread from one of the mocks that just started, and saw some disbelief about Peyton Manning going second. I'm on record as saying that the deeper the league (in this case a 14 team league), you're asking for some serious trouble if you draft him this high. However, the folks that believe the RB depth is as strong as ever, don't concentrate just on the PTD points, look at the bigger picture. Regardless of how many points you get for passing TD's, the gamble could pay off for those with the stones to do so. Does it really matter if the league would reward 6 pts. per TD opposed to 4 pts? If all else were equal, it would have made a difference of an average of 6.5 points per game, or 98 points in total. However, if in fact there is a difference in points per passing yards, or the amount of deduction for interceptions thrown, the difference is far less. Instead of the 98 points difference, look at this from 2 of my leagues last year. Leauge 1: 4 pts. per passing TD, -1 per INT, 1 pt. per 20 yards passing. 417.75 total points 21.60 21.20 39.65 18.00 20.90 B 30.40 42.60 31.40 34.00 26.05 36.20 30.25 22.90 16.45 26.15 League 2: 6 pts. per passing TD, -2 per INT, 1 pt. per 25 yards passing. 447 total points 21 22 45 18 23 B 32 46 36 38 30 45 28 23 15 25 The difference between these two leagues averaged out to 2 pts. better per game for League 1. Obviously, the INT's and points per yardage make a hugh difference. With all this being said, Manning still outscored the best RB's by a ton, and again, for those of you that believe RB's can be snared somewhere else, your gamble could pay off. League 1: Manning--417.75 pts., Best 2 RB's--287.30 and 286.40. League 2: Manning--447 pts., Best 2 RB's--294 and 289. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 I've only played in 4pt and don't like 6 because of the lopsidedness. Thanks for the info gil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Leauge 1: 4 pts. per passing TD, -1 per INT, 1 pt. per 20 yards passing. 417.75 total points 21.60 21.20 39.65 18.00 20.90 B 30.40 42.60 31.40 34.00 26.05 36.20 30.25 22.90 16.45 26.15 League 2: 6 pts. per passing TD, -2 per INT, 1 pt. per 25 yards passing. 447 total points 21 22 45 18 23 B 32 46 36 38 30 45 28 23 15 25 The difference between these two leagues averaged out to 2 pts. better per game for League 1. Obviously, the INT's and points per yardage make a hugh difference. With all this being said, Manning still outscored the best RB's by a ton, and again, for those of you that believe RB's can be snared somewhere else, your gamble could pay off. League 1: Manning--417.75 pts., Best 2 RB's--287.30 and 286.40. League 2: Manning--447 pts., Best 2 RB's--294 and 289. 840677[/snapback] Two things that really stand out to me. 1) No, the difference between the two leagues don't avg out to 2pts better per game for League 1. It's League 2, the league with 6pts per TD, that has the 2pt per game edge. 2) Aside from the QB scoring, what else is different about the 2 leagues' scoring that make the RB points vary? Even without knowing the answer to this question it should be noted that the disparity between Manning and the top RB is greater in League 2, the one with 6pt TDs, than it is in League 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted June 14, 2005 Author Share Posted June 14, 2005 difference is .1 per yard compared to 1 pt. per 10 yards and a reception bonus after the 4th reception per game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 and not just QBs scoring more than RBs. i remember one year in my local league i had jeff wilkins, who scored more than anybody in a TD only league (performance i dont think it would happen) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 This was bounced around some in another thread. If you want to look at point differentials, I don't think you can compare Manning to another RB. For instance, in the IDP mock, I took Manning at 1.3. Naturally, at 2.10 and 3.3 I took RB's. If that were not an IDP league, I would have taken a WR at 4.10, and most likely again at 5.3. Now, if I had passed on Manning, that 5.3 pick may well have been my QB pick. Let's say I took Edge at 1.3 instead of Manning. At 2.10, I would have taken Martin, so that pick remains the same. At 3.3, I took Jordan. So far, I have to figure (project) the points differential between Edge and Jordan. Then, I also have to figure the difference between Manning and the QB I would have selected at 5.3, let's say it's T Green. For arguements sake, let's say Jordan has a pretty good year, not Edge numbers, but not bad. The differential between Manning and Green should exceed that of Edge over Jordan. But, we're not done yet. By taking Manning I had to take my first WR in round 4, instead of round 3, and my second WR in round 5 instead of round 4. The round 4 WR pick would be the same player, but I would have to include my projected points differential between the WR I could have gotten in the 3rd round (with the T Green pick) vs. the WR I got in the fifth round (with the Manning pick). So, the Manning vs. Green point difference would have to be greater than: RB at 1.3 and WR at 3.3 vs. RB at 3.3 and WR at 5.3. This makes taking Manning look less attractive. It really boils down to what your projections are for individual players. In my case, I think I got lucky to get Jordan in the third round. The difference between getting a WR in the 3rd round vs. the 5th might be hurt more than the RB comparison did. I would not want to do this in all of my leagues, since so much rides on Manning. But, he's durable and I don't see any reason he can't come close to last year's numbers. If he doesn't, I'm sunk. But, a straight differential between Manning and an RB in the first only tells a part of the story, in terms of point differentials. By taking a QB in the first, I weaken myself at my #1 RB and #1WR positions. Those two differentials must also be considered against the Manning vs. Green diferential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanruiz13 Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Nice post Rovers...totally agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 (edited) I've never been a fan of scoring systems that only give QBs 4 pts for passing tds. For one reason, I think it's all relative. You compare your QB scoring to QB scoring. Not to other positions. The only thing that it does do, is make QBs like CPep, Mcnabb, Vick more valuable as they will run for more of the 6 pt tds then others. I was in 3 leagues last year. Two of them give 6 pts for all tds. Culpepper scored 2 more pts then Manning in one of them, and Manning had 2 more pts in the other...due to slight difference in pts for passing yardage. In the one league where passing tds are worth only 4 pts....Culpepper outscored Manning by 15 pts. Bottom line...I don't see why so many people feel the need to balance out the scoring between positions, at least by penalizing the one position. You only get to start 1 QB, where you get to start 2 RBs and probably 3 WRs. If you started the same amount of players at each position, then I could see reasons to try and balance them out...maybe. Touchdowns are Touchdowns....give me my 6 pts! Edited June 14, 2005 by BillyBalata Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trots Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted June 14, 2005 Author Share Posted June 14, 2005 Rovers, agree completely with your assessment. Good stuff. Taking the bigger picture into account is necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.