Why do most leagues still use a DST and K?
Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:48 pm
Is it just because people feel like, “Well, there are DST and kicking plays in the NFL, so why not reward them?”? Or is it just because every league we’ve ever been in has them, so we don’t question them? Maybe it’s time to take a closer look at how much we reward them in comparison to other positions, and either adjust their scoring or eliminate them altogether? Of course, if people might not admit it, but actually like wildcards in order to increase mostly-random luck, then this is a moot point.
Before anyone assumes that this is just sour grapes for us not having benefited from DSTs and Ks, in our 7 managed [non-DC] leagues:
• Our DSTs were: NYJ (6th), BAL (1st), TEN (8th), HOU (5th), BAL (1st), TEN (8th) and BAL (1st). So we’ve admittedly gotten lucky plenty of times with these.
• Our kickers were: Gould (4th), Bironas (13th), Gould (4th), Janikowski (7th), Bironas (13th), Hanson (12th) and Gostkowski (8th). Though our kickers weren’t the best, they ranged from good to average to below average.
Using NFFC 14-team league scoring data through 13 weeks, ignoring QBs, some observations:
1. IMO, DST and K are just like playing poker with wildcards – a way for fantasy teams to pad their scores without much skill or thought, seeing most owners wait until after round 9 or 10 to even start drafting the top DSTs and much longer even to draft kickers (often the last couple of rounds).
2. The top 14 DST scored 100-153 and the top 14 kickers scored 103-145.
3. DST
a. Compared to the best starting fantasy DST, which scored 153 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 12
• WRs: 18
• TEs: 5
b. Compared to the median starting fantasy DST, which scored 112.5 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 29
• WRs: 41
• TEs: 14
*** That's just 84 position players (plus 32 QBs) who scored more than a DST that was drafted around 180th!
c. Compared to the worst starting fantasy DST, which scored 100 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 30
• WRs: 50
• TEs: 20
4. K
a. Compared to the best starting fantasy K, which scored 145 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 14
• WRs: 22
• TEs: 5
b. Compared to the median starting fantasy K, which scored 117.5 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 26
• WRs: 40
• TEs: 12
*** That's just 78 position players (plus 32 QBs) who scored more than a kicker that was drafted around 207th!
c. Compared to the worst starting fantasy K, which scored 103 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 30
• WRs: 48
• TEs: 20
Only half of the DSTs in the top 14 were drafted among the top 14; three were drafted after 25th.
Only 6 of the top 14 kickers were drafted among the top 14; two were drafted after 25th and two were even free agents.
Though this volatility is similar to most of the other positions, the big difference is that almost every owner drafts all of their positional starters before a DST and most of their bench even before a kicker. Obviously, fantasy players understand the unpredictability and unreliability of these positions.
So is it really a good idea to continue to so greatly reward these positions with the same or more points as such a large number of starting positional players? IMO, we spend the vast majority of our time building and managing our teams around the positional players, with DST a slight afterthought and kickers a distant afterthought. And most of us struggle each week with trying to find that right RB2 or WR3 or flex that we hope can get us a reliable 10-12 points or more. Meanwhile, DSTs and kickers that were drafted much later routinely score just as much – just like wildcards in poker. Is it time to reconsider?
[ December 06, 2011, 08:15 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]
Before anyone assumes that this is just sour grapes for us not having benefited from DSTs and Ks, in our 7 managed [non-DC] leagues:
• Our DSTs were: NYJ (6th), BAL (1st), TEN (8th), HOU (5th), BAL (1st), TEN (8th) and BAL (1st). So we’ve admittedly gotten lucky plenty of times with these.
• Our kickers were: Gould (4th), Bironas (13th), Gould (4th), Janikowski (7th), Bironas (13th), Hanson (12th) and Gostkowski (8th). Though our kickers weren’t the best, they ranged from good to average to below average.
Using NFFC 14-team league scoring data through 13 weeks, ignoring QBs, some observations:
1. IMO, DST and K are just like playing poker with wildcards – a way for fantasy teams to pad their scores without much skill or thought, seeing most owners wait until after round 9 or 10 to even start drafting the top DSTs and much longer even to draft kickers (often the last couple of rounds).
2. The top 14 DST scored 100-153 and the top 14 kickers scored 103-145.
3. DST
a. Compared to the best starting fantasy DST, which scored 153 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 12
• WRs: 18
• TEs: 5
b. Compared to the median starting fantasy DST, which scored 112.5 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 29
• WRs: 41
• TEs: 14
*** That's just 84 position players (plus 32 QBs) who scored more than a DST that was drafted around 180th!
c. Compared to the worst starting fantasy DST, which scored 100 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 30
• WRs: 50
• TEs: 20
4. K
a. Compared to the best starting fantasy K, which scored 145 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 14
• WRs: 22
• TEs: 5
b. Compared to the median starting fantasy K, which scored 117.5 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 26
• WRs: 40
• TEs: 12
*** That's just 78 position players (plus 32 QBs) who scored more than a kicker that was drafted around 207th!
c. Compared to the worst starting fantasy K, which scored 103 points, the number of positional players who scored at least that much:
• RBs: 30
• WRs: 48
• TEs: 20
Only half of the DSTs in the top 14 were drafted among the top 14; three were drafted after 25th.
Only 6 of the top 14 kickers were drafted among the top 14; two were drafted after 25th and two were even free agents.
Though this volatility is similar to most of the other positions, the big difference is that almost every owner drafts all of their positional starters before a DST and most of their bench even before a kicker. Obviously, fantasy players understand the unpredictability and unreliability of these positions.
So is it really a good idea to continue to so greatly reward these positions with the same or more points as such a large number of starting positional players? IMO, we spend the vast majority of our time building and managing our teams around the positional players, with DST a slight afterthought and kickers a distant afterthought. And most of us struggle each week with trying to find that right RB2 or WR3 or flex that we hope can get us a reliable 10-12 points or more. Meanwhile, DSTs and kickers that were drafted much later routinely score just as much – just like wildcards in poker. Is it time to reconsider?
[ December 06, 2011, 08:15 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]