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.
The Official Staff/Messageboard Survivor Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Maurile Tremblay
- Start date
My team is good, possibly top 3, but not #1. 
joffer
Footballguy
Regarding the ranking of my PK as 2nd last (2) with just Vanderjagt, here are what all of the duos currently ranked ahead of me would have produced last year vs. just Vanderjagt
Wilkins/Hanson - 203
Hall/Nedney - 170 (Had to use Gary Anderson for last year's stats since Nedney was hurt)
Vanderjagt - 170
Stover/Kasay - 169
Akers/Mare - 161
Elam/Grammatica - 153
Vinatieri/Jano - 151
Longwell/Reed - 149
Elling/Carney - 145
Brown/Brown - 143
Feely/Anderson - 142
Good thing I wasn't ranked behind Herd or I would have had to dig up Shayne Graham's and Josh Scobee's stats.
:rotflmao:
Edit: Just FYI, but I thought it noteworthy that a second kicker always added between 21 and 37 total points to the highest individual total of the two.
Wilkins/Hanson - 203
Hall/Nedney - 170 (Had to use Gary Anderson for last year's stats since Nedney was hurt)
Vanderjagt - 170
Stover/Kasay - 169
Akers/Mare - 161
Elam/Grammatica - 153
Vinatieri/Jano - 151
Longwell/Reed - 149
Elling/Carney - 145
Brown/Brown - 143
Feely/Anderson - 142
Good thing I wasn't ranked behind Herd or I would have had to dig up Shayne Graham's and Josh Scobee's stats.
:rotflmao:Edit: Just FYI, but I thought it noteworthy that a second kicker always added between 21 and 37 total points to the highest individual total of the two.
Last edited by a moderator:
Turbo Punch
Footballguy
I find BnB's assigned percentages very interesting. I am not commenting on their accuracy or how they were determined but I think they say something about the luck factor in survivor drafting and FF in general.The way I see it every team in a league of roughly equal drafters should have a 1 in 12 chance of winning which is 8.3%. The highest percentage BnB gave any team in this draft is 9.8% or an increase of just 1.5% points over any other random team. The lowest percentage BnB gave any team was 5.2% which is 3.1% less than any random team. So no matter how badly or how well anyone drafted they still have between 5.2% - 9.8% chance of winning. This alone I think speaks to the huge factor luck plays in this type of format.As an experiment to determine the role of luck in survivor drafting I would like to see a draft where 1 expert drafts against 11 other teams that use no strategy other than to use the draft dominator and take the highest valued player at each of their picks. In this scenario the expert would know exactly who will be drafted before and after each of their picks becasue they would be using the draft dominator. How well do you think this expert would do? How far above 8.3% would he raise his chance of winning.Theoretically I would like to see 24 experts do this type of draft and see how many of the experts actually win. Randomly 2 out of 24 experts should win in this situation. How many experts would need to win to satisfy you that skill at drafting is the deciding factor over luck? I say I would need to see at least 4 experts win in this type of draft to be satisfied that skill can determine the outcome of a survivor draft. I do not claim to be an expert in these type of drafts but I may try it myself out of curiosity. Everyone here can try it and see what happens. By the way BnB how did you determine those percentages?
BassNBrew
Footballguy
This is why I looked at the draft from two different angles. You didn't get dinged for jumping on Vandy early. Actually, given your draft, it was excellent strategy as you need to free up another roster spot to fill holes elsewhere. I probably would have done the same thing. Here are my issues...1) In week 6, you will be likely be giving up a minimun of 6 points to every team left. Futhermore, you could easily be giving up 10 or more to a team you're neck in neck with to survive.Regarding the ranking of my PK as 2nd last (2) with just Vanderjagt, here are what all of the duos currently ranked ahead of me would have produced last year vs. just Vanderjagt
Wilkins/Hanson - 203
Hall/Nedney - 170 (Had to use Gary Anderson for last year's stats since Nedney was hurt)
Vanderjagt - 170
Stover/Kasay - 169
Akers/Mare - 161
Elam/Grammatica - 153
Vinatieri/Jano - 151
Longwell/Reed - 149
Elling/Carney - 145
Brown/Brown - 143
Feely/Anderson - 142
Good thing I wasn't ranked behind Herd or I would have had to dig up Shayne Graham's and Josh Scobee's stats.
Edit: Just FYI, but I thought it noteworthy that a second kicker always added between 21 and 37 total points to the highest individual total of the two.
2) Survivor, as in loser leaves town. Sure Vandy will put up huge weeks, but that occasional week of 3-6 could be a killer. It's the weekly deviation relative to the other duos that worries me.
3) I'm expecting Vandy to revert towards the norm. I don't think he missed a kick last year, that won't happen again.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I completely agree Turbo. It was very wise of BnB to give the highest rated team a 9.8%. In a league full of experts coupled with the fact that this is a survivor format, the percentages shouldn't vary from the 8.3 very much.And your analysis hits the nail on the head on how to test the percentages...are you a fellow science major?
Last edited by a moderator:
Turbo Punch
Footballguy
Not a science major. Economics & Poli Sci but that was a long time ago. Just seemed logical to me.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Turbo, I'll try my best to address your questions. Please note that I converted everything to chances in 100 to advance to the final four at the very end and combined my draft ratings with my more opinionated positional rankings.I'll be the first to admit that there are likely some mathmatical flaws and I tried to seek help, but this is more complicated then it appears. Basically after grading each team, I divided that team's grade by the total of all the grades. As you said, random chance gives you an 8.3% chance of being either the best (or worst) team each week. If every team was rated a 5, the every team would have an 8.3% assigned. Now the important thing to note is that a team that grades out to 7.3% isn't just 1% weaker, they're 1 - 7.3/8.3 weaker proportionately. Furthermore, this isn't a total points league intially, it's a league consisting of 8 mini seasons (1, 2, 3, 4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-12). So if your team is 10% proportionally weaker, you have to overcome that deficit in each of these mini-seasons. In other words, it compounds in this format. Of courses the impact of byes aren't factored in (other then my rankings and draft grades), but Dodds is going to tackle this for you to review (plus throw in strength of schedule) since he's smarter and has more resources.I tried to model this accurately in the final odds in 100 to advance, but the magnitude of the complexity overwhelmed me so I swaged a few things. Technically I shouldn't have run calculations to the norm, but compared the teams to the likely remaining teams. There's some huge math equation to solve this problem, but it wasn't that important in the end analysis. I think you have a pretty good feel where I stand on each team. Besides, if it was that easy, Vegas would push every bet.What would be an interesting idea would be to taken action on my odds and see how it plays out.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Now you're talking.
That would be a great way to test everybody's knowledge, including those who didn't participate. BTW, I have a minor in mathematics and would not attempt to handicap the odds for this draft...there are simply too many variables to do it accurately 
I would post bets, but wouldn't be the oddsmaker/house.
Last edited by a moderator:
BassNBrew
Footballguy
One other comment regarding the rankings. I calculated strength of position (importance of each postion), by taking the average score at each postion for each starting requirement (1/2/3/1/1/1) and factoring in the dropoff across that range. For those that are interested or want to debate it, here are the results...QB 13%RB 27% or 13.5%/RBWR 32% or 10.7%/WRTE 12%K 7%D 10% A couple of notes...101% includes a rounding error. These calculations assumed a linear dropoff which doesn't occur.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I may just do this as a contest and keep track of the results.Now you're talking.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I'll admit that the stud TEs throw things out of wack. The guy with TE12 is getting dinged as hard for the drop off from 7 to 12 (22 points) as the guy with TE6 for the dropoff from 1 to 6 (130 pts). It averages out, but in this case Shick gets a bump and Wood gets punished too hard. Dowling's TE stink so bad that his punishment is deserved. This linear v. expotential problem exists to some extent with RB1, WR1, and PK
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I'm in.I may just do this as a contest and keep track of the results.Now you're talking.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
:gang: Gladly go to war with my squad.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Based on last years actual results in this scoring system. Think AVT. C-pep ranked 1st at 333, Garcia ranked 12th at 272. The average starting QB is worth 302.5. I did this for each position and weighted them v. each other. The rankings of the teams rotiserrie style were my opinion. I just didn't want to add up the position rankings and divide by 6 when we know that K<QB<RBx2<WRx3.I realize that there are numerous holes with my linear assumptions, but it's better then nothing (although Colin and Wood would disagree). I also realize that the rankings of each drafter aren't linear. Many of the teams were a coin flip and some people dominated at a position. This wasn't captured.
Unlucky
Phenom
Glad to see BnB doesn't like my team. I can see all the holes in it:At QB, I only have the most reliable quality QB in Manning, and have two Miami QBs to back him up, thus reducing the chance that I have 0 QBs to almost nothing.At RB, I only have the top RB over the past two seasons, with nothing changing except Priest is a year older. I'm sure some have questions with Dillon, but is Kevin Faulk really going to share that much of the load? George, Bettis, and Fisher are weak, but I think I'll get some points from them each week. At least I have 5 RBs.At WR, I do have some question marks. S. Moss, J. Walker, I. Bruce, L. Fitzgerald, R. Woods, and J. Gage. Moss is good. Walker should be good. Bruce is solid. I like the upside of the last three. At least they all have different bye weeks, so I'll always have 5 WRs playing. (barring injury)At TE, I have by far the best combo. Shockey and Winslow will put up major points. Plus, I've kept a great TE away from another team. Kicker - who cares. I have two with different bye weeks. Someone posted a list of the top 11 combos from last year. The difference between 1 and 11 - 60 points, less than 4 PPW. That's from the best to the worst. D - Overrated position in this scoring system. In fact, I actually have a decent pair according to Chase's DTBC article. So, I've spread out my bye weeks within positions. I've got star players at every position. I've got depth at every position. While I have a couple of question marks, I think I can go pretty far barring some major injuries or setbacks. Really, that's what a lot of this competition will come down to - injuries. Healthy team = moving on.Finally, I want to be sure everyone saw my commentary on my second kicker, Janikowski:
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Hey Joe,In my strategy I discuss whether or not I should go WR6 or 3rd defense and opted for the 3rd D. Defenses can score quite a few points in this system this year and, in factoring who was left at WR versus adding a third D, I gave the edge to the D. Now clearly some, yourself, LHUCK and BnB included believe that a 6th WR will be my undoing. I respectfully disagree. Yes, we start 3 WRs and theoretically I could be looking at a week down the road where I possibly am short a receiver, but I don't see that as unlikely. I have excellent bye week coverage, no major overlaps. Knowing I was going to go QB squeeze meant I had to put extra time in the WR position in order to make up value...people may not see my guys on par with some others right now, but I have them projected that way.As I said a few pages ago, if my projections end up wrong on these guys and the consensus is right, so be it. But I'll take my chances.
Also, might I add, it looks like my Steven Jackson pick looks better and better every day. I had figured a handful of solid games from him, I may be looking at 16 studly games. But ultimately as someone else said, it's great to hear each other pontificate one way or the other because we're in the dead part of the season, but much of this is going to come down to staying healthy and defensive matchups. When the team with Priest and Jamal goes down in Week 1 last year, you know anything can happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
:rotflmao:
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
Hmmm - in league two, B-fred did something very similar, and Sinrman went stud TE - no staff member took a big-three TE in league two - did you guys have a "plan" that you discussed, or did it simply work out this way?
Not overrated if you fail to address it properly. True, "who cares" is a way to look at it, but you MUST get scoring from your starers each week - especially early in the year when your starting skill players are on bye weeks - or you WILL bow out early.
I think your team is fairly strong, too and BnB was harsh on you.
If kickers are truly "who cares" why did you address them before the last two rounds? You ended with Vinny and Janny. Vinny went as K2 in league two, so you must have grabbed at him early. And you ended with an EXCELLENT combination at the spot that will probably get you 12-15 pts/week. You shouldn't go after kickers very early, but they are an integral part of a survivor team that should not be simply phoned in over the last three rounds.
bostonfred2
Footballguy
We didn't discuss this because there's no way we could have planned on Winslow slipping to the 9th in both leagues. This is just one of the most visible ways that we took advantage of the staff's QB strategy, although there are others. What we did discuss that was relevant was:- smoothing out players scoring (two players at one position will do better than one)- TE scoring is inflated by the 2pts per reception rule, but was a little overrated (drafting Gonzo in the 3rd or Winslow in the 5th would have been)- TE scoring is the most variable position (but we all figured out that having two studs at the position would smooth that out on our own)
bostonfred2
Footballguy
While I'm at it, I wanted to rave about Unlucky's team one more time. QB should be solid every week of the year, including Manning's bye. ManningFeelyFiedlerRB is the strongest in the leaguePriestDillonGeorgeBettisFisherWR is solid, and even better if you buy into Unlucky's rankingsS MossWalkerBruceFitzgeraldGageWoodsTE is the strongest in the league by 150+ pointsShockeyWinslowPK is middle of the roadVinatieriJanikowskiD is below average but both teams are decent sleepersWashingtonDetroitI don't know what you would want more than this out of the draft, short of drafting my team in the other league.
Marc Levin
Hangs out with Oscar Zeta Acosta
How is this taking advanatge of the staff's QB-strategy - in league two at least it dropped from the end of the 4th until the top of the 9th between TE 3 and TE 5.The staff was finished with their QB ploy by the end of the 7th. Any players that were going to fall, fell. Winslow was readily available to staff and MB alike for a good 24 picks after the staff's QB strategy was over.
David Dodds
Administrator
My Simulation for Survivor I has been run.
League 1 Simulation
I have also run the numbers for league 2 and am formatting them now. They should be posted in a few hours here.
League 1 Simulation
I have also run the numbers for league 2 and am formatting them now. They should be posted in a few hours here.
Joe T
Footballguy
Interesting stuff. I will have to look at it more closely.But after a quick review I think I've discovered a possible weakness:'It is derived by assigning the projections out to the corresponding weeks based on Strength of Schedule.'Deriving strength of schedule is an interesting topic. An accurate measure of future strength of schedule will be an interesting calulation to look at...
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Good stuff, glad to see a more rational view of the outcome...
Fullback Fro
yesno
I would like a more detailed look at how this calculation was done. Interesting read though.
David Dodds
Administrator
League Two's Simulation
Yes, this is only as good as the Strength of Schedule that drives it. We are doing some things in house to get the very best SOS ever (all going forward prediction data - not past data).
I will rerun these models with updated projections, updated SOS, etc before the season starts. It very likely will yield different results.
This I do believe is the future of drafting though.
My team came out number 1 via this method because I drafted my team on this pulse the whole draft. It may end up being flawwed, but I wanted to see if it could work. I was always looking for complimentary players (after 7-8 rounds) to round out my weeks. Based on how I did this during the Survivor Draft, we have been building these tools directly in the Draft Dominator.
In the next release (due in about a week), you can instantly have the program rank players that compliment your team (or position). Want to know the right kickers to match, with Elam....just one click, etc. This is especially a powerful feature (in my opinion) for survivor drafts.
David
Yes, this is only as good as the Strength of Schedule that drives it. We are doing some things in house to get the very best SOS ever (all going forward prediction data - not past data).
I will rerun these models with updated projections, updated SOS, etc before the season starts. It very likely will yield different results.
This I do believe is the future of drafting though.
My team came out number 1 via this method because I drafted my team on this pulse the whole draft. It may end up being flawwed, but I wanted to see if it could work. I was always looking for complimentary players (after 7-8 rounds) to round out my weeks. Based on how I did this during the Survivor Draft, we have been building these tools directly in the Draft Dominator.
In the next release (due in about a week), you can instantly have the program rank players that compliment your team (or position). Want to know the right kickers to match, with Elam....just one click, etc. This is especially a powerful feature (in my opinion) for survivor drafts.
David
David Dodds
Administrator
There was simply no way to spin it here. Colin's team is hurting.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
More rationale or one that rewards you for mimicking Dodds' projections. Just keep in mind Jason that I hit on 4 of the remaining 5 and 2 of the remaining 3 in my survivor 2 analysis last year. In other words, be afraid...very, very afraid.Good stuff, glad to see a more rational view of the outcome...
bagger
Footballguy
good stuff david. definitely looks like you are looking at some other factors that are currently only qualitatively being looked at now.this is definitely more useful for survivor drafts where there is no trading or FA movement.players that compliment each other should be taken into consideration more in survivor drafts. even i could have improved on my backup WRs who had the same bye week...there were probably some better comparable WRs who would have complimented the balance of my roster better.
bagger
Footballguy
this is true. these rankings are going to reflect in part, how close you projected your players to FBG.com. For example, I have George a lot higher than them, that hurt me.looks like Rudnicki is a Dodds mini-me ranking 1st in all of his categories.More rationale or one that rewards you for mimicking Dodds' projections. Just keep in mind Jason that I hit on 4 of the remaining 5 and 2 of the remaining 3 in my survivor 2 analysis last year. In other words, be afraid...very, very afraid.Good stuff, glad to see a more rational view of the outcome...
Similar threads
