Fantasy Football

Guys who get 90 yards and no TDs are worthless, guys who go over 100 yds with touchdowns are blown massively out of proportion.

There's likely a reason that the standard scoring is standard - it would take quite a bit of theorizing and mathematical analysis to determine the value of every football stat. I imagine someone has made an attempt at it and come up with this.

The scoring system does not appear to be fair because quarterbacks tend to get far more passing TDs than running backs get rushing TDs. Hence they become extremely overvalued, and it turns into last year where Brady (on your team) crushed everyone for most of the season nearly singlehandedly. Almost all of the high scorers will be QBs as opposed to a mix of QBs, RBs, and maybe a few WRs.

But it is balanced now. Of course guys who get 100 + yards with TD's will be valuable.

The reason I wanted to give the 100 yards bonus is to protect players from getting an unfair bust. What happens if someone drafts Joseph Addai, and Indy puts Rhodes as their goaline back? What would happen if Addai goes for 170 yards with no TD's and Rhodes goes for 35 yards and 2 TD's? Under the old system Addai would have had (assuming no fumbles) 8 points and Rhodes would of have 13 points. Is this fair? Of course not. Thats why under the new system Addai would have 18 points due to the bonus, and Rhodes would remain on 13 points.

Is that not fair?

The scoring system does not appear to be fair because quarterbacks tend to get far more passing TDs than running backs get rushing TDs.

This is exactly why I have given a boost to RB's yardage (not td) production. Unbelievable concept, isn't it?

The reason I wanted to give the 100 yards bonus is to protect players from getting an unfair bust. What happens if someone drafts Joseph Addai, and Indy puts Rhodes as their goaline back?

What would happen if someone drafted a third string TE in the first round? Do we need a way to protect this investment too? You're assuming that Joseph Addai has to be a top-tier fantasy running back, and if he isn't, that's a fault with the scoring system rather than a fault of his and of the Colts. If people didn't think he was going to score more points than Rhodes, they wouldn't draft him.

What is "unfair" about making a pick that doesn't work out? Fairness is that everyone performs exactly the way they were projected to?

What would happen if Addai goes for 170 yards with no TD's and Rhodes goes for 35 yards and 2 TD's? Under the old system Addai would have had (assuming no fumbles) 8 points and Rhodes would of have 13 points. Is this fair? Of course not.

Of course it's fair - touchdowns are much more important than yardage. And with such a huge bonus you're in the neighborhood of making rushing TDs irrelevant.

And I don't see how anyone including me would have the time to statistically work out their own rankings based on this nonstandard scoring. Unless you're just planning to wing it, this would be necessary, and it's much easier to just scan a lot of people's standard-scoring rankings around the web in order to get a sense of things. It's not so much an "inconvenience" as something I'm totally unwilling to do.

The scoring system does not appear to be fair because quarterbacks tend to get far more passing TDs than running backs get rushing TDs.

This is exactly why I have given a boost to RB's yardage (not td) production. Unbelievable concept, isn't it?

I wasn't talking about the RB bonus, I was talking about 6 pts per passing TD.

Is it to late to join the league?? Well I'm in if possible..

Is it to late to join the league?? Well I'm in if possible..

Sign up brother, there's plenty of room.

What would happen if someone drafted a third string TE in the first round? Do we need a way to protect this investment too? You're assuming that Joseph Addai has to be a top-tier fantasy running back, and if he isn't, that's a fault with the scoring system rather than a fault of his and of the Colts. If people didn't think he was going to score more points than Rhodes, they wouldn't draft him.

What is "unfair" about making a pick that doesn't work out? Fairness is that everyone performs exactly the way they were projected to?

Wow awesome analogy! I'm not saying all draft picks should be protected, I'm saying yards should be rewarded as well as TD's.

What this comes down to is you not willing to accept a scoring system different to the default because you'll have to re rank your players. Boo hoo.

I wasn't talking about the RB bonus, I was talking about 6 pts per passing TD.

But the RB bonus should give running backs the opportunity to be just as valuable as QB's.

Qballer has addressed his concerns over having a player rack up big yardage and no touchdowns, so I've addressed this. Your complaint is basically "oh this scoring system is different to the default, so I'll have to re order my players". I'm not willing to switch it to default just because you don't want to be inconvenienced.

Yards are rewarded....one point for every ten yards. They are not nearly as valuable as TDs however thus why standard leagues are based around who scores the most points as well as various secondary statistics.

What this comes down to is you not willing to accept a scoring system different to the default because you'll have to re rank your players.

Bingo, I don't have the time, data, or motivation to rank 160+ players, especially when having to take into account a round number fetish (100 yards is vastly superior to 99 yards, pile on the points!).

Qballer has addressed his concerns over having a player rack up big yardage and no touchdowns, so I've addressed this.

How did he address them? And why do you need to address them too? Shouldn't they be addressed by saying "I don't think this guy is going to score very many TDs - I'll go ahead and not draft him"?

But the RB bonus should give running backs the opportunity to be just as valuable as QB's.

Are you familiar with last season's fantasy leaders? Basically you're screwing up something that already makes sense (4 pts to 6 pts for passing TD) then overcompensating for it by boosting the value of RBs who get a lot of carries through the roof.

Qballer has addressed his concerns over having a player rack up big yardage and no touchdowns, so I've addressed this.

How did he address them? And why do you need to address them too? Shouldn't they be addressed by saying "I don't think this guy is going to score very many TDs - I'll go ahead and not draft him"?

Have you even read this thread?

sweet. I'm down again. i was waiting for you to mention it. i think i got 2nd last year. I feel like getting 100 yds should be just as good as a touchdown. I had Tony Gonzalez last year and got screwed as he racked up the yards but not the TDs.

Go back to arguing with a mirror.

Do you have nothing to say to the other three things I posted? I can't say I'm shocked that you would zero in on the most irrelevant thing in the post.

Regardless, I don't see Qballer addressing the problem at all, just complaining about his draft pick that didn't work out. I fail to see how it's "unfair" that Gonzalez didn't score very often last season. Should we adjust scoring for every single player to make sure they all come out the same and everybody wins?

Even outside of that, 100 yds is 5 points, a touchdown is 6. This "unfair" fact is too much for you to let slide and requires a major revamp of the rules?

I have already addressed and given answers for what you ask over and over and over and over again. I refuse to continue to answer games just because you don't like the answer to them.

No...you have not answerd them, and some of them were not even questions at all; they were declarative statements. Show me where you responded to these:

Yards are rewarded....one point for every ten yards. They are not nearly as valuable as TDs however thus why standard leagues are based around who scores the most points as well as various secondary statistics.

]Bingo, I don't have the time, data, or motivation to rank 160+ players, especially when having to take into account a round number fetish (100 yards is vastly superior to 99 yards, pile on the points!).

Qballer has addressed his concerns over having a player rack up big yardage and no touchdowns, so I've addressed this.

How did he address them? And why do you need to address them too? Shouldn't they be addressed by saying "I don't think this guy is going to score very many TDs - I'll go ahead and not draft him"?

Are you familiar with last season's fantasy leaders? Basically you're screwing up something that already makes sense (4 pts to 6 pts for passing TD) then overcompensating for it by boosting the value of RBs who get a lot of carries through the roof.

Yards are rewarded....one point for every ten yards. They are not nearly as valuable as TDs however thus why standard leagues are based around who scores the most points as well as various secondary statistics.

Already answered with:

The reason I wanted to give the 100 yards bonus is to protect players from getting an unfair bust. What happens if someone drafts Joseph Addai, and Indy puts Rhodes as their goaline back? What would happen if Addai goes for 170 yards with no TD's and Rhodes goes for 35 yards and 2 TD's? Under the old system Addai would have had (assuming no fumbles) 8 points and Rhodes would of have 13 points. Is this fair? Of course not. Thats why under the new system Addai would have 18 points due to the bonus, and Rhodes would remain on 13 points.

]Bingo, I don't have the time, data, or motivation to rank 160+ players, especially when having to take into account a round number fetish (100 yards is vastly superior to 99 yards, pile on the points!).

Already answered with:

What this comes down to is you not willing to accept a scoring system different to the default because you'll have to re rank your players. Boo hoo.

BigKaboom2 wrote:
Matthew wrote:
Qballer has addressed his concerns over having a player rack up big yardage and no touchdowns, so I've addressed this.

How did he address them? And why do you need to address them too? Shouldn't they be addressed by saying "I don't think this guy is going to score very many TDs - I'll go ahead and not draft him"?

Already answered this in the text you quoted.

Are you familiar with last season's fantasy leaders? Confused Basically you're screwing up something that already makes sense (4 pts to 6 pts for passing TD) then overcompensating for it by boosting the value of RBs who get a lot of carries through the roof.

Already answered with:

Basically, what I wanted to do was instead of lowering the qb production, I wanted to make it so the other categories were lifted upto that level. If you guys want it differently, it can be changed.

READING HELPZ SUMTIMES.

wouldnt mind being in, just PM me the site info or whatever. If i cant be there for the draft im ok with an auto draft for my team and taking my licks lol

Dr Gonzo,
http://fantasysports.yahoo.com/

The league ID is 367722 and the password is vick4mvp

Yards are rewarded....one point for every ten yards. They are not nearly as valuable as TDs however thus why standard leagues are based around who scores the most points as well as various secondary statistics.

You absolutely did not respond to this. The "answer" you quoted did not mention the comparative values of yards and TDs at all. It merely said that people who make bad picks need to be bailed out by an altered scoring system, otherwise they're somehow being treated unfairly despite being able to pick absolutely anyone on the board that they wish.

especially when having to take into account a round number fetish (100 yards is vastly superior to 99 yards, pile on the points!).

You did not respond to this part either. Explain why getting 100 yds deserves a ten point bonus and 99 or 98 yards deserves zero bonus points.

How did [Qballer] address them?

You certainly did not answer this, and I don't even know what it means since Qballer has no way of changing the scoring system.

And why do you need to address them too?

So you needed to address them because Qballer was unhappy with the standard settings? I'm unhappy with the modified settings, how about you address those?

Shouldn't they be addressed by saying "I don't think this guy is going to score very many TDs - I'll go ahead and not draft him"?

Certainly never answered this.

Basically, what I wanted to do was instead of lowering the qb production, I wanted to make it so the other categories were lifted upto that level.

This is also irrelevant to the question you claim it answered. To rephrase what you wrote: "Basically, what you wanted to do was instead of lowering the QB production, raise it indiscriminately, then overcompensate massively by boosting backs who get a lot of carries into the stratosphere (but not enough) while lesser backs get hosed."

Top 5 Fantasy Players 2007 - Standard Scoring

Code:

1   Tom Brady   378   , NE QB   
2   LaDainian Tomlinson   293   , SD RB   
3   Tony Romo   283   , Dal QB   
4   Randy Moss   280   , NE WR   
5   Brian Westbrook   269   , Phi RB   
6   Peyton Manning   268   , Ind QB   
7   Ben Roethlisberger   248   , Pit QB   
8   Drew Brees   244   , NO QB   
9   Derek Anderson   243   , Cle QB   
10   Brett Favre   237   , GB QB   
11   Matt Hasselbeck   231   , Sea QB   
12   Joseph Addai   222   , Ind RB   
13   Adrian Peterson   222   , Min RB   
14   Carson Palmer   221   , Cin QB   
15   Terrell Owens   218   , Dal WR   
16   Braylon Edwards212   , Cle WR  P   
17   Clinton Portis   210   , Was RB  P   
18   Jamal Lewis   207   , Cle RB   
19   Kurt Warner   199   , Ari QB   
20   Reggie Wayne   198   , Ind WR   
21   Jay Cutler           198   , Den QB  P   
22   Chargers D/ST   198   , SD D/ST   
23   Donovan McNabb 197   , Phi QB   
24   Larry Fitzgerald   188   , Ari WR   
25   Marion Barber   187   , Dal RB   
26   Chad Johnson   185   , Cin WR   
27   T.J. Houshmandzadeh   179   , Cin WR   
28   Marques Colston   176   , NO WR  P   
29   Jon Kitna   175   , Det QB   
30   David Garrard   175   , Jac QB   


Top 5 Fantasy Players 2007 - Modified Scoring

Code:

1   Tom Brady*+   461.02
2   Tony Romo*   312.67
3   Randy Moss*+   302.65
4   LaDainian Tomlinson*+   271.79
5   Brett Favre*   261.7
6   Peyton Manning*   258.55
7   Drew Brees   243.56
8   Brian Westbrook*+   237.2
9   Matt Hasselbeck*   233.77
10   Ben Roethlisberger*   233.28
11   Derek Anderson*   225.24
12   Adrian L. Peterson*   218.45
13   Terrell Owens*+   218
14   Carson Palmer   209.12
15   Joseph Addai*   201.8
16   Braylon Edwards*   200.45
17   Reggie Wayne*   195.7
18   Clinton Portis   194.85
19   Donovan McNabb   194.28
20   Jamal Lewis   193.6
21   Chad Johnson*   172.35
22   Larry Fitzgerald*   170.45
23   Jay Cutler   170.19
24   Willis McGahee*   169.9
25   Kurt Warner   169.09
26   Marques Colston   166.1
27   Willie Parker*   166
28   Marion Barber*   164.85
29   David Garrard   161.43
30   T.J. Houshmandzadeh*   159.85

This could go on forever in circles. This will be the last time I answer questions I've already answered.

You absolutely did not respond to this. The "answer" you quoted did not mention the comparative values of yards and TDs at all. It merely said that people who make bad picks need to be bailed out by an altered scoring system, otherwise they're somehow being treated unfairly despite being able to pick absolutely anyone on the board that they wish.

When did I say anything about bad picks? When I was dominating last season, was it because of a good pick (Brady) or because the scoring system was flawed?

You did not respond to this part either. Explain why getting 100 yds deserves a ten point bonus and 99 or 98 yards deserves zero bonus points.

It's just the nature of the beast. What happens if a player breaks a 80 yard run and is stopped on the 1 yard line? He misses out on a TD right, even thought its just one yard away.

You certainly did not answer this, and I don't even know what it means since Qballer has no way of changing the scoring system.

He said he was unhappy with the way that yardage was rewarded (or unrewarded) and offered an alternative.

That's him addressing it.

So you needed to address them because Qballer was unhappy with the standard settings? I'm unhappy with the modified settings, how about you address those?

Because you want it changed just to make it more convenient for you. If more people want it changed the way you like it, then I'll change it.

But I'm not going to change it just because one guy might be slightly inconvenienced.

Certainly never answered this.

Because that was the problem last year in this league, it was too heavily driven on TD's. What happens if AP gets 30 TD's? People will bitch about how heavily favoured the league scoring is to touchdowns. I'm trying to balance it out.

This is also irrelevant to the question you claim it answered. To rephrase what you wrote: "Basically, what you wanted to do was instead of lowering the QB production, raise it indiscriminately, then overcompensate massively by boosting backs who get a lot of carries into the stratosphere (but not enough) while lesser backs get hosed."

Lesser backs don't get hosed, it's just bringing yards into the equation so it's not so reliant on TD's scored. And I never raised QB production, it was like that from previous years. Plus I like it how you fail to acknowledge that interceptions are -4 which will bring down QB production as well.

When I was dominating last season, was it because of a good pick (Brady) or because the scoring system was flawed?

...Both. Quarterbacks were inflated in value with 6 pts per TD, so you got 100 extra points over the course of the season compared to a standard league.

It's just the nature of the beast. What happens if a player breaks a 80 yard run and is stopped on the 1 yard line? He misses out on a TD right, even thought its just one yard away.

What beast? The 100 yd bonus is completely arbitrary and alien to the game of football, unlike your example. They aren't even vaguely comparable, as one is based on a fetish for large round numbers with many zeroes in them, and one is based on the physical properties of the field. Which one of those sounds more reasonable?

He said he was unhappy with the way that yardage was rewarded (or unrewarded) and offered an alternative.

That's him addressing it.

Alright, I shall add that to the Matthew Damian Unabridged Dictionary.

Because you want it changed just to make it more convenient for you. If more people want it changed the way you like it, then I'll change it.

So it's just a popularity contest, not any sort of rational decision.

But I'm not going to change it just because one guy might be slightly inconvenienced.

So you are indeed going to prepare your own rankings based on the scoring you've devised? I don't see how this could take any less than 10 hours, which seems like an inconvenience to me. Unless of course you're just going to wing it as most everyone did last year. (Not that this inevitably generates a bad team).

Because that was the problem last year in this league, it was too heavily driven on TD's. What happens if AP gets 30 TD's? People will bitch about how heavily favoured the league scoring is to touchdowns. I'm trying to balance it out.

Ignore them. Touchdowns are the most important thing in football and should be rewarded accordingly. If they understand the scoring they will not use high picks on backs that score very few rushing TDs.

Lesser backs don't get hosed, it's just bringing yards into the equation so it's not so reliant on TD's scored. And I never raised QB production, it was like that from previous years. Plus I like it how you fail to acknowledge that interceptions are -4 which will bring down QB production as well.

I showed you the rankings. Running backs all plummet (lesser ones more than top-tier due to 10 pt bonuses) -QBs go through the roof. As you can see from the standard scoring points leaders, they're quite balanced. There's a 203-point dropoff from 1st to 30th in standard and a 302-point dropoff in yours. QBs were very strong last year while RB's were not, and you're only widening that gap with these settings.

maybe instead of the 100 yd RB/WR bonus and the 300 yd QB bonus we should get rid of them and then make rushing and reception yards 10 yards per point instead of 20? then a player with a 100 yd/0 TD game would get 10 points.

...Both. Quarterbacks were inflated in value with 6 pts per TD, so you got 100 extra points over the course of the season compared to a standard league.

I had him in a standard league as well last year, and it pretty much ended the same way with him. QB's have an inflated rating, so instead of deflating their value, I raised the other positions potential. Why can't you understand this?

What beast? The 100 yd bonus is completely arbitrary and alien to the game of football, unlike your example. They aren't even vaguely comparable, as one is based on a fetish for large round numbers with many zeroes in them, and one is based on the physical properties of the field. Which one of those sounds more reasonable?

This is why we can't have a productive conversation, it goes way off topic with immature and vague responses. Who anywhere has a fetish for round numbers? Who said they have such? Or maybe I should point out the word "zeroes" only has one e in their, like you pointed out I made an error by typing "comma's"

Alright, I shall add that to the Matthew Damian Unabridged Dictionary.

Once again, wtf? Does this have ANYTHING to do with the conversation?

So it's just a popularity contest, not any sort of rational decision.

Yes, thats exactly what it is. If the majority of players want 1000 point rewards for 10 yards running, I'll set it at that for them. If one player wants to bitch and whine about being inconvenienced with a different scoring system, then thats his problem.

So you are indeed going to prepare your own rankings based on the scoring you've devised? I don't see how this could take any less than 10 hours, which seems like an inconvenience to me. Unless of course you're just going to wing it as most everyone did last year. (Not that this inevitably generates a bad team).

It's upto the individual on how long they take to pre rank. Notice you're the only one complaining about having to change your rankings?

Ignore them. Touchdowns are the most important thing in football and should be rewarded accordingly. If they understand the scoring they will not use high picks on backs that score very few rushing TDs.

So make other people unhappy to not inconvenience you?

I showed you the rankings. Running backs all plummet (lesser ones more than top-tier due to 10 pt bonuses) -QBs go through the roof. As you can see from the standard scoring points leaders, they're quite balanced. There's a 203-point dropoff from 1st to 30th in standard and a 302-point dropoff in yours. QBs were very strong last year while RB's were not, and you're only widening that gap with these settings.

You know you're using select information to try and make your case stronger. But i know your motive for wanting change and tough luck, it's not going to change just for you. If you don't like it, maybe you should try to find a new league.

maybe instead of the 100 yd RB/WR bonus and the 300 yd QB bonus we should get rid of them and then make rushing and reception yards 10 yards per point instead of 20? then a player with a 100 yd/0 TD game would get 10 points

What about a 5 point bonus? I have no problem with the point per 10 yards, and keep the point per 20 for throwing, so the 5 point per 100 is just a suggestion.

I had him in a standard league as well last year, and it pretty much ended the same way with him. QB's have an inflated rating, so instead of deflating their value, I raised the other positions potential. Why can't you understand this?

I can't understand it because it isn't what happened and is thus incomprehensible. I already showed that you boosted the QBs to be the most important position, then crippled the RBS, whereas the standard scoring is extremely well balanced, hence why it's standard.

]This is why we can't have a productive conversation, it goes way off topic with immature and vague responses. Who anywhere has a fetish for round numbers? Who said they have such? Or maybe I should point out the word "zeroes" only has one e in their, like you pointed out I made an error by typing "comma's"

"Zeroes" is an absolutely correct spelling. You pedantically lecturing me on "inverted commas" while using one incorrectly within the same sentence was rather absurd.

Alright, I shall add that to the Matthew Damian Unabridged Dictionary.

Once again, wtf? Does this have ANYTHING to do with the conversation?

And you're accusing me of hypocrisy...

If you want to define "addressing a problem" as "suggesting a possible alternative," that's great but I'm never going to accept such a backward proclamation.

Yes, thats exactly what it is. If the majority of players want 1000 point rewards for 10 yards running, I'll set it at that for them. If one player wants to bitch and whine about being inconvenienced with a different scoring system, then thats his problem.

So the scoring is decided on by people who take defenses and kickers in the fourth round. Wonderful.

It's upto the individual on how long they take to pre rank. Notice you're the only one complaining about having to change your rankings?

How long are you going to take? Or are you just going to wing it and draft like you normally would, then see what happens?

Ignore them. Touchdowns are the most important thing in football and should be rewarded accordingly. If they understand the scoring they will not use high picks on backs that score very few rushing TDs.

So make other people unhappy to not inconvenience you?

That's not what I said at all, nor could it even be described that way. I'm talking about issues of balance and value, you're talking about changing it for the sake of changing it when you don't even understand the consequences of the changes (even when I give you data to the contrary, but then again you can't possibly use statistics to make any conclusions!).

You know you're using select information to try and make your case stronger.

What a despicable tactic.

But i know your motive for wanting change and tough luck, it's not going to change just for you. If you don't like it, maybe you should try to find a new league.

What's the motive? I already have other leagues, I just figured this one would actually be fun instead of just putting on a blindfold and throwing a dart at the draft board.

maybe instead of the 100 yd RB/WR bonus and the 300 yd QB bonus we should get rid of them and then make rushing and reception yards 10 yards per point instead of 20? then a player with a 100 yd/0 TD game would get 10 points

What about a 5 point bonus? I have no problem with the point per 10 yards, and keep the point per 20 for throwing, so the 5 point per 100 is just a suggestion.

10 yard per point for rec yds/rush yds is standard, 25 for passing is usually standard but with the insane 6 pts per TD that would blow them up even more.

well as of right now, the league's set at 50 yds per point for passing and 20 yds per point for rushing and receiving. i think we can all agree at this point to make it 10 yds per point for rushing and receiving. i also wouldn't mind bringing the 100 yd bonus to 5.

If it's okay with you guys, I request that the live draft be moved ahead by a day or two from its current schedule.

What day/time do you want?

This is the date that appears for me on the league page:

Fri Aug 29 4:00am SGT

I don't exactly know what time appears on others because of time zone differences.
The same time is okay but make it the next day or day after that.

Sat/Sun Aug 30/31 4:00am SGT

That would be Friday or Saturday my time at 4 PM.

I prefer the old time myself, since I have a surgery Friday morning, but i could do Saturday 4 PM EST.

nooooooooo i prefer the current time because it falls on 1 of my 2 days off from work this week.