I use draft dominator. Great tool. I do see something that bothered me as far as the final scoring for 2009 and the projected scoring for 2010. It seems that the projections are very, very conservative to say the least. I noticed in my league last year that there were 8 QB's that scored over 300 points. Using the same scoring rules the player pool in draft dominator only has 1 QB over 300 points. Running back projections were pretty close, 8 last year over 200, and 7 projected for this year. Wide receivers there is a huge difference. Last year there were 23 receivers scoring over 200 points. This years projection show only 7. It seems to me that the projections for 2010 are super conservative. Has anybody else faced this problem?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
SCORING ESTIMATES 2009 TO 2010 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter coachjim
- Start date
daveandken
Footballguy
Cannot confirm or deny, but as long as they are conservative across the board, why does it matter? The tool is there to compare players, not to give absolute numbers, right?
Agreed. It just seems that draft dominator is using very conservative estimates though. This is a $1000 buy in TOTAL POINTS pool so the amount of points scored by each position is very important. In my situation the points scored is how you win this league. I generally try and estimates how many points I need per week to win. This is how I try and draft, by point production only.
daveandken
Footballguy
I think you are missing my point though. The tool is there to evaluate players against each other. If you feel like it's too conservative, multiple every player's point total by the same factor until the numbers look right to you. In the end it really does not matter.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
I noticed the same thing and ask David Dodds about it. For WRs at least if you convert his projections to PPR scoring and then to PPG and compare to last year's actual WR PPG totals for the top ~40 WRs every single projection is lower than the actuals from 2009. It's greatest at the top (more than a PPG), and diminishes until about WR40 or so, when it's nearly the same as 2009, and then switches and "overrates" the bottom half of WRs. I suspect there's a regression or two involved, but that's just a guess.
IIRC it worked out to be about 23 points per week across the top 40 WRs. Which would be something like 350+ points for the entire season.
IIRC it worked out to be about 23 points per week across the top 40 WRs. Which would be something like 350+ points for the entire season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrod
Footballguy
I noticed the same thing with the projections earlier this pre-season.
I was looking at the number of WR's that break 1000 yards each year, and every single group of staff projections had below the average number of annual receivers with 1000 yards. I think the annual average for the last three years was like 25 and some of the staff had as few as 17. I think Dodds was actually the lowest. I was interested in this because I have 3 WR's that I think have a legit shot to hit 1000 yds, but none of them are projected to do so by most of the staffers.
I think the idea is to keep things conservative across the board....players are projected at the middle of their ranges, but every year several will outperform and underperform that average.
I was looking at the number of WR's that break 1000 yards each year, and every single group of staff projections had below the average number of annual receivers with 1000 yards. I think the annual average for the last three years was like 25 and some of the staff had as few as 17. I think Dodds was actually the lowest. I was interested in this because I have 3 WR's that I think have a legit shot to hit 1000 yds, but none of them are projected to do so by most of the staffers.
I think the idea is to keep things conservative across the board....players are projected at the middle of their ranges, but every year several will outperform and underperform that average.
Last edited by a moderator:
Marauder
Footballguy
The reason is because you can't project luck. A lot of random things happen over the course of a football season - Injuries, defensive backs fall down allowing a receiver to break a 80 yard TD, etc. The outliers at the top end are usually going to be the ones that have the most good luck fall their way.
Glad that I am not the only person who noticed this.
