Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?

renman · Post by **renman** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:31 am

Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by jdoggmms:
the points should only go to the individual player, and not the team DEF/ST. The ST really needs to be removed from the team defense because nobody drafts a defense based on how good their return men are. It might break a tie between two equally perceived defenses, but defense is defense, and special teams is special teams. Kicking is part of special teams, yet we have a separate position for that..makes no sense to me. Let defense be defense, and return points go to the rare breed of lightning quick offensive players. A lot of their real life value is based on their return ability, and aren't we trying to mimic real-life with this fantasy game of ours? I would agree with this, but I highly doubt it gets changed. We are too "used to" getting the return TD's, and people fear change.

However, it there is one contest that doesn't mind change....this is the one (and that is a GOOD thing!

)

It would solve the problems when people are complaining that they should receive ST points for when a team fakes a punt or field goal and runs it for a score.

[/QUOTE]This is funny, because before the net, hardly any PAY services had D/ST.

The original post here is a great post. Why are kickers separated?

Get rid of ST. Give the points to Royal, and then more accurately score the DEF's by including yardage totals and MINUS points for thins like 48 PTS against.

INTS and FUMBLES are minus points.

48 pts against should be minus points.

A shutout and low yards against should yield 15-20 points, thus enhancing a chance to earn a W, and not just int/F/sacks where sometimes a team giving up 35 points scores more than one giving up 14. [/QUOTE]Some good ideas here. Imagine how much more strategy would be involved if the "def" position was scored using something closer to the above example? We see examples all the time of defenses that played horrible outscoring defenses that played brilliantly based on our current scoring system.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:31 am

Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Obviously I read the rules and knew I wasn't getting ANYTHING from him (point wise) in the return game. :rolleyes: you knew you were taking on the injury potential from likely kickoff/punt returns, so you were getting something!

[ October 21, 2009, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:34 am

Originally posted by BillyWaz:

The question is, would you have spent say 20% more on them had you had Royal or Bush so you could secure the "double points" (if implemented)? Billy ... I'm on your side on this. It is NO different than having the QB/WR. Its single points from two different plays (DEF/WR). If you team is weak ... it makes sense to match them up. If your strong ... you want to diversify IMO.

The Double points (single point from two different plays) for WR/DEF is a non-issue (like Double points for QB/WR)

UYT

[ October 21, 2009, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Ugly Yellow Tomatoes ]

renman · Post by **renman** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:46 am

Ugly yellow is 100% right. I have peeked at this thread a couple times today and wasn't understanding what some were talking about regarding double points. I at first thought someone was saying punt returns should count as double (12) for the player who scored.

Now I see they don't really mean double points at all but are refering to the strategy of being the recipient of a scored TD through two different positions on the same play. ie QB-WR, or QB-RB (dump off pass), or in this case, Def/st-WR (who happens to also return kicks).

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:09 am

SINCE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IMPLEMENTS. SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS PLAYER VICTORY POINTS FOR WINNING AND LOSING.

ONE LEAGUE IS WAS IN REWARDED PLAYERS WITH 3PTS IF THEIR TEAM WON THIER GAME AND SUBTRACTED THREE IF THEY LOSE.

JUST LIKE THE EXAMPLE WITH ROYAL JUST BECAUSE HE DID DO ANYHTING OFFENSIVELY HIS WAS INSTURMENTAL IN THEM WINNING HENCE HIS FANTASY SCORE WOULD HAVE BEEN 3 PTS.

JUST LIKE IF A TEAM GOES UP 21 NOTHING BECAUSE OF DEFENSE/SPECIAL TEAM SCORES SHOULD OFFENSIVE PLAYERS BE 100% PUNSHISED FOR THAT.

THEY MAY NOT BE NEED TO SCORE SO THEY SHOULD GET SOMETHING.

ALSO AT THE SAME TIME IF YOU ARE BEHIND 28-0 AND A Q.B. IS FORCED TO THROW AND GETS 300 YARDS IN GARBAGE TIME SURE GIVE HIM HIS FANTASY STATS BUT SUBTRACT THREE POINTS FOR HIM BEING ON THE LOSING TEAM.

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:10 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Obviously I read the rules and knew I wasn't getting ANYTHING from him (point wise) in the return game. :rolleyes: you knew you were taking on the injury potential from likely kickoff/punt returns, so you were getting something! [/QUOTE]So if the Colts would have said that Anthony Gonzalez was returning punts the week before the NFFC draft you wouldn't have touched him? Even though you thought he was going to break out this year, and were higher on him more than anyone I knew???

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:11 am

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:

The question is, would you have spent say 20% more on them had you had Royal or Bush so you could secure the "double points" (if implemented)? Billy ... I'm on your side on this. It is NO different than having the QB/WR. Its single points from two different plays (DEF/WR). If you team is weak ... it makes sense to match them up. If your strong ... you want to diversify IMO.

The Double points (single point from two different plays) for WR/DEF is a non-issue (like Double points for QB/WR)

UYT [/QUOTE]Yep, yep!

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:37 am

Wow, some pretty far-fetched comparisons here. how an anhyone say that a player scoring on a kick/punt return and his DST also scoring is the same thing as qb/wr? the first is the SAME player; the latter is notm. I'll bow out of this discussion now, as it's obvious we will continue to disagree on this.

Greg, you have my input.

bobsgym13 · Post by **bobsgym13** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:06 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
Wow, some pretty far-fetched comparisons here. how an anhyone say that a player scoring on a kick/punt return and his DST also scoring is the same thing as qb/wr? the first is the SAME player; the latter is notm. I'll bow out of this discussion now, as it's obvious we will continue to disagree on this.

Greg, you have my input. Sandman,

The 'double-dipping' is irrelevant. But, I like dropping the ST from the D's, giving it to the individual players, and making D's a better reflection of performance (-.25/pt allowed and yardage bonuses).

Bob

[ October 21, 2009, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: Bob Squad ]

williamhare · Post by **williamhare** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:09 am

Greg- don't change anything here. Its all knee-jerk because Royal owners are trying to justify the loss of potential points.

As I left for Vegas my 12-yr old partner told me to get Deshaun Jackson... and to also get the Eagles D/ST too so we get ALL his td's. . . . so ability to strategize is already in your contest.

If you loved Royal as a returner wouldn't the DEN
D/ST be a priority? Also, you could have picked them off the Waiver Wire in weeks #1 thru 3.
Tears aplenty!!!! I vote a fat "NO".
HMan