Fantasy Football Scoring Feedback Thread

[Jaguar]

I am soliciting your opinions on the scoring system while it's still fresh in your minds. Please participate if you were in the D/ST league, or the Auction league (which elected to use D/ST scoring).

Particularly, which positions do you think were too important? Which weren't important enough? Can you give me an example of a player who was outscored by someone else at his position, despite a clearly-inferior day?

Your input is valuable. For reference, here's a comparison of Yahoo! default scoring vs D/ST scoring.

QB:
 1.  Tom Brady          312.24		Tom Brady		548.50
 5.  Aaron Rodgers      290.22		Aaron Rodgers		487.05
 9.  Matthew Stafford   256.88		Tony Romo		417.80
13.  Josh Freeman       236.84		Carson Palmer		387.20
19.  Ryan Fitzpatrick   204.30		Sam Bradford		342.60
25.  Christian Ponder   168.48		Christian Ponder	248.35

RB:

 1.  Adrian Peterson    266.30		Adrian Peterson		513.55
 5.  Ray Rice           199.80		Ray Rice		383.50
 9.  C.J. Spiller       177.90		Jamaal Charles		338.80
13.  Michael Turner     143.60		Steven Jackson		277.85
19.  Mikel Leshoure     130.90		LeSean McCoy		233.85
25.  Ryan Mathews        97.90		Joique Bell		203.75
37.  Michael Bush        77.40		Jonathan Dwyer		136.45

WR:
 1.  Brandon Marshall   199.80		Calvin Johnson		457.95
 5.  Dez Bryant         166.20		Vincent Jackson		368.92
 9.  Victor Cruz        155.90		Dez Bryant		338.56
13.  Reggie Wayne       144.90		Victor Cruz		324.55
19.  Mike Wallace       129.10		Stevie Johnson		272.55
25.  Miles Austin       117.80		Brandon Lloyd		253.40
37.  Golden Tate        102.52		Donnie Avery		216.20
49.  Brandon LaFell      84.80		Antonio Brown		189.47

TE:
 1.  Tony Gonzalez      136.00		Tony Gonzalez		285.40
 5.  Greg Olsen         104.70		Rob Gronkowski		252.60
 9.  Brandon Myers       98.30		Jermaine Gresham	211.95
13.  Martellus Bennett   88.40		Kyle Rudolph		168.11
19.  Dwayne Allen        66.50		Jermichael Finley	147.85

DEF:
 1.  Chicago            191.00		Chicago			444.62
 5.  New England        161.00		Houston			379.83
 9.  Cincinnati         133.00		Atlanta			318.77
13.  Cleveland          120.00		St Louis		310.96
19.  New Orleans        107.00		Miami			281.46

K:
 1.  Stephen Gostkowski 150.00		Stephen Gostkowski	148.00
 7.  Justin Tucker      129.00		Justin Tucker		129.00
13.  Phil Dawson        123.00		Phil Dawson		121.00

Feel free to use this data to make your points. Obviously, the big change here is that kickers and TDs have become less important, in favor of broader measures of good play.

[Berzerker]

overall those numbers show a decent balance and the changes i'd suggest aint worth messing with the settings

i really dont see much anyway, the Ds could be toned down a bit - but thats more a matter of taste, we aint use to high scoring Ds - and I'd reduce the penalty/reward for rushes and receptions - and 50 yds/ret

i was thinking maybe 5 yds/pt instead of 4, but that would make qbs and Ds even more powerful

good stats, Jag - all i can do is nitpick

[MRT144]

I think the most bothersome part of scoring this year was the percieved variance between weeks. Could you get pull up some data on scoring by team?

[-Jrabbit]

This is based strictly on my perception, having done no data-based analysis: QBs are somewhat marginalized, while defenses are overpowered.

I think the upside for defenses is too high, while it seemed like QBs were nerfed. Dunno, maybe there just weren't that many great QB performances this year. It just seemed like, week after week, mediocre QB performances didn't hurt much (though more than two turnovers were brutal), but one could overcome deficits by the rest of the team with just a big defensive score. But again -- just a perception at this point.

Overall, the system struck me as a bit...mercurial.

[Jaguar]

QBs were nerfed relative to last year. The 2011 season brought QB play to new highs, and it looks like that's here to stay.

I suspect most of the "variance" is just a form of money illusion. Somehow watching the opposing running back score 40 points to help beat you 220-175 feels "worse" than losing 100-75, even though that's actually completely irrational.

There are some things that affect week-to-week performance, though, and maybe we need to take a look at them. I suspect the RB attempts penalty slightly increases week-to-week variance in RB scoring, while the QB attempts penalty actually reduces variance by balancing Andrew Luck-type games with Russell Wilson-type games. I'd probably angle for reducing that, as well as the scoring per yard from scrimmage.

The ideas about defenses, I think, are completely misguided. The Bears steamrolled all sorts of fantasy leagues in their first few weeks, but they mellowed out reasonably. Defenses might actually be weaker in this league.

[SlowwHand]

From my experience in DST, it varied wildly, just as any other position. I might get +40, I might get -1.5. That suggests to me that it's in perspective.

[Ben Kenobi]

There should be a Jaguar bonus. Players should get a 10 percent bonus just for bathing in Jag's awesomeness.

Running my numbers - my only concern with this league is the turnovers, and frankly, I'm happy with the change. Turnovers should hurt, it was odd seeing decent PR weeks in IDP with shockingly bad weeks in Auction. Sadly PR's gone from being massively advantaged by the scoring change, to coming back to the mean for QBs over the last two years. His TD/INT numbers are still respectable which basically says it all about how good his numbers were before.

I will make a recommendation. Would it be possible instead of tiering defensive performance to have continuous formulas? For example, points against. That should balance some of the swinginess.

[-Jrabbit]

This is literally the first D/ST league I've played in since maybe 04/05, so I have limited perspective at best. And back then, if you didn't have a TD return of some kind, defensive scoring was background noise. I like the more powerful defense, but still think this might go too far. My thoughts on this are likely affected by the fact that they went for a song in the draft (I don't think any defense went for more than about $8), yet played a huge role in team success.

Regarding the QB nerfage, it seems nearly impossible for a QB to take over a game. Maybe that was the intent. But with WR/RB, you get a duo, and there's a pretty good chance that several teams will have a killer corps. The QB is just one guy, and seems set up to fail (or, more accurately, to be ineffectual). Big scores are hard to achieve, and the high TO penalties hit them hardest because they handle the ball on every play - not just their rush/pass attempts.

[SlowwHand]

A fumble or an interception is a big deal, as is not allowing points to be scored. Those are the Big 3. Yardage yielded, not so much.

[MRT144]

QBs were nerfed relative to last year. The 2011 season brought QB play to new highs, and it looks like that's here to stay.

I suspect most of the "variance" is just a form of money illusion. Somehow watching the opposing running back score 40 points to help beat you 220-175 feels "worse" than losing 100-75, even though that's actually completely irrational.

There are some things that affect week-to-week performance, though, and maybe we need to take a look at them. I suspect the RB attempts penalty slightly increases week-to-week variance in RB scoring, while the QB attempts penalty actually reduces variance by balancing Andrew Luck-type games with Russell Wilson-type games. I'd probably angle for reducing that, as well as the scoring per yard from scrimmage.

The ideas about defenses, I think, are completely misguided. The Bears steamrolled all sorts of fantasy leagues in their first few weeks, but they mellowed out reasonably. Defenses might actually be weaker in this league.

I'm thinking more along the lines that one week I'd score in the 200+ range, then the next week the sub 130 range. I don't know if that's just my perception, or just my team.

[Berzerker]

the powerful Ds do make it even more interesting, do you play the matchups or sacrifice a good pick on a solid D and hope they dont fall apart? I'd hate to lose a play off game because my opponent nabbed a mediocre D playing a terrible O like AZ of KC, but I took Detroit in sal cap vs AZ after Seattle stomped them and the Cards put up big numbers and Oak skunked KC.

one D could score 60-85 and another could lose points, that is a pretty big swing making the Ds the most important pos imo, but I suppose Ds should be more relevant than what we've done in the past.

[Berzerker]

btw, i picked up Indy vs KC

just in case I wanna try that again

I gave up a good pick for the SF D and i got scared off by Brady and now Seattle is rolling I really was hoping to use SF in week 16 if i was still in it

[MRT144]

I'd actually be all for taking yards allowed out of the picture.

[snoopy369]

Yards allowed seems relevant to me...

[-Jrabbit]

So you're in favor of screwing the "bend don't break" teams?

Teams that win their games in the first half with dominant performances routinely sit back and let their opponents dink for yardage, as long as any scoring costs significant clock minutes. It's not uncommon to see blowout wins where time of possession and yardage are roughly equal.

I tend to agree with Sloww on this issue. Yardage allowed is a poor measure of relative defensive prowess.