Fantasy Football Discussion Thread

[-Jrabbit]

.04? What kind of anal setting is that?

It's 25 yds/point, Sloww. Not actually all that exotic.

[-Jrabbit]

d/p

[MRT144]

Communist scum, clearly.

We've argued about this before. I'm for more freedom in drafting and you favor RB heavy draft strategies.

[-Jrabbit]

????

[MRT144]

????

Oh cmon, you want to nerf qbs adn TEs

[-Jrabbit]

I'm sure I have no idea to what you are referring.

[SlowwHand]

Nerf QB's? I don't know what that is.

[-Jrabbit]

Nerf QB's? I don't know what that is.

To nerf -- to soften or make less effective, to take the edge off.

A term often used in gaming, e.g., "They totally nerfed the Whale resource in Civ4."

In this context, Jaguar's suggestion would "nerf" QBs by increasing the penalty for INTs.

[MRT144]

To nerf -- to soften or make less effective, to take the edge off.

A term often used in gaming, e.g., "They totally nerfed the Whale resource in Civ4."

In this context, Jaguar's suggestion would "nerf" QBs by increasing the penalty for INTs.

And other things.

[Jaguar]

I haven't actually calculated it, but I suspect it doesn't change the value of QBs much at all.

Remember, we don't care about the total points scored. We just care about relative points scored. Sure, a larger INT penalty lowers the average QB's score. But it also increases the value of Tom Brady relative to Jay Cutler. This makes Brady more valuable, even when he is scoring less.

This isn't like Civ, where nerfing horsemen makes people build them less. Everyone starts a QB, and wants their QB to be significantly better than average. Penalizing interceptions more increases the value of low-interception QBs.

[SlowwHand]

RB is going to be higher priority, to me, because you have to start at least 2. Close behind is QB, because "elite" QB's are few. WR? You can never tell. This is before you even throw in the injury factor.

[Zopperoni]

Sparrowhawk got away this week in Survival Football. Looks like we'll have another crapshoot duel in Week 12

[-Jrabbit]

I haven't actually calculated it, but I suspect it doesn't change the value of QBs much at all.

Remember, we don't care about the total points scored. We just care about relative points scored. Sure, a larger INT penalty lowers the average QB's score. But it also increases the value of Tom Brady relative to Jay Cutler. This makes Brady more valuable, even when he is scoring less.

This isn't like Civ, where nerfing horsemen makes people build them less. Everyone starts a QB, and wants their QB to be significantly better than average. Penalizing interceptions more increases the value of low-interception QBs.

I agree, though lowering the value of TD passes is another alternative (vs raising INT penalties). I don't know if we want to get to the point of making a boom/bust-type QB undraftable. If you want to go that route, we should have the same discussion re fumbles.

[flash9286]

I would like to see QBs in general nerfed a little. I haven't delved into the numbers, but it is my feeling that you really need one of the small number of elite QBs to have a good chance at winning in our league.

[MRT144]

I would like to see QBs in general nerfed a little. I haven't delved into the numbers, but it is my feeling that you really need one of the small number of elite QBs to have a good chance at winning in our league.

The top 6 teams in DST are split between elite QBs and Elite RBs. I will say this though, no team in the top half has less than a top 10 qb.

I'll post the point by positon makeup for all the teams later this week.