Any other PPR leagues considering scoring tweaks (1 Viewer)

[Sack-Religious]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.

We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.

A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards.

Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.

Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.

We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.

A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards.

Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.

Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

You want to make RBs more valuable? Why punish WRs by making them get 20 yards for a point? If anything, RBs should be .5 PPR and WRs 1 PPR. If you want to make QBs more valuable, don't penalize for INTs.

 

[chidoy]

Our league is similar where most players are equal. RB's aren't more valuable than WR's and QB's and so forth. We have PPC's for qb's so that they will level out as well. However, WR's get more points for rec's than RB's since RB's get completions, rushing yards along with receiving yards, whereas WR's just get receiving yards and completion points.

Our draft isn't dominated by RB's in the first rounds. So top tier WR's are just as valuable as top tier RB's/QB's.

 

[Sack-Religious]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.

We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.

A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards.

Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.

Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

You want to make RBs more valuable? Why punish WRs by making them get 20 yards for a point? If anything, RBs should be .5 PPR and WRs 1 PPR. If you want to make QBs more valuable, don't penalize for INTs.

I think a lot of this has to do with the perception (valid or not) that this was the "Year of the WR." IMO, part of that is due to the injuries/ineffectiveness to many of the RB's who were projected to be in the top 12 (Gore, SJax, Alexander, Ronnie Brown, Rudi, Maroney etc.), which probably would have had the top WR's and RB's scoring close to the same amount of points. It's not necessarily me who wants this, but my leaguemates. Their logic is that generally speaking WR's catch more balls than RB's, so RB's can get the 1 PPR. I get the Derrick Mason example almost every week. "Mason caught 8 balls for 80 yards and outscored whatever RB who rushed for 90 yards and scored." I chalk this up to the majority of the league coming from a previous TD-only league I took over so while they're good players, they're unfamiliar with the scoring system and the proportional values associated with players. They also tend to look at single-game "blow up" performances and base their opinion on that, rather than the big picture numbers.

Looking at the numbers in my league, they are pretty even with the top 5 WR's all scoring in the low, to mid 20's, with the top 5 RB's in the low, to mid 20's with a large group of both positions scoring 15-20 ppg. Now that I look at it, I really don't see the need to decrease WR scoring at all. If there's a league revolt, I might consider making it 1 pt per 15 yards receiving, but I don't think it's necessary to even go that far.

Not penalizing for INT's for QB's is interesting, but I don't know how that would fly in my league. I personally like the idea of .25 or .5 point per completion. It would reward QB's who complete a lot of passes and somewhat minimize the turnovers while greatly rewarding QB's who complete passes and minimize mistakes.

 

[QuizGuy66]

The one league I'm in starts PPR with the 6th catch (WR/TE only). Basically it rewards stud receiver games but not run of the mill receiver games.

-QG

 

[greenline]

We switched to 2QB league.

 

[Black]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards. Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

We bumped Passing TDs up to 6 points and 25 passing yards/1 point, but it's a delicate balance after that... It's still hard to find a good, consistent RB (outside of the top 4 or so PPR monsters Bush, Westbrook, Gore (years past), SJax), but those 3rd down backs are useful, so I wouldn't change the value of receptions.Going to 2 points/TE reception will make a small handful of TEs become monsters (Gonzo, Winslow), and if you have TE mandatory, that handicap is sort of built-in already.

 

[sdsjr3]

I dunno. In one of my leagues we switched this year to PPR (standard 1 point per rec accross the board).

First...this very well may be the anomoly as the year of the WR, but the spread offenses and ticky tack penalties are only going to lead to MORE WR scoring and more throwing. Add that to the growing number of RBBC and you have devalued RBs a bit too much IMHO.

Second...the "Derrick Mason" example was brought up earlier. I agree, that sucks. If I'm going to get beat by Randy Moss's 3 TDs, I'm cool with that. Or by Jamal Lewis scoring 4 times while only accumulating 30 yards, I'm cool with that too. And I've never EVER played in a TD only...or TD heavy league for that matter. All the leagues I play in are performance scoring, but making the change to PPR performance in this particular league has been tough to swallow...And I'm leading the league.

Third...if you then throw in fractional points for completion you've only created a bigger mess IMO. Brady, for example, is averaging right around 30pts/week using 1pt/20yds and 4pts/TD. Add in completion points and he's singlehandedly winning somebody (in this case me) the title....or close to it as it were.

Bottom line, I don't like seeing guys like Welker, Mason, Engram, etc scoring as much as (or outscoring in many cases) elite RBs because the backs only get 100 yards and a TD (ONLY? that's nonsense, that's a good game for any RB). None of those guys are "studs" and shouldn't be considered as such. But, this in just one man's opinion.

S

 

[Beau Tocks]

We have in our 10 man league the QB's earning 1 pt. for first 10 completions and an additional 1 pt. for every five thereafter and it's worked very well.

 

[Liquid Tension]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards. Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

I would get rid of PPR altogether, but if you must give .5 to WR's and 1 point to TE's and nothing to RB's. keep yards at 1 pt for 10 yards except QB's which should be 20

 

[Superbowl Shuffle]

No, we're not making any changes. We like PPR (1pt across the board), and like that it balances the scoring across all positions.

As for the complaints about de-valuing "stud RBs" versus possession WRs and versatile backs, that's the beauty of strategy involved. Everyone in the league operates under the same set of rules. It is the shark that identifies the ways to maximize the output from his team in accordance with those rules. If you set up your league to be PPR, then play the game that way and don't complain about player X being a better football player but not scoring as much as player Y in your league.

 

[Liquid Tension]

No, we're not making any changes. We like PPR (1pt across the board), and like that it balances the scoring across all positions.

 

[fkohws]

We switched to 2QB league.

We did this a few years ago and it changes the whole dynamic of the draft. QBs will disappear quicker than you think and if you aren't prepared, you'll end up with crappy QBs. On the other hand, teams with 2 stud QBs can really do well in a league.

 

[barista]

I don't understand the idea that you want to equalize every position. I would try to make each postiion as consistent as possible.

 

[SSOG]

The problem with PPC is that things get out of hand in a hurry. Adding PPC won't dramatically impact the difference between top QBs and mediocre QBs, but it will DRAMATICALLY influence how many points the average QB scores, which pretty much dooms any team that loses its QB to injury in the middle of a game. I play in a league that rewards a full point per completion, and you can easily win with a mediocre QB, but if your QB gets hurt, it's an automatic loss.

If I were playing around with it, I'd add a point per completion and SUBTRACT a point per incompletion. This does a lot more to reward good performance (50% passing is worth nothing, while the more above 50% you go, the more points you get), which should create a much higher differential between top performers and mediocre performers. That should make QBs more valuable without giving them cartoon scores.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I don't understand the idea that you want to equalize every position. I would try to make each postiion as consistent as possible.

Making each position about equal avoids a particular position from becoming an afterthought.If QBs score 100 a week, RBs 50, and WRs 5, no one will draft Randy Moss for a long, long time in your draft - and rightly so.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

As the commish of a first-year local redraft league, I don't necessarily want to jump the gun to tweak scoring in an effort to make it more balanced based on one season. We give pretty standard PPR scoring, all TD's are 6 and 1 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving. Minus 2 points per turnover.

We will more than likely be keeping all receptions at 1 pt. However, I'm open to having WR's score .5 PPR, RB's 1 PPR and TE's 2 PPR.

A few owners have asked about increasing the yardage necessary for a WR to get a point to 20 yards.

Another tweak that's being considered is giving fractional points per completion for QB's (probably .25 or .5 PPC). It would counter the RB/WR/TE PPR slightly, but this would also make QB's even more valuable.

Have any leagues done things like this previously? Did it create any parity in the scoring or increase owner satisfaction?

Consider PPFDR - Point Per First Down Reception.Here's the article:

Points Per Deception

 

[DA RAIDERS]

ppr league

this league has .5 for rb's & the completion points for qb's. it makes the qb a little too valuable, imho. & whatever you do, don't make the rb's MORE valuable.

 

[Sack-Religious]

Thanks for the suggestions guys. Pasquino's PPFDR is something I've been considering, however, I'm not sure our league hosting site can handle that. It's definitely something I'll look into, though.

SSOG's suggestion of PPC but subtracting a point per incompletion is also very interesting.

I was actually looking over scoring averages last night for my league.

The top 10 (QB's included) break down as follows: 2 QB, 5 RB, 3 WR

The top 25 (QB's included) break down as follows: 5 QB, 10 RB, 10 WR, 1 TE

In terms of PPC, I was thinking more along the lines of 1/4 point per completion. A QB would only get 1 point per 4 completions, so if he completes 20 passes he'd get an additional 5 points. Not enough to make QB scoring go through the roof, but it might be enough to sneak a few more into the top 25.

I also like the idea of awarding 1 PPR after a certain number of catches and I think I'll also toy with the idea of 1.5 PPR for TE's. Of course this will make the top TE's even more valuable, but the top 5 at any position generally score much more than the next tier anyway and in a TE required league it might make starting 2nd a or 3rd tier TE more viable.

Great suggestions, guys!

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

.5 RB

1 WR (start 3)

1.5 TE

...along with starting 2 QBs (super flex)

Worked very well in keeping each position as equal in value to any league I've been in. Simple is better in my opinion, because nobody wants to calculate too much while watching games. As such, no need to add completions/incompletions into the mix, when you don't need to.

 

[chidoy]

We switched to 2QB league.

We did this a few years ago and it changes the whole dynamic of the draft. QBs will disappear quicker than you think and if you aren't prepared, you'll end up with crappy QBs. On the other hand, teams with 2 stud QBs can really do well in a league.

x2

 

[SSOG]

We switched to 2QB league.

We did this a few years ago and it changes the whole dynamic of the draft. QBs will disappear quicker than you think and if you aren't prepared, you'll end up with crappy QBs. On the other hand, teams with 2 stud QBs can really do well in a league.

x2

The big problem with starting 2 QBs is that when the byes hit, there will be people who quite simply cannot field a full starting roster. An idea I'd heard was making the second QB a QB/RB flex spot. Most people will start a second QB there, because it's a lot easier to find a second quality QB than it is to find a third or even FOURTH quality RB who could outscore a second QB... but in weeks where everything goes wrong, you aren't forced to start a crappy backup and hope for an injury- you can just plug an RB in there, instead.