Which FF format involves the least amount of luck? (1 Viewer)

[Jackal King]

I think it's fair to say that the Shark Pool agrees that the degree to which 'luck' is involved in any fantasy football championship is significantly influenced by the format of the league. If this is true, then I think an examination of the popular formats could result in a format where luck is wrung out of the equation as much as practical...leaving us with the most skillful format in the hobby today.

I suggest that the 'tournament' style format is the format that requires the most skill.

When I say 'tournament'...I'm describing the format where everyone can use a player only once per season.

This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players.

This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.

In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.

The biggest problem with this format in gaining wide spread popularity, is that many people consider the draft the high point of the season, and few want to give it up.

But...I think for those that are really put off by the 'luck factor'...the tournament format is something to consider.

Thoughts?

 

[Islander]

Not only having a draft is fun, but people like to manage a team. Not to start a guy that was on another team last week. I like to know a player is on MY team.

You can reduce luck with this:

1. Total points leagues, not head-to-head (or all-matchup leagues as a compromise). H2H is horrible for luck.

2. Dynasty (or keeper as a compromise)

3. IDP

4. Reduce the value of TDs relative to yards

5. Auction

Etc.

 

[cybergourmet]

The more performance based criteria you include the less lucky your league will be. TD-only is luck-of-the-draw to me... It has to be even over all positions. I'm in one where the QB tends to score very little- weighted towards TDs.. as it's a start 2 league it's a crapshoot. bottom tiered QBs are lucky not to get negatives... ie. I won't start Walters, Romo, etc. they're as likely to get negatives.

 

[John Mamula]

i would argue there is more skill in a draft compared to other formats.

 

[mueller54]

auction is the only way

also we do an all-play based on weekly total points. the high score goes 9-0 for the week and the lowest 0-9

 

[ExtremeFajita]

No kickers.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Your format seems to include a lot of luck. Injuries don't affect everyone the same, because if your guy goes down after 3 minutes, it only hurts the people who started him and people who haven't used him yet.

You're still playing matchups which contains luck.

I think there's plenty of relevant luck in any format.

 

[Jackal King]

i would argue there is more skill in a draft compared to other formats.

Well....here's the place to make that argument.Talent evaluation is not synonamous with drafting. As was pointed out in the other thread...beyond the random placement of your draft position, a draft can actually 'mask' true skill at evaluating talent. Someone who 'falls' to you in a draft is not a product of your skill, it's the result of others actions. Sometimes fortunate, sometimes unfortunate.There certainly is skill to drafting well...but...I agree with those who perceive luck as a significant factor in formats that draft.

 

[Jackal King]

Your format seems to include a lot of luck. Injuries don't affect everyone the same, because if your guy goes down after 3 minutes, it only hurts the people who started him and people who haven't used him yet.You're still playing matchups which contains luck.I think there's plenty of relevant luck in any format.

I said that the tournament format 'minimizes' luck associated with injuries.....not that it eliminated it. You're right...those that fielded the player who get's injured are unlucky. But...it affects the owner for that single game only and he doesn't carry that misfortune across the entire season.As far as playing 'matchups'....I'm not sure how I see the luck involved in that facet of the game. In fact, playing the matchups are one of the most skillful elements of this format. Matchups are far from 'luck' in my opinion.

 

[Jackal King]

Not only having a draft is fun, but people like to manage a team. Not to start a guy that was on another team last week. I like to know a player is on MY team. You can reduce luck with this:1. Total points leagues, not head-to-head (or all-matchup leagues as a compromise). H2H is horrible for luck.2. Dynasty (or keeper as a compromise)3. IDP4. Reduce the value of TDs relative to yards5. AuctionEtc.

I agree with all of your points. They all elevate the skill level and wrings out the luck factor.And I agree that the draft is one of the most enjoyable aspects of the hobby, and would never suggest that they be eliminated. I'm simply suggesting that a draft introduces a significant amount of luck into the equation, and for those that are looking to eliminate luck as much as possible...alternative formats are probably better.

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Adding to ideas already mentioned:

Start more players each week - like 2 QBs, 3 RBs and 4 WRs.

It's easy to pick studs but harder to pick good talent at the 3rd RB and 4th WR positions.

 

[BassNBrew]

i would argue there is more skill in a draft compared to other formats.

Tournament style play involves elevates the importance of luck. At least over a season the luck, good and bad, is spread out across a wider population of games.

 

[intrinsic]

Total points versus head to head for sure

Head to head can give you a lucky playoff birth or an unlucky last place

 

[EBF]

bigger leagues + bigger rosters + bigger starting lineups + total points = less luck

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

A total points auction league should, over the course of the season, reveal who the best owners were that year. Not sure if trades should be allowed, though. While trading is itself an art form, you can't control someone else's stupidity-- and that could affect your team negatively.

Even with all that, a lot of luck is involved. You don't control who gets injured, or what penalties changed a 1-yard run to a 6-yard flip to a TE. You can't predict the holding call that, although unrelated to the play, wiped out a 75-yard TD. Those things are going to happen, and at least total points allows it to have less impact on your season than a win or loss based on that play.

 

[SSOG]

This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players. This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.

Let's say that you start Lee Evans, and Lee Evans beats the DB 60 yards down the field 5 times during the game, but the DB tackles him in the end zone (drawing the PI) every time. That's pretty bad luck- you made the right call and started the right WR, since he's absolutely abusing that DB, but he's not getting you any fantasy points.

bigger leagues + bigger rosters + bigger starting lineups + total points = less luck

I disagree with the "bigger leagues = less luck" part. I feel like, in the largest of leagues, your entire production is dependent on your studs. If you're in a 32 team league, and you have the #1 overall draft pick, and that pick winds up getting injured in the first game... your season is over. That's it, end of season, end of story.I think smaller leagues + bigger rosters + bigger starting lineups + total points (or all-matchup) = less luck. Personally, I think the league that would minimize luck the most would be a 2-team league, start 12 QBs, 18 RBs, 24 WRs, 12 TEs, 12 Defenses (no kickers). If you lose your #1 overall pick, no big deal, because you have plenty of other studs to replace him with- that entire league comes 100% down to who did a better job of talent evaluation at the draft.

 

[bonesman]

sounds to me like FF might not be that much fun without the luck factor

 

[mlichty]

I like the victory point scoring in the Antsports leagues. The standings are determined by the VP's instead of win/loss record.

12 team league

You are head to head

2 points for a win

0 for a loss

the top 4 scores of the week get 2 points

the middle 4 scores get 1 point

the bottom 4 get 0

So if you have the 2nd highest score in a week but lose to the top score you still end up with 2 VP's. In a league last year I had a 5-8 record? but had the 2nd most points scored in the league. I just made the playoffs (#6) and was able to win the championship. I had a good team but was unlucky with the matchups during the season.

This format combines the total points and overall record as good as anything I have seen.

 

[Family Matters]

Just to add another perspective. IMO=you have to define what luck is. There is dumb luck which is likley to find it's way into a format discussed above whereby you pick different players each week. But when you draft a team and tehn manage that team over a season you find where the true definition of luck comes into play which is "Luck is defined as when preperation and opportunity meet". So preparing for the draft and what you project to lie ahead and then managing to that expectation along with the subsequent changes that are always going to come about (such as injuries) and then after a season find out how well you performed.

Can someone have a luck filled season, sure it can happen but it rarely does in a league of seasoned owners that worth their salt.

Now if you want to argue that someone won a championship due getting some lucky breaks then I guess it's certainly possible. But if you truely want to determine if someone has just been lucky then take a look at their resume of championships. If they consistently win championships year in and year out against top players then they are not lucky. They are just damn good.

Win 1 time maybe due to some dumb luck. Win year in and year out and you are damn good. Big difference.

As to the luck format, there is none that is more subjected to luck than the survivor format. You draft long before the seaon begins in some cases and you pray there are no critical injuries. If you are lucky enough to avoid major injuries and not be the low scorer every week and you might win the championship.

 

[L5UT1ger]

Play double headers each week. The last team in the playoffs goes by total points scored as opposed to win/loss record. Those two help a little with luck factor though you cant get rid of it altogether without making the league no fun.

 

[videoguy505]

Total points, instead of head-to-head; extended benches; and retroactive rosters--on Tuesday morning each team's best players from the weekend are added up in a roster, instead of a starting lineup submitted by Sunday AM.

 

[Jackal King]

Just to add another perspective. IMO=you have to define what luck is. There is dumb luck which is likley to find it's way into a format discussed above whereby you pick different players each week. But when you draft a team and tehn manage that team over a season you find where the true definition of luck comes into play which is "Luck is defined as when preperation and opportunity meet". So preparing for the draft and what you project to lie ahead and then managing to that expectation along with the subsequent changes that are always going to come about (such as injuries) and then after a season find out how well you performed.Can someone have a luck filled season, sure it can happen but it rarely does in a league of seasoned owners that worth their salt. Now if you want to argue that someone won a championship due getting some lucky breaks then I guess it's certainly possible. But if you truely want to determine if someone has just been lucky then take a look at their resume of championships. If they consistently win championships year in and year out against top players then they are not lucky. They are just damn good.Win 1 time maybe due to some dumb luck. Win year in and year out and you are damn good. Big difference.As to the luck format, there is none that is more subjected to luck than the survivor format. You draft long before the seaon begins in some cases and you pray there are no critical injuries. If you are lucky enough to avoid major injuries and not be the low scorer every week and you might win the championship.

Thanks FM.I find it interesting that you perceive the survivor format as involving the most luck (which I certainly agree with), but consider standard draft formats as 'skillful'. The only difference in the two is 'free agents' which allows you to 'soften' the impact of misfortune over the course of the season.Again...I'm not trying to make a case that there is no skill in drafting. Most of us can recognize a skilled drafter/manager when we see them...and can appreciate the way they come out of drafts with consistently good teams. But....generally the skill that is involved is mostly around talent evaluation and anticipation of the tendancies of the other owners. Draft placement as well as the quality of the other 11 (or so) drafters is really variables you can't control in any meaningful fashion...which is my definition of luck.As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

 

[Gravity]

CDM Sports runs a tournament style game which I believe is extremely fair and moves the talent evaluators and best FFL players way above the others:

http://budgetfootball.cdmsports.com/index.php

In essence you start 22 players every week

* 3 Quarterbacks

* 6 Running Backs

* 6 Wide Receivers

* 2 Tight Ends

* 3 Kickers

* 2 Defense/Special teams

The catch is that there is a salary cap so you need to mix expensive studs with cheap breakout players.

You have a bench and are allowed to pick up/drop a max of 12 new players during the season. So not only are you tested before the season but during the season you need to evaluate who is breaking out and who is worth high salaries.

Highly recommended.

(Horn Toot: I'm 117 Overall out of about 5000!)

 

[Jackal King]

This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players.

This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.

In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.

Let's say that you start Lee Evans, and Lee Evans beats the DB 60 yards down the field 5 times during the game, but the DB tackles him in the end zone (drawing the PI) every time. That's pretty bad luck- you made the right call and started the right WR, since he's absolutely abusing that DB, but he's not getting you any fantasy points.

Note my reference to 'relevant' luck.I'm not aware of any format in the world that can allow you to anticipate the randomeness of the game as it's played on the field. I think we pretty much have to accept that variable.

 

[Family Matters]

Just to add another perspective. IMO=you have to define what luck is. There is dumb luck which is likley to find it's way into a format discussed above whereby you pick different players each week. But when you draft a team and tehn manage that team over a season you find where the true definition of luck comes into play which is "Luck is defined as when preperation and opportunity meet". So preparing for the draft and what you project to lie ahead and then managing to that expectation along with the subsequent changes that are always going to come about (such as injuries) and then after a season find out how well you performed.

Can someone have a luck filled season, sure it can happen but it rarely does in a league of seasoned owners that worth their salt.

Now if you want to argue that someone won a championship due getting some lucky breaks then I guess it's certainly possible. But if you truely want to determine if someone has just been lucky then take a look at their resume of championships. If they consistently win championships year in and year out against top players then they are not lucky. They are just damn good.

Win 1 time maybe due to some dumb luck. Win year in and year out and you are damn good. Big difference.

As to the luck format, there is none that is more subjected to luck than the survivor format. You draft long before the seaon begins in some cases and you pray there are no critical injuries. If you are lucky enough to avoid major injuries and not be the low scorer every week and you might win the championship.

Thanks FM.I find it interesting that you perceive the survivor format as involving the most luck (which I certainly agree with), but consider standard draft formats as 'skillful'. The only difference in the two is 'free agents' which allows you to 'soften' the impact of misfortune over the course of the season.

Again...I'm not trying to make a case that there is no skill in drafting. Most of us can recognize a skilled drafter/manager when we see them...and can appreciate the way they come out of drafts with consistently good teams. But....generally the skill that is involved is mostly around talent evaluation and anticipation of the tendancies of the other owners. Draft placement as well as the quality of the other 11 (or so) drafters is really variables you can't control in any meaningful fashion...which is my definition of luck.

As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

Let me respond by answering your question:It's not luck, it's skill. Anyone that picked Edge in the first round should have known better. Just look at the history of the AZ running game and it's not hard to figure out he was not going to put up good numbers. If he did then he was Superman. They did nothing to improve their run blocking. Personally, I would've taken (and did) Westbrook in the first round of every PPR league I was in past the #6 hole. In non-PPR, I might have taken him somewhere after the 10 spot.

This is perfect evidence of why it isn't luck. Most the experts I know feel the same way. Many knew Edge was in trouble. Only his history kept in the first round. We all knew Westbrook's only issue was health. But he's worth the risk IMO. It was stated clearly that he was going to get more goalline carries to go along with his already great production.

 

[Pound]

I ran a yards-only league for many years. (TD's = 0 points). I found it to have MUCH less luck than the standard scoring most people use. I am planning to get the league going again next season.

 

[sinatravolta]

As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

Let me respond by answering your question:

It's not luck, it's skill. Anyone that picked Edge in the first round should have known better. Just look at the history of the AZ running game and it's not hard to figure out he was not going to put up good numbers. If he did then he was Superman. They did nothing to improve their run blocking. Personally, I would've taken (and did) Westbrook in the first round of every PPR league I was in past the #6 hole. In non-PPR, I might have taken him somewhere after the 10 spot.

This is perfect evidence of why it isn't luck. Most the experts I know feel the same way. Many knew Edge was in trouble. Only his history kept in the first round. We all knew Westbrook's only issue was health. But he's worth the risk IMO. It was stated clearly that he was going to get more goalline carries to go along with his already great production.

I think you missed the point of the question. The question was if you wanted to take Edge with the 8th pick, but someone took him with the 6th or 7th, and you wound up 'settling' for Westbrook at #8, was that skill or luck?

Skill in that you picked Westbrook over Cadillac Williams or whoever else was possible, but luck in that you would have taken Edge if one person in the draft hadn't been even dumber than you and happened to draft right before you.

 

[Family Matters]

This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players.

This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.

In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.

Let's say that you start Lee Evans, and Lee Evans beats the DB 60 yards down the field 5 times during the game, but the DB tackles him in the end zone (drawing the PI) every time. That's pretty bad luck- you made the right call and started the right WR, since he's absolutely abusing that DB, but he's not getting you any fantasy points.

Note my reference to 'relevant' luck.I'm not aware of any format in the world that can allow you to anticipate the randomeness of the game as it's played on the field. I think we pretty much have to accept that variable.

It seems to me that before any league starts that we are all on the same playing field. So if we start the same then why do some always do better than most? It's not dumb luck.Some will suggest that the guy(s) who get the 1st, 2nd & 3rd pick have a built in advantage. It's not true. 1 player does not make a team. If you feel you cannot win picking from the 12 hole or anywhere else on the grid then you shouldn't be playing at all. I and others have won champioships from nealy every draft poisition.

Should I assume that you are suggesting that those of us that win championships most years are winning because of luck? Most ofter people refer to luck when others win and they lose. They say things like "Boy was he lucky". Or "I would've won if...". It's ironic that the ones that consistently win have the least amount of dumb luck along the way.

 

[Family Matters]

As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

Let me respond by answering your question:

It's not luck, it's skill. Anyone that picked Edge in the first round should have known better. Just look at the history of the AZ running game and it's not hard to figure out he was not going to put up good numbers. If he did then he was Superman. They did nothing to improve their run blocking. Personally, I would've taken (and did) Westbrook in the first round of every PPR league I was in past the #6 hole. In non-PPR, I might have taken him somewhere after the 10 spot.

This is perfect evidence of why it isn't luck. Most the experts I know feel the same way. Many knew Edge was in trouble. Only his history kept in the first round. We all knew Westbrook's only issue was health. But he's worth the risk IMO. It was stated clearly that he was going to get more goalline carries to go along with his already great production.

I think you missed the point of the question. The question was if you wanted to take Edge with the 8th pick, but someone took him with the 6th or 7th, and you wound up 'settling' for Westbrook at #8, was that skill or luck?

Skill in that you picked Westbrook over Cadillac Williams or whoever else was possible, but luck in that you would have taken Edge if one person in the draft hadn't been even dumber than you and happened to draft right before you.

I guess it's a bad exmple then. So let's say I was hoping for player A and the guy in front of me took him leaving me the another player. Is that what you mean?

Well if so, then I would say no problem. I planned for that scenario. If player A isn't there then my next move will be player B. Again, not luck. Skill. It's called draft preparation and it's used until the last round.

 

[Jackal King]

As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

Let me respond by answering your question:

It's not luck, it's skill. Anyone that picked Edge in the first round should have known better. Just look at the history of the AZ running game and it's not hard to figure out he was not going to put up good numbers. If he did then he was Superman. They did nothing to improve their run blocking. Personally, I would've taken (and did) Westbrook in the first round of every PPR league I was in past the #6 hole. In non-PPR, I might have taken him somewhere after the 10 spot.

This is perfect evidence of why it isn't luck. Most the experts I know feel the same way. Many knew Edge was in trouble. Only his history kept in the first round. We all knew Westbrook's only issue was health. But he's worth the risk IMO. It was stated clearly that he was going to get more goalline carries to go along with his already great production.

I think you missed the point of the question. The question was if you wanted to take Edge with the 8th pick, but someone took him with the 6th or 7th, and you wound up 'settling' for Westbrook at #8, was that skill or luck?

Skill in that you picked Westbrook over Cadillac Williams or whoever else was possible, but luck in that you would have taken Edge if one person in the draft hadn't been even dumber than you and happened to draft right before you.

I guess it's a bad exmple then. So let's say I was hoping for player A and the guy in front of me took him leaving me the another player. Is that what you mean?

Well if so, then I would say no problem. I planned for that scenario. If player A isn't there then my next move will be player B. Again, not luck. Skill. It's called draft preparation and it's used until the last round.

I'm probably messing up my point by using names like Edge and Westy.

But...what I'm trying to illustrate is the scenario where you have x number of guys ranked for your next pick. Let's say you have 8 guys ranked from best to worst.

And...the 7 owners in front of you take the highest ranked players leaving you with your lowest ranked player.

Now....your player then goes onto outperform the other guys.

Was that skill?

I say 'no' because had you been allowed to choose who you wanted to....you would have picked another player.

 

[OldMilwaukee]

bigger leagues + bigger rosters + bigger starting lineups + total points = less luck

Very well put, this is by far the simplest and the best way to reduce the luck variable!!!

 

[Wilbur Wood]

I think it's fair to say that the Shark Pool agrees that the degree to which 'luck' is involved in any fantasy football championship is significantly influenced by the format of the league. If this is true, then I think an examination of the popular formats could result in a format where luck is wrung out of the equation as much as practical...leaving us with the most skillful format in the hobby today.I suggest that the 'tournament' style format is the format that requires the most skill. When I say 'tournament'...I'm describing the format where everyone can use a player only once per season.This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players. This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.The biggest problem with this format in gaining wide spread popularity, is that many people consider the draft the high point of the season, and few want to give it up.But...I think for those that are really put off by the 'luck factor'...the tournament format is something to consider.Thoughts?

I've played in the FF-TOC tournament style for 2 years now. I respectfully disagree on the "luck quotient" involved, as I actually think that there is MORE LUCK involved in the FFTOC format than there is in a well structured, high performance scoring formatted league:#1 Injuries still play a big role in the tourney format as it can eliminate the use of stud players who you were saving for a juicy matchup of the playoff rounds (weeks 13-16) and then the saved stud gets injured.#2 The biggest luck factor that weighs against the tourney format is the "Law of Small Samples". For example, I make a value call this year in a few leagues that WRs such as Roy Williams and Andre Johnson would put up Top 5ish WR numbers. At their current pace, I'd be pretty darn correct and rewarded over the course of the fantasy season. However, a lot of this production gets somewhat randomly distributed over the course of a 16 game season. Yes, matchups do play some role. So in a tournament if I started Roy Williams last week vs the JETS (a pretty good matchp on paper), I would have gotten marginal reward (8 pts) vs Week 6 (Roy had 10-161-1 vs a comparable opponent in the Bills). This is especially true for WRs as their production is lumpy - Hines Ward last week, even though there were better matchups on paper to save him for in a tourney. Stumbling into LT's 4 TD week in a tourney is largely luck as it just so happened to coincide with a large number of 1st and goals from inside the 5 yard line.Formats in regular leagues that reduce luck IMO are:#1 Auction draft (as a general rule early draft slots increase odds of making playoffs)#2 Larger number of starting player requirements (a league that starts 10 players instead of 7 or 8 will require a stronger, deeper team to succeed.#3 A much more high performance, less TD-centric scoring system.#4 The use of the Super Flex position (opens up a wider array of strategies)#5 No limits on WW pickups each week#6 Schedule double headers each week#7 Have final wild card playoff slot based on total points.

 

[Jackal King]

I think it's fair to say that the Shark Pool agrees that the degree to which 'luck' is involved in any fantasy football championship is significantly influenced by the format of the league. If this is true, then I think an examination of the popular formats could result in a format where luck is wrung out of the equation as much as practical...leaving us with the most skillful format in the hobby today.I suggest that the 'tournament' style format is the format that requires the most skill. When I say 'tournament'...I'm describing the format where everyone can use a player only once per season.This format eliminates all of the luck associated with the draft. Everyone has equal access to all players. This format minimizes luck associated with injuries....in that an injury impacts everyone the same.In fact...I'm not sure I can see where there is any relevant luck in this format.The biggest problem with this format in gaining wide spread popularity, is that many people consider the draft the high point of the season, and few want to give it up.But...I think for those that are really put off by the 'luck factor'...the tournament format is something to consider.Thoughts?

I've played in the FF-TOC tournament style for 2 years now. I respectfully disagree on the "luck quotient" involved, as I actually think that there is MORE LUCK involved in the FFTOC format than there is in a well structured, high performance scoring formatted league:#1 Injuries still play a big role in the tourney format as it can eliminate the use of stud players who you were saving for a juicy matchup of the playoff rounds (weeks 13-16) and then the saved stud gets injured.#2 The biggest luck factor that weighs against the tourney format is the "Law of Small Samples". For example, I make a value call this year in a few leagues that WRs such as Roy Williams and Andre Johnson would put up Top 5ish WR numbers. At their current pace, I'd be pretty darn correct and rewarded over the course of the fantasy season. However, a lot of this production gets somewhat randomly distributed over the course of a 16 game season. Yes, matchups do play some role. So in a tournament if I started Roy Williams last week vs the JETS (a pretty good matchp on paper), I would have gotten marginal reward (8 pts) vs Week 6 (Roy had 10-161-1 vs a comparable opponent in the Bills). This is especially true for WRs as their production is lumpy - Hines Ward last week, even though there were better matchups on paper to save him for in a tourney. Stumbling into LT's 4 TD week in a tourney is largely luck as it just so happened to coincide with a large number of 1st and goals from inside the 5 yard line.Formats in regular leagues that reduce luck IMO are:#1 Auction draft (as a general rule early draft slots increase odds of making playoffs)#2 Larger number of starting player requirements (a league that starts 10 players instead of 7 or 8 will require a stronger, deeper team to succeed.#3 A much more high performance, less TD-centric scoring system.#4 The use of the Super Flex position (opens up a wider array of strategies)#5 No limits on WW pickups each week#6 Schedule double headers each week#7 Have final wild card playoff slot based on total points.

Good post Wilbur.I happen to see the injury element differently...in that I see it as universally a product of luck...but with far more dire consequences in a draft format versus a FFTOC format.Your point on 'small samples' is something I also look at differently. I happen to think that picking the specific weekly performance requires more skill...than picking performance based over a season. But, I do see your point that you can be right about the player...and just pick the wrong game to play him.

 

[Family Matters]

As someone pointed out in the other thread....if you picked Westbrook with your 8th pick....but would have picked Edge had he been there....is that 'skill'...or is that 'luck'?

Let me respond by answering your question:

It's not luck, it's skill. Anyone that picked Edge in the first round should have known better. Just look at the history of the AZ running game and it's not hard to figure out he was not going to put up good numbers. If he did then he was Superman. They did nothing to improve their run blocking. Personally, I would've taken (and did) Westbrook in the first round of every PPR league I was in past the #6 hole. In non-PPR, I might have taken him somewhere after the 10 spot.

This is perfect evidence of why it isn't luck. Most the experts I know feel the same way. Many knew Edge was in trouble. Only his history kept in the first round. We all knew Westbrook's only issue was health. But he's worth the risk IMO. It was stated clearly that he was going to get more goalline carries to go along with his already great production.

I think you missed the point of the question. The question was if you wanted to take Edge with the 8th pick, but someone took him with the 6th or 7th, and you wound up 'settling' for Westbrook at #8, was that skill or luck?

Skill in that you picked Westbrook over Cadillac Williams or whoever else was possible, but luck in that you would have taken Edge if one person in the draft hadn't been even dumber than you and happened to draft right before you.

I guess it's a bad exmple then. So let's say I was hoping for player A and the guy in front of me took him leaving me the another player. Is that what you mean?

Well if so, then I would say no problem. I planned for that scenario. If player A isn't there then my next move will be player B. Again, not luck. Skill. It's called draft preparation and it's used until the last round.

I'm probably messing up my point by using names like Edge and Westy.

But...what I'm trying to illustrate is the scenario where you have x number of guys ranked for your next pick. Let's say you have 8 guys ranked from best to worst.

And...the 7 owners in front of you take the highest ranked players leaving you with your lowest ranked player.

Now....your player then goes onto outperform the other guys.

Was that skill?

I say 'no' because had you been allowed to choose who you wanted to....you would have picked another player.

I see your point. I guess I do not see it as luck. You have your rankings and projections and they will not likely be exactly as you thought. So you know a few guys are going to outperform their draft or ranking. I do not consider it luck that the guy you were left with outperformed his drafted position. You had to have him ranked there in order to darft him in the first place. It's opportunity knocking so to speak.

We know every year there will be some of those guys that surprise in how well they do. Sometimes it's 2nd/3rd rounders performing like 1st rounders. Sometimes it's known sleeper candidates that you suspect will do better than most expect. If you want to qualify that as luck then yes to your question. But I really doubt you'll find very many shark types agreeing that's what luck is.

Here's another thought to add into the equation. When you first try something new and you succeed it's sometimes called beginners luck. When does experience trump luck?

 

[Islander]

I see your point. I guess I do not see it as luck. You have your rankings and projections and they will not likely be exactly as you thought. So you know a few guys are going to outperform their draft or ranking. I do not consider it luck that the guy you were left with outperformed his drafted position. You had to have him ranked there in order to darft him in the first place. It's opportunity knocking so to speak.We know every year there will be some of those guys that surprise in how well they do. Sometimes it's 2nd/3rd rounders performing like 1st rounders. Sometimes it's known sleeper candidates that you suspect will do better than most expect. If you want to qualify that as luck then yes to your question. But I really doubt you'll find very many shark types agreeing that's what luck is. Here's another thought to add into the equation. When you first try something new and you succeed it's sometimes called beginners luck. When does experience trump luck?

When you get to draft your 8th guy out of 8, and he does well, at least you had him as #8. Other teams maybe did not this guy until 2 rounds later. If owner X has Plummer ranked ahead of Rivers (like 99% of owners), but ends up with Rivers in the draft, I think it's because owner X might have ranked Rivers ahead of anybody else, I don't see it as luck. Sure, if Plummer was still available at that point he would have gone with Plummer. But going with Rivers and getting good value out of it is not luck. I know many unsuccesful FF players blaming their problems on bad luck (every year). Good FF players usually don't think the same way.