Apolyton Fantasy Football

[Guynemer]

The idea of subtracting points (albeit only 0.1/attempt) from rushers for doing their job -- running the ball -- just seems...wrong.

Agreed. I'd rather they get +0.05 per attempt, or even zero, than a negative.

Although, when thinking about it... a rush of zero yards is a negative play, by any reasonable definition. The same as an incompletion. Maybe a smaller negative, -0.05?

x-post

[Al B. Sure!]

Well we're not rewarding rushing attempts. That would be retarded to give points for rushing attempts (though it's similar in principle to what I find nonsensical and is the rewarding for practically throwing the ball 50 times a game and everyone else seems fine with that). Giving points for rushing attempts would be doing the OPPOSITE of what we're intending to do which is reward the high yards per carry guys.

The idea is to subtract from rushing attempts.

[Al B. Sure!]

Jaguar, the new QB system looks very in line with my thinking.

Check it, on the old system, Brees outscored Brady by 15 points! That makes no sense given the fact that Brady had an MVP season and Brees had one of his worst. With the new system, Brady has a sizable 40 point advantage!

That's what I'm talking about! THAT is exactly my thinking!

[Al B. Sure!]

Old system:
Peyton: 533
Brees: 509
Brady: 494
Rivers: 471
Ryan: 428
Schaub: 424
Rodgers: 415
Eli: 414

New system:
Peyton: 524
Brady: 522
Rivers: 500
Brees: 482
Schaub: 439
Rodgers: 433
Ryan: 423
Eli: 404


In the old system, Brees was the #2 QB out of sheer volume (658 attempts! even though he threw 22 picks and had a pedestrian 7.02 Y/A). With the new system, much more deserving Brady and Rivers leapfrog over him and Brees is more appropriately the last of the top-tier before the Schaub/Rodgers/Ryan/Eli group. Even in the next group, Rodgers and Schaub appropriately leapfrog over Matt Ryan (that Matt Ryan was the #5 QB tells how much the original scoring needed an adjustment) and all of Eli's interceptions count against him as the difference between him and the preceding man widens from 1 point to 19 points.

I like this. This is much improved

[Al B. Sure!]

Even rounding out the top-10, the next two QB's were Carson Palmer and Josh Freeman. Under the old system, Palmer stood at 394 with Freeman quite a bit behind him at 376. With the new system, Palmer's 14 more interceptions (over Freeman's) are not made up for by his 500 additional yards so they basically swap: Freeman at 392, Palmer at 376.

Palmer's no longer rewarded for volume as much so his 14 more INTs come to hurt him, even though he did throw 500 more yards. The much more careful and efficient Freeman is rightfully above him.



I can't wait til all the naysayers chime in. I know it's coming but it'll be trying to wrap my head around how you don't see how this is obviously superior.

[Al B. Sure!]

An interesting comparison is Roethlisberger vs. Vick because they each played 12 and 11 games and put up near-identical numbers so they're fairly comparable:

Roethlisberger: 240/389 (61.7%), 3200 yards (8.23 Y/A) 17TD 5INT 32sacks
Vick: 233/372 (62.6%), 3018 yards (8.11 Y/A) 21TD 6INT 34sacks

Under the old, Vick had a small advantage at 306 points vs. 298.

Now, they're both at 324.

I'd still be inclined to say Vick was better (4 more TDs and slightly more accurate), but it makes sense that those positives of Vick were countered by the 182 less yards, the slightly smaller Y/A, the additional INT and the two more sacks.

What do you think?

(I'm assuming rushing is not being counted in this spreadsheet, since Vick and Rodgers are so low, right?)

[Ben Kenobi]

Albert, you are for a system that exposes Eli?

[-Jrabbit]

Back to the RBs, it just seems a shame that bell-cow backs asked to run out the clock in the 4th quarter are penalized, albeit in a minor way. And when the best argument in favor of something seems to be, 'well, it's just a tiny penalty'... Well, I don't see what that buys you; it just burns a stat category.

Haven't looked at the QB changes.

Any changes to the D/ST spot, Jag?

[Al B. Sure!]

Albert, you are for a system that exposes Eli?

Exposes Eli? He led the league in interceptions with a terrible 25 picks!

In either system he's still the 8th best QB for fantasy, but in the new system, his picks bring him down a little in points, if not in rankings. That is appropriate. He shouldn't be one point less than Aaron Rodgers.

[Ben Kenobi]

In either system he's still the 8th best QB for fantasy, but in the new system, his picks bring him down a little in points, if not in rankings. That is appropriate. He shouldn't be one point less than Aaron Rodgers.

Interesintg these ratings.

[Al B. Sure!]

Interesintg these ratings.

Eli has very quietly been a top-10 fantasy QB in most formats for a few years now. I'm wondering if only now, after consecutive 4000 yard campaigns, fantasy players will finally pick up on him being a top-10 guy.

Hell, he's been about as valuable as Carson Palmer over the course of their careers.

Consider, Eli and Carson Palmer have been starting QB's since 2004. Palmer, due to injuries, has started 6 less games than Eli.

Yet check their career stats:

Palmer: 22,694 yards 154TD 100INT
Eli: 22,646 yards 156TD 113INT

Both QB's have had a pair of 4000 yard seasons though Eli is the one you most expect to repeat that feat at least a few more times whereas Palmer enters retirement

The point is that if you started a keeper league in 2004, for all the apparent flashiness and fantasy hype of Carson Palmer, you would have, over 7 seasons, done the same with Eli.

[Ben Kenobi]

The point is that if you started a keeper league in 2004, for all the apparent flashiness and fantasy hype of Carson Palmer, you would have, over 7 seasons, done the same with Eli.

The problem is that in a keeper league I would have had to pay so much more to get Eli in the first place.

[Al B. Sure!]

The problem is that in a keeper league I would have had to pay so much more to get Eli in the first place.

Carson Palmer was a first overall pick as well. Why would Eli have cost more than Palmer to draft in 2004? Cause of Kitna? Warner was in New York, though. The Bengals had been 8-8 in 2003 whereas the Giants had been 4-12 so you couldn't make the argument that the Giants were a better team at the time.

I'm lost how the hell Eli would have cost more than Palmer in 2004.

[MRT144]

QB's is the one thing that SHOULD get nerfed. RB's and WR's are debatable.

You really don't mind my Bradford/Freeman comparison where better accuracy and much more yards per attempt leads to less fantasy points? Where volume means more than efficiency?

No. I do not want QBs nerfed in a 14 team league where RBs are few and far between.

[MRT144]

Even rounding out the top-10, the next two QB's were Carson Palmer and Josh Freeman. Under the old system, Palmer stood at 394 with Freeman quite a bit behind him at 376. With the new system, Palmer's 14 more interceptions (over Freeman's) are not made up for by his 500 additional yards so they basically swap: Freeman at 392, Palmer at 376.

Palmer's no longer rewarded for volume as much so his 14 more INTs come to hurt him, even though he did throw 500 more yards. The much more careful and efficient Freeman is rightfully above him.



I can't wait til all the naysayers chime in. I know it's coming but it'll be trying to wrap my head around how you don't see how this is obviously superior.

See, Jag actually knows how to do things, and you don't. Fact.