Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Ultimate Strength of Schedule (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mapmaker
- Start date
Mr. Sparkle
Footballguy
cool. I asked about this the other day. Thanks.
purestrength
Footballguy
Wooohoooo!
Marvin88
Footballguy
Some of the numbers here look peculiar to me. Anyone else notice this? One of the things that seems strange to me is that in the FBG magazine, Clayton mentions that LJ has a SOS rank of 23 (16.8) for the first five games and LT2 an (SOS) rank of 3 (17.9), so LT2 may be the better option to get off to quick start the first 5 games. But the SOS for LT2 just posted on the website for the first five games is 15.6. What am I missing? My main point here is that LT2 went from ranked 3rd in the magazine to 23rd on the website for the first five games of the season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Marvin88
Footballguy
I actually questioned Clayton Gray on this in a PM. I got a response back from Clayton and he told me pretty much what I thought: This is how much has changed since the info in the magazine was compiled until now (i.e. - offseason moves, news, and events, etc..).I submitted a free lance article that briefly touched on this. If it doesn't get accepted in a few weeks (July 15th deadline) I will post my thoughts in this thread later.
Last edited by a moderator:
Marvin88
Footballguy
There is, obviously, nothing wrong with magazines. You just can't ONLY look at a magazine published in June and then stop doing your homework. But this is true of every point in the season. You can't (and shouldn't) just look at this preseason SOS and never look at it again either. The SOS can do a 180 degree turn around on you in just 7 weeks. That is not to say that SOS does not have value - it does. But in my mind, the SOS will be more beneficial and more accurate around mid-season. There is always benefit in evaluating the info you have, but you have to take into account how accurate that info might be. Do I want to place more weight on a preseason SOS where no team has played in 6 months and every team has had personnel changes, or do I want to place more weight on a week 7 SOS where there have been 6 immediate weeks that have preceeded this SOS, and practically no personnel changes?Because of all of this, I try not to look too hard at preseason SOS because I am afraid that it could unduely sway my decision making during the draft.
Last edited by a moderator:
bigreese82
Footballguy
Has anyone taken the time to figure out who the top 8 defenses and bottom 8 defenses that he used to figure out the SOS for each position...Could get some good debate going there
Marvin88
Footballguy
It would be easy to figure out. But it would be different for each category of WR, RB, etc... You simply have to look at the eight blue numbers in Week 1 and see who those teams play against. If you follow the blue numbers the remaining weeks of the season, you should find that the eight teams "played against" are always the same.
Marvin88
Footballguy
8 Toughest Against RB fantasy production
1. DEN 12.4
2. KC 12.7
3. NYG 13.1
4. BALT 13.4
5. SEA 13.9
6. PITT 14.1
7. AZ 14.2
8. SD 14.4
8 Toughest Against WR fantasy production
1. DAL 13.3
2. OAK 14.5
3. ATL 14.9
4. BUFF 15.0
5. BALT 15.3
6. PITT 15.8
7. DET 16.1
8. AZ 16.3
8 Toughest Against QB fantasy production
1. TB 10.9
2. BALT 12.5
3. WASH 12.8
4. CLEV 13.1
5. CHI 13.4
6. PITT 13.6
7. NYJ 13.6
8. DEN 13.7
8 Toughest Against TE fantasy production
1. OAK 2.7
2. AZ 3.5
3. WASH 3.7
4. HOU 3.8
5. NYG 3.8
6. BUFF 3.9
7. DEN 4.0
8. TENN 4.1
1. DEN 12.4
2. KC 12.7
3. NYG 13.1
4. BALT 13.4
5. SEA 13.9
6. PITT 14.1
7. AZ 14.2
8. SD 14.4
8 Toughest Against WR fantasy production
1. DAL 13.3
2. OAK 14.5
3. ATL 14.9
4. BUFF 15.0
5. BALT 15.3
6. PITT 15.8
7. DET 16.1
8. AZ 16.3
8 Toughest Against QB fantasy production
1. TB 10.9
2. BALT 12.5
3. WASH 12.8
4. CLEV 13.1
5. CHI 13.4
6. PITT 13.6
7. NYJ 13.6
8. DEN 13.7
8 Toughest Against TE fantasy production
1. OAK 2.7
2. AZ 3.5
3. WASH 3.7
4. HOU 3.8
5. NYG 3.8
6. BUFF 3.9
7. DEN 4.0
8. TENN 4.1
Last edited by a moderator:
So let me get this straight - the numbers have changed since June based on offseason moves? How exactly does one quantify how a player with help a defense from a fantasy point perspective.
It also mentions that it "removed bias" by adjusting a team's defensive numbers based on the offensive teams they faced. What calculations are used for this?
I create my own SOS reports, and in the past I have experimented with such concepts. Problem is, where does it stop? You could say that the "top offenses" were good because they faced poor defenses....it's a big circle.
IMO, it seems that Clayton's piece is a pure opinion piece since he massages the numbers so much. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it should be noted that it is based on one man's opinion and not entirely raw numbers if that's the case.
Also, if it's going to be an opinion piece, it would be nice if he held himself accountable by showing what he projected last season and how far off the actual statistics ended up being.
It also mentions that it "removed bias" by adjusting a team's defensive numbers based on the offensive teams they faced. What calculations are used for this?
I create my own SOS reports, and in the past I have experimented with such concepts. Problem is, where does it stop? You could say that the "top offenses" were good because they faced poor defenses....it's a big circle.
IMO, it seems that Clayton's piece is a pure opinion piece since he massages the numbers so much. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it should be noted that it is based on one man's opinion and not entirely raw numbers if that's the case.
Also, if it's going to be an opinion piece, it would be nice if he held himself accountable by showing what he projected last season and how far off the actual statistics ended up being.
Last edited by a moderator:
NYG Endzone
Footballguy
SOS is a quite useless at this point
Warpig
Footballguy
Not to take away anything from the staff members since there are people that find value in everything they do, but how accurate are SOS rankings through history? Since defenses ebb and flow as far as what they allow "fantasy wise" on a yearly basis. When I do my drafts, I tend not to pay attention to SOS rankings when drafting players. To me, it's too much of a crapshoot to bump or drop players according to what defenses they face or how many playoff teams they'll go up against. If memory serves me correctly I have been burned by this thought process in the past.
Marvin88
Footballguy
Yes, and I would agree with this, and I know for a fact that early season top 8 SOS defenses can become mid season bottom 8 SOS defenses. But this doesn't always happen and probably does not happen the majority of the time. But if you are looking to draft two players who appear equal in your eyes, why not go with the info you have and draft the guy with the weak early season SOS? Sure, maybe it will be wrong, but my guess is the odds that a projected preseason favorable SOS that turns unfavorable is less likely than a projected preseason unfavorable SOS to turn favorable (although I know that this can happen too). Just take SOS for what it is - the best info you have at the time. And as time goes on, it gets more accurate.
Last edited by a moderator:
nygiants56
Footballguy
not very...last year, Miami figured to play the toughest schedule, as it turned out ,by the end of the year, they played the easiest.
the '05 Bears got stomped by steve smith in the playoffs..they were supposed to have a tough defense..
more now than ever, SOS means very little, especially with the parity in the NFL..last year's doormats are this year's playoff teams..
Marvin88
Footballguy
You are half right! Miami did indeed go from a top 8 preseason SOS pass defense to a bottom eight SOS pass defense in 2005 by week 9. But they remained there the rest of the season, so you could have banked on this and planned for the stretch run and the playoffs. So SOS does have value! And midseason is the point to start zeroing in on SOS. Again, I wrote a freelance article on this, but obviously, I cannot share any of the concepts until after the 15th of July.
Last edited by a moderator:
Great thread.
Marvin88 I am very interested to read more on your take on this on July 15th but it probably won't be till after the deadline. Good Luck.
DrJ is right on.
I have the same problem with the SOS. If you notice the QB SOS DET, GB, MINN & CHI are 1,2,3,4 in improvment percentage. Is the NFC North that bad that since the teams play twice a year, hence the biggest improvements. Detroit is a huge improvment @ 14.5%. Is it really that much of a percentage change from the 05 SOS. Or the fact Harrington is no longer the QB. In second is GB @ 13.4 Is this because everyone knows Farve just has to rebound from last year, and in 3rd is Chicago, who had to start Kyle Orton for 15 games. My mother would have be an improvment. Minnesota just got rid of their HC Mike Tice. Enough said on that. Each team has a huge chance for improvemt from the 2005 numbers based on their situations not the schedule. The same could be said for LT2. Did he drop from 3rd to 23rd simply because Rivers is now the QB, and teams will now have the line stacked? Does it really matter about the schedule? Is SOS just a great tool for pointing out the obvious despite it's fancy excel spreadsheet wrapping?
Is SOS based on actual numbers from the previous year or is it based on hunches from the author? Or both?
Marvin88
Footballguy
It has to be based on actual numbers in some fashion, otherwise it would be completely hocus pocus. Problem is, I get the feeling that this info is proprietary to FBG's and, as such, they may not be able to divulge the "exacts". My gut tells me it combines numbers, with offseason moves (Rivers by the way has been a given for some time so that shouldn't have played into SD's SOS for RB's changing), with previous year's matchups, with OTHER STUFF, etc..) But don't throw the baby out with the bath water. There are more ratings that have stayed the same than have changed. So just because SD's RB SOS changed drastically that doesn't mean that everyone's did. When making decisions you go with the odds. I would guess that over 60% of the preseason stuff is accurate, but this percentage goes up as the year goes along and I would contend is well above 90% accurate by mid season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
