Is it time for PPR across the board?

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:42 am

Originally posted by Just Russ:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Just Russ:
[qb] I don't feel like giving 1PPR would alloe them to dominate here. I feel like it would make the 2 or 3 parts of a RBBC worth starting and competitive. [/QUOTE]Hello Russ....

I'm going to respond to this post with my last thoughts on this subject (no promises)....

I think the reason most who are posting in favor of 1-PPR for running backs believe that there is a movement towards WR's becoming more valuable in this format and are trying to stem the tide of those at the back of the draft going WR/WR or WR/WR/WR or even WR/WR/WR/WR.

The problem in my mind with this reasoning is that I believe it would have the exact OPPOSITE effect.

With the format currently in place, I believe the most valuable player is still the full time 3-down back who gobbles up tons of yardage and scores TD's. Its the rarest player in fantasy football right now and gives teams with those players a distinct advantage at RB1 over teams who don't have one. That's why a Michael Turner or Deangelo Williams are still 1st round picks and AP is still the acknowledged #1 even though they don't catch many passes.

Right now, as I stated in an earlier post, those going WR heavy in earlier rounds have to roll the dice on RBBC players later in the draft. If we gave a full point per reception for RB's, it makes those mid-round backs like Bush or DMC or even Leon Washington, Felix Jones, etc. even more valuable, thus lessening the risk in waiting on RB for one of them.
Think about it....these backs are not going in the first couple rounds anyway, whether half or full PPR. If the gap between a Turner and a Felix Jones can be lessened by increasing the value of a RBBC player, the WR/WR teams would be even more resolute in their strategy of waiting on RB because their risk is reduced.

I will once again state that I believe that the 14-team format, KDS/3RR, 1/2 PPR for RB's, and 6 PT/TD for QB's has created a great balance for all positions and has increased the strategy in this contest when compared to those without it.
I'd have to say that in my opinion, those that succeed at this format have done it with more skill and less luck than other formats (not to resurrect another thread please).

Again just one rookie's thoughts,
Glenn

botherk · Post by **botherk** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:46 am

Originally posted by Just Russ:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by Just Russ:
I think the RBBC approach has a lot to do with necessity due to injuries. I could be very wrong, but I just don't see it going away.

And, IMO, RBs have dominated the fantasy landscape due to scoring rules/lineup rules.

We see that in other leagues where it's 2QB or 2RB/2WR. In those leagues the QB and RB are still king. So by giving rb's a full point, you would also like them to dominate here?
WR's are the soup d' jour, for sure, but isn't it a little soon to be giving rb's an extra half point per catch? [/QUOTE]I don't feel like giving 1PPR would alloe them to dominate here. I feel like it would make the 2 or 3 parts of a RBBC worth starting and competitive. [/QUOTE]I get it.
Kind of like the U.S. sending aid to third world countries, but somehow ends up in the wrong hands

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:56 am

Originally posted by Glenneration X:
quote:Originally posted by Just Russ:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Just Russ:
[qb] I don't feel like giving 1PPR would alloe them to dominate here. I feel like it would make the 2 or 3 parts of a RBBC worth starting and competitive. [/QUOTE]Hello Russ....

I'm going to respond to this post with my last thoughts on this subject (no promises)....

I think the reason most who are posting in favor of 1-PPR for running backs believe that there is a movement towards WR's becoming more valuable in this format and are trying to stem the tide of those at the back of the draft going WR/WR or WR/WR/WR or even WR/WR/WR/WR.

The problem in my mind with this reasoning is that I believe it would have the exact OPPOSITE effect.

With the format currently in place, I believe the most valuable player is still the full time 3-down back who gobbles up tons of yardage and scores TD's. Its the rarest player in fantasy football right now and gives teams with those players a distinct advantage at RB1 over teams who don't have one. That's why a Michael Turner or Deangelo Williams are still 1st round picks and AP is still the acknowledged #1 even though they don't catch many passes.

Right now, as I stated in an earlier post, those going WR heavy in earlier rounds have to roll the dice on RBBC players later in the draft. If we gave a full point per reception for RB's, it makes those mid-round backs like Bush or DMC or even Leon Washington, Felix Jones, etc. even more valuable, thus lessening the risk in waiting on RB for one of them.
Think about it....these backs are not going in the first couple rounds anyway, whether half or full PPR. If the gap between a Turner and a Felix Jones can be lessened by increasing the value of a RBBC player, the WR/WR teams would be even more resolute in their strategy of waiting on RB because their risk is reduced.

I will once again state that I believe that the 14-team format, KDS/3RR, 1/2 PPR for RB's, and 6 PT/TD for QB's has created a great balance for all positions and has increased the strategy in this contest when compared to those without it.
I'd have to say that in my opinion, those that succeed at this format have done it with more skill and less luck than other formats (not to resurrect another thread please).

Again just one rookie's thoughts,
Glenn [/QUOTE]Good post Glenn. Most people don't consider the less obvious, unintended effects of rule changes. Well done.

Secondly, the "if this trend continues" thesis is funny. Kinda like Doughboys favorite baseball line "at this pace..." for players who get off to a hot start early. I mean, if the trend really continues I guess we'll have 5 WRs drafted before the first round begins by 2012.

Trends don't continue forever, they accelerate, peak, die out and usually reverse. I think some owners had a hole shot in the floor of their perfect draft strategy, and thus think a rule change is in order because of it.

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:00 am

ONE THING I CAN SAY IS THIS. BETWEEN PICK 4 AND 14 OF THE FIRST ROUND WAS A CRAPSHOOT.

FOR THE MOST PART AP, JONES DREW AND FORTE WENT 1,2,3 BUT AFTER THAT IS WAS ANYONES CALL.

GOING TO BE A REALLY FUN YEAR THIS SEASON.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:14 am

One more thought, as to the trend of WRs going earlier.

This has been building for several years, and at least in some drafts I think this could go down as the "bubble" year for WRs (in terms of being overvalued). Maybe it will be next year, but we're getting close.

In my prime draft the player next to me drafted: WR-WR-WR-QB-RB-WR-WR. Do I think this will work for him? No, but it will be fun watching it play out.

botherk · Post by **botherk** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:14 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Glenneration X:
quote:Originally posted by Just Russ:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Just Russ:
[qb] I don't feel like giving 1PPR would alloe them to dominate here. I feel like it would make the 2 or 3 parts of a RBBC worth starting and competitive. [/QUOTE]Hello Russ....

I'm going to respond to this post with my last thoughts on this subject (no promises)....

I think the reason most who are posting in favor of 1-PPR for running backs believe that there is a movement towards WR's becoming more valuable in this format and are trying to stem the tide of those at the back of the draft going WR/WR or WR/WR/WR or even WR/WR/WR/WR.

The problem in my mind with this reasoning is that I believe it would have the exact OPPOSITE effect.

With the format currently in place, I believe the most valuable player is still the full time 3-down back who gobbles up tons of yardage and scores TD's. Its the rarest player in fantasy football right now and gives teams with those players a distinct advantage at RB1 over teams who don't have one. That's why a Michael Turner or Deangelo Williams are still 1st round picks and AP is still the acknowledged #1 even though they don't catch many passes.

Right now, as I stated in an earlier post, those going WR heavy in earlier rounds have to roll the dice on RBBC players later in the draft. If we gave a full point per reception for RB's, it makes those mid-round backs like Bush or DMC or even Leon Washington, Felix Jones, etc. even more valuable, thus lessening the risk in waiting on RB for one of them.
Think about it....these backs are not going in the first couple rounds anyway, whether half or full PPR. If the gap between a Turner and a Felix Jones can be lessened by increasing the value of a RBBC player, the WR/WR teams would be even more resolute in their strategy of waiting on RB because their risk is reduced.

I will once again state that I believe that the 14-team format, KDS/3RR, 1/2 PPR for RB's, and 6 PT/TD for QB's has created a great balance for all positions and has increased the strategy in this contest when compared to those without it.
I'd have to say that in my opinion, those that succeed at this format have done it with more skill and less luck than other formats (not to resurrect another thread please).

Again just one rookie's thoughts,
Glenn [/QUOTE]Good post Glenn. Most people don't consider the less obvious, unintended effects of rule changes. Well done.

Secondly, the "if this trend continues" thesis is funny. Kinda like Doughboys favorite baseball line "at this pace..." for players who get off to a hot start early. I mean, if the trend really continues I guess we'll have 5 WRs drafted before the first round begins by 2012.

Trends don't continue forever, they accelerate, peak, die out and usually reverse. I think some owners had a hole shot in the floor of their perfect draft strategy, and thus think a rule change is in order because of it. [/QUOTE]KJ, please tell me that doesen't happen here
Bonifacio was well on his way to 300 sb's this year!
If Troy Williamson gets three td's and 200 yards, Williamson owners will smile, for sure, but they wouldn't bring out the "on pace to", would they?

botherk · Post by **botherk** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:16 am

Greg, please read the pm.

TradeStar28 · Post by **TradeStar28** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:21 am

In 2004 (first year of NFFC) I went RB-WR-WR-WR-WR and thought I was a lock for scoring points with the PPR. Even though I was stacked with great WRs, it was my worst year.

I think this year that the nfl will return to the RB heavy points and the WRs will cool down.

Any rule applies for everyone so just draft the team that scores 1730+ points in weeks 1 to 13. Then you can sniff the championship round where anything is possile.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:36 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
KJ, please tell me that doesen't happen here
Bonifacio was well on his way to 300 sb's this year!
If Troy Williamson gets three td's and 200 yards, Williamson owners will smile, for sure, but they wouldn't bring out the "on pace to", would they?

You better believe it Dough!

In 2005 the Brown's #4 or #5 WR - Frisman Jackson - had 8 for 128 yds and a TD in week 1. Somone spent $900 FAAB on him the next week and tried to convince us all here that he was on pace for ... x-x-x ... a huge season.

It was weeks of entertainment.

Sad to say, Frisman never cracked the end zone again in his career, or even put up a double-digit fantasy week.

dough - did you draft a football team this year?

botherk · Post by **botherk** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:54 am

I got in a couple of satelites, KJ.
I cut my teeth on fantasy football, but lost interest when fantasy baseball came along.
I have a lot more time now,so thought I'd get my feet wet again this year with thoughts of going to Vegas next year.