What's new
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.

PPR or Non PPR? That is the question (1 Viewer)

What do you play or prefer to play? PPR or Non PPR?

  • PPR

    Votes: 50 71.4%

  • Non PPR

    Votes: 20 28.6%
  • Total voters
    70
Carl Eller's Dead Liver

Carl Eller's Dead Liver

Footballguy
What do you play or prefer to play?

The reason I ask is because some of the PodCasts I listen to only talk Non PPR.....which they call a "Standard League". I thought PPR was the new "Standard League". My assumption is that more people play PPR or prefer to play PPR. I'm in 5 leagues and they are all PPR. I haven't played in a Non-PPR in over 10 years.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.

 
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
That.

They've bent over backwards to make the passing game all but assuredly successful for any team with competent skill position guys. And the nature of RB in general has forced the game to evolve in a back-by-committee direction. PPR no longer levels the field, it breaks it.

Any scoring system that values a Danny Woodhead type as a top RB performer is less about football and more about manipulating the stats. Standard is the gold standard.

 
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
I couldn't disagree more. The top 5-6 players in most PPR drafts are still RBs and PPR allows WR's to start being taken in the late first/early second over 2nd tier RB's. In non-PPR leagues if you are picking at the end of the first round, you are almost forced to take two 2nd tier RB's knowing that there are so many RBBC's out there making you screwed if you don't. In PPR you can take the actual best players on the board (which are the top WRs) picking near the back end turn, because you can get valuable pass catching RB's later in the draft. MOST IMPORTANTLY, these days there are WAY too many RBBC's that the number of valuable RB's is low in non-PPR......PPR makes guys like Woodhead, Spiller, Gio, Ellington valuable commodities. Non-PPR is the obsolete type of league.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.

 
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
Agreed......you need to have a top half of the draft pick to win the league. In non-PPR, if you are a top 5 pick you are guaranteed a bell cow RB (which only increases in value in non-PPR) and then one of the top WR's.....gaining you a statistical advantage off the bat in 2 if not 3 positions. Top WR's rarely fall back to you in that same spot in PPR leagues. That's the way it should be. If you don't draw a top 5-6 pick or so in non-PPR you are starting at an extreme disadvantage.

Now if you play auction, non-PPR is okay I guess......but I'm willing to bet most people play in "Standard PPR leagues"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carl Eller said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
Agreed......you need to have a top half of the draft pick to win the league. In non-PPR, if you are a top 5 pick you are guaranteed a bell cow RB (which only increases in value in non-PPR) and then one of the top WR's.....gaining you a statistical advantage off the bat in 2 if not 3 positions. Top WR's rarely fall back to you in that same spot in PPR leagues. That's the way it should be. If you don't draw a top 5-6 pick or so in non-PPR you are starting at an extreme disadvantage.

Now if you play auction, non-PPR well that's the fair way to go.
Click to expand...
Agree, auction balances out the draft slot disparity. But it doesn't settle the RB positional disparity unless the other 11 guys in your league are cutthroat and run up the cost of those players.

 
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
I couldn't disagree more. The top 5-6 players in most PPR drafts are still RBs and PPR allows WR's to start being taken in the late first/early second over 2nd tier RB's. In non-PPR leagues if you are picking at the end of the first round, you are almost forced to take two 2nd tier RB's knowing that there are so many RBBC's out there making you screwed if you don't. In PPR you can take the actual best players on the board (which are the top WRs) picking near the back end turn, because you can get valuable pass catching RB's later in the draft. MOST IMPORTANTLY, these days there are WAY too many RBBC's that the number of valuable RB's is low in non-PPR......PPR makes guys like Woodhead, Spiller, Gio, Ellington valuable commodities. Non-PPR is the obsolete type of league.
Click to expand...
If you're going to narrow down your focus on the top 5-6 picks, you're bound to make poor assumptions on a scoring system like this. Many of the top 5-6 picks are RBs because that's all that's left of the bell-cow RBs, and most of the ones being taken there are huge receivers that get unnecessary stat boosts for catching the ball causing a disproportionate importance on RBs who catch 50+ balls vs those who may be just as good or better at every other facet of the game.

 
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.

 
I agree with the non-PPR consensus here. PPR was invented to correct an RB/WR imbalance that existed when most teams used a 3-down running back and running was considered essential to success in the league.

The league changes toward a more open offense, coupled with the use of RBBC by a large majority of NFL teams has swung the pendulum the other way enough that PPR is no longer needed to achieve its purpose. Add in the greater likelihood of those "obvious" top RBs being hurt/dropping out of the top 10 compared to the top WRs and the balance is just fine where it stands in non-PPR.

The fact that RBs still go high in round 1 has more to do with positional scarcity of every-down backs than with expectations that they will reliably outscore top WRs. That won't be corrected with or without ppr. Same reason Gronk is going so high, or Watt in IDP leagues...doesn't mean we need to skew the scoring system in favor of TE or DL.

Factor in how ppr skews the balance between pounding backs and catching backs needlessly, and it's more trouble than it's worth. A solution in search of a problem.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.

 
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.

Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.

 
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

 
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.

Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
I wasn't concerned, but im looking at the Staff rankings right now:

Bell, Peterson, Charles, Gronk, A. Brown, Lynch, Lacy - if were gonna cherry pick things that don't matter to the actual argument.

So the #1 WR the last two years is in the top 7, thats pretty solid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.

Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
I wasn't concerned, but im looking at the Staff rankings right now:

Bell, Peterson, Charles, Gronk, A. Brown, Lynch, Lacy - if were gonna cherry pick things that don't matter to the actual argument.
Click to expand...
You should look again at the current non-ppr consensus staff rankings. They are exactly how I listed them. Look, if you want to play PPR go ahead. But don't act like the dynamics of the NFL haven't changed over the last 15-20 years towards a pass-heavy game.

ETA: you might want to edit out the premium content of your post.

ETA2: Never mind, they're wrong anyway.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.

Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
I wasn't concerned, but im looking at the Staff rankings right now:

Bell, Peterson, Charles, Gronk, A. Brown, Lynch, Lacy - if were gonna cherry pick things that don't matter to the actual argument.
Click to expand...
You should look again at the current non-ppr consensus staff rankings. They are exactly how I listed them. Look, if you want to play PPR go ahead. But don't act like the dynamics of the NFL haven't changed over the last 15-20 years towards a pass-heavy game.

ETA: :cry:

ETA2: :cry: :cry: :cry:
Click to expand...
I acknowledged that they changed... I said there are even fewer top tier RBs, thus their value in standard scoring has gone up even more. Standard scoring is what hasn't changed. There are more WR depth than ever before, and less RB depth. If you are playing a non-auction snake draft standard league, the value of your draft slot is laughably huge. This article was written years ago, and outlines the inherent value of draft position. Now apply common-sense (the above), magnitudes worse.

Also the top 10 or so of the rankings are freely available.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
PPR makes no sense. It's a crazy pass happy league, why bolster WR numbers even more? PPR is outdated.

 
Ilov80s said:
PPR makes no sense. It's a crazy pass happy league, why bolster WR numbers even more? PPR is outdated.
Click to expand...
What is there to make sense? What doesn't make sense?

Its about balancing out positional values. You can either give points for catching balls, or you can force people to start more WRs or fewer RBs.

Or you can maintain RBs being grossly over-valued compared to the number of talented ones available.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That theory made sense in 2006. Not today when RB scoring is down and WR scoring is up. Plus it makes no sense that a 1 yard catch is worth more than a 9 yard run. I'm in a standard league and I expect 1 TE and 3-4 WRs bring taken in the first round. Another 5-6 in the second. They have tons of value.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Run It Up said:
Ilov80s said:
PPR makes no sense. It's a crazy pass happy league, why bolster WR numbers even more? PPR is outdated.
Click to expand...
What is there to make sense? What doesn't make sense?

Its about balancing out positional values. You can either give points for catching balls, or you can force people to start more WRs or fewer RBs.

Or you can maintain RBs being grossly over-valued compared to the number of talented ones available.
Click to expand...
if it's just about positional values, the better solution is to change the lineups.

 
FUBAR said:
Run It Up said:
Ilov80s said:
PPR makes no sense. It's a crazy pass happy league, why bolster WR numbers even more? PPR is outdated.
Click to expand...
What is there to make sense? What doesn't make sense?

Its about balancing out positional values. You can either give points for catching balls, or you can force people to start more WRs or fewer RBs.

Or you can maintain RBs being grossly over-valued compared to the number of talented ones available.
Click to expand...
if it's just about positional values, the better solution is to change the lineups.
Click to expand...
Perfectly fair argument, its not what happened, but it could have definitely been what happened. I prefer PPR because it feels less cumbersome and the familiarity from playing with it for the last decade. But in the leagues I run personally, we start at least 3WR. Its a balancing act.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.

Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.

Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.

Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
What matters more is what happens down the road in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. It's clear that you only see it one way, so I'm not going to spend the time explaining it.

 
The old solution to fantasy balance was PPR or 1/2PPR.

Now people are just comfortable with it. Unwilling to use a better fix. 0-RB.

NonPPR is the proper answer.

 
FUBAR said:
Run It Up said:
Ilov80s said:
PPR makes no sense. It's a crazy pass happy league, why bolster WR numbers even more? PPR is outdated.
Click to expand...
What is there to make sense? What doesn't make sense?

Its about balancing out positional values. You can either give points for catching balls, or you can force people to start more WRs or fewer RBs.

Or you can maintain RBs being grossly over-valued compared to the number of talented ones available.
Click to expand...
if it's just about positional values, the better solution is to change the lineups.
Click to expand...
Correct.

 
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
What matters more is what happens down the road in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. It's clear that you only see it one way, so I'm not going to spend the time explaining it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I thought you were asking for opinions. Instead you seem to be looking to confirm your previously conceived belief. I prefer non-ppr.

 
Amused to Death said:
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
What matters more is what happens down the road in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. It's clear that you only see it one way, so I'm not going to spend the time explaining it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I thought you were asking for opinions. Instead you seem to be looking to confirm your previously conceived belief.I prefer non-ppr.
Click to expand...
We were expressing opinions, but using words like "misinformed" and using smug comments like "I must play with fish" and "I can win the league from drafting late", etc are way more than expressing opinions.

We all know you love non-PPR.......but you are in the minority. Looks like a 70% PPR vote right now. That's a landslide! Non-PPR seems like the one that is obsolete. ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
What matters more is what happens down the road in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. It's clear that you only see it one way, so I'm not going to spend the time explaining it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I thought you were asking for opinions. Instead you seem to be looking to confirm your previously conceived belief.I prefer non-ppr.
Click to expand...
We were expressing opinions, but using words like "misinformed" and using smug comments like "I must play with fish" and "I can win the league from drafting late", etc are way more than expressing opinions. We all know you love non-PPR.......but you are in the minority. Looks like a 70% PPR vote right now. That's a landslide! Non-PPR seems like the one that is obsolete. ;)
Click to expand...
Wow relax. I got attacked by Run It Up first after I gave a very reasonable response. he posted stuff that was incorrect. I'm not the one that's mad. Go pick on someone who agreed with me. I'm out.
 
As I have said many times changing the starting requirements is going to have a larger impact of player values than a scoring system will. 10 years or so ago when PPR scoring became more popular, a lot of leagues were start 2RB 2WR. When you only need to start 2WR there are so many viable WR it makes them less valuable compared to a RB simply because there are at least 2 WR playing a lot on every team while there is maybe one RB on each team getting the majority of the action. Many leagues have since changed to a 3WR starting requirement because that better balances the scarcity at RB to WR. I would argue that requiring 4WR does a better job of that than starting 3WR but you get to that point by also allowing a flex RB/WR/TE which in most cases will be a WR.

If the objective is game balance, and the driver of player value is scarcity, then how do we achieve this balance in FF?

The following data is the average points scored for all positions from 2011-2013 for a 12 team league with starting requirements of 1QB 2RB 3WR 1TE 1FLEX (RB/WR/TE).

Standard

RB 12 183 points

WR 12 168 points

RB 24 138 points

WR 24 130 points

RB 36 98 points

WR 36 110 points

Total difference between positions is 9 points in favor of the RB.

PPR scoring

RB 12 224 points

WR 12 254 points

RB 24 167 points

WR 24 198 points

RB 36 125 points

WR 36 165 points

Total difference between positions is 101 points in favor of the WR.

Based on the above numbers a standard scoring league is much more balanced between RB and WR scoring than a PPR league is.

That said PPR or other types of scoring besides standard can make the viable player pool larger. This may be desirable for large leagues like 16 teams. However for a typical 12 team league it seems very clear that standard scoring is more balanced than PPR.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, people who dont see the inequity caused by ppr are just being willfully ignorant (or maybe they dont care enough to actually look at the disparity). :shrug: .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Carl Eller said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Run It Up said:
Amused to Death said:
Prefer, and mostly play in, standard scoring (non-PPR). IMO, PPR is obsolete. It was originally implemented to give WRs and TEs higher value compared to RBs when RBs dominated the 1st round. That's no longer the case and I feel PPR is still used just to add scoring.
Click to expand...
So the top 7 picks aren't still RBs and Gronk? Nothing has changed there are even fewer top tier RBs meaning a top 6 pick has an even more outrageous advantage over the back half of the pack.Standard scoring is literally be a top 6 pick or lose, the scoring system.
Click to expand...
FBGs top 12 non-PPR has 6 RBs, 1 TE & 5 WRs. Back when PPR was first being implemented that was unheard of. It was 11 RBs and Randy Moss in the 1st round.Play whatever you want, I prefer to not add PPR. And I can win a league drafting from late in the 1st in non-PPR, thank you.
Click to expand...
Well most of my leagues aren't filled with fish, so everything is important.
Click to expand...
:lmao: Yes, I must play with fish. My 8 year old, 14 team redraft is filled with those. I won last year from the 12 spot, since you're concerned.Now back to your other misinformation about how the top 7 non-PPR is presently constructed - RB,RB,TE,RB,WR,RB,WR. Again, that was unheard of when PPR was first being implemented.
Click to expand...
What matters more is what happens down the road in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. It's clear that you only see it one way, so I'm not going to spend the time explaining it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I thought you were asking for opinions. Instead you seem to be looking to confirm your previously conceived belief.I prefer non-ppr.
Click to expand...
We were expressing opinions, but using words like "misinformed" and using smug comments like "I must play with fish" and "I can win the league from drafting late", etc are way more than expressing opinions.

We all know you love non-PPR.......but you are in the minority. Looks like a 70% PPR vote right now. That's a landslide! Non-PPR seems like the one that is obsolete. ;)
Click to expand...
PPR (19 votes [59.38%])

Non PPR (13 votes [40.62%])

6 votes isnt a landslide. (granted, I expect the PPR lead to gain)

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Yeah, people who dont see the inequity non caused by ppr are just being willfully ignorant (or maybe they dont care enough to actually look at the disparity). :shrug: .
Click to expand...
I think it's just (a) that it's become the norm around here and (b) it makes players like Sproles, Woodhead and Vereen startable.

 
ponchsox said:
Non. PPR is for the weak.
Click to expand...
Or for those who want more flexible ways to build rosters and lineups.

As someone else mentioned, the starting lineup requirements can help with this as well.

The 2RB - 2 WR - 1 FLEX format is hopelessly updated.

 
Biabreakable said:
FUBAR said:
BigSteelThrill said:
Yeah, people who dont see the inequity non caused by ppr are just being willfully ignorant (or maybe they dont care enough to actually look at the disparity). :shrug: .
Click to expand...
I think it's just (a) that it's become the norm around here and (b) it makes players like Sproles, Woodhead and Vereen startable.
Click to expand...
It also makes goal line RB less viable because TD are worth less relative to receptions.
Click to expand...
And big play receivers like djax

 
BigSteelThrill said:
Jack White said:
ponchsox said:
Non. PPR is for the weak.
Click to expand...
Or for those who want more flexible ways to build rosters and lineups.

As someone else mentioned, the starting lineup requirements can help with this as well.

The 2RB - 2 WR - 1 FLEX format is hopelessly updated.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct that PPR is about making it easy.

NonPPR is now better about position and league balance.
Click to expand...
I think the component of this you're missing is that this is a game. It's supposed to be fun. PPR is fun.

For what it's worth, the guys who run this site typically refer to 12-team PPR leagues as their basis for things they're analyzing.

 
Ilov80s said:
That theory made sense in 2006. Not today when RB scoring is down and WR scoring is up. Plus it makes no sense that a 1 yard catch is worth more than a 9 yard run. I'm in a standard league and I expect 1 TE and 3-4 WRs bring taken in the first round. Another 5-6 in the second. They have tons of value.
Click to expand...
Sure it does. Catching a ball one yard right before getting blasting is tough. Much harder than being handed the ball.

Full point PPR is the way to go, but .5 PPR is a good compromise for the ladies.

 
eoMMan said:
Ilov80s said:
That theory made sense in 2006. Not today when RB scoring is down and WR scoring is up. Plus it makes no sense that a 1 yard catch is worth more than a 9 yard run. I'm in a standard league and I expect 1 TE and 3-4 WRs bring taken in the first round. Another 5-6 in the second. They have tons of value.
Click to expand...
Sure it does. Catching a ball one yard right before getting blasting is tough. Much harder than being handed the ball.

Full point PPR is the way to go, but .5 PPR is a good compromise for the ladies.
Click to expand...
As opposed to running straight into the d-line for that 1 yard? 300lbers vs 190lbers, egads.

 
eoMMan said:
Ilov80s said:
That theory made sense in 2006. Not today when RB scoring is down and WR scoring is up. Plus it makes no sense that a 1 yard catch is worth more than a 9 yard run. I'm in a standard league and I expect 1 TE and 3-4 WRs bring taken in the first round. Another 5-6 in the second. They have tons of value.
Click to expand...
Sure it does. Catching a ball one yard right before getting blasting is tough. Much harder than being handed the ball.

Full point PPR is the way to go, but .5 PPR is a good compromise for the ladies.
Click to expand...
I prefer full-point PPR as well.

I guess BigSteelThrill plays fantasy football for a living.

On the other hand, I have a lot of fun doing what I do for a living.

 
Some analysis on the subject from Rotoworld (I pasted just the conclusion - full details in the link):

To sum up…

If the primary goal of a PPR scoring system is to make more “fantasy-relevant” players, I don’t believe it’s succeeding. Sure, it’s inflating scoring so that more players score 10 or more points each week, but is that really making more players relevant if nearly everyone is getting a bump for reception scoring?

PPR does shift some value from RB to WR and TE, but it also deflates the most important position in football: the quarterback. As it stands, the position is so deep that owners can ignore it for the first half of the draft and still end up with a quality passer in the 8th or 9th round. There are strategies that revolve around streaming QBs from the waiver wire. While this is a valid strategy for one-QB PPR (and standard) format, given how important the position is in the NFL, shouldn’t fantasy football better reflect this importance?

PPR does a poor job of rewarding real-world value. Why should a player get a full point (equal to 10 rushing/receiving yards) for a catch that nets his team zero yards? If the goal is to reward players for moving the chains, then award a point or a half-point for each first down.

After going through this process, if I were starting a league, I would not use a PPR format. I think there are better ways to improve the balance between the positions and to reward on-field production. I’ll be back with a Part 2 of this scoring system study to discuss a few different options that commissioners and owners have to better balance positional value.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gottabesweet
Official 1st Pick PPR (Redraft) thread***
2
Replies
68
Views
2K
IndyCasey
IndyCasey
G
Superflex Non-PPR leagues
Replies
3
Views
419
Gally
G
P
Superflex differences
Replies
21
Views
536
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top