article slightly knocking vbd (1 Viewer)

[tecmo bo]

http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/publi...Nope_Not_me.htm

 

[JohnnyU]

I've never used VBD or Draft Dominator and I don't need it.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Terrible article. I don't think that anyone out there says to use VBD exclusively and that's basically what he's railing against. VBD is a tool to help you compare values across positions. Period.

 

[PsychoMan]

i like this guy's approach

 

[dagogrease]

To me, it seems what he is describing is precisely what Draft Dominator does? Incorporating VBD with positional needs.

 

[burd]

nothing here that hasn't already been written before ...

 

[Lehigh98]

I do the same thing this guy does for that situation. But what does he do for the next pick when his next one is 16 picks away and he knows all the current tier QB, WR, RB, and TE's will be gone? How does he choose between a similar QB, WR, RB and TE for that pick?... hmm, maybe a little VBD isn't such a bad idea.

 

[Bartguy]

His approach makes sense and works for him, obviously. But some of his assumptions about how and why people use VBD are flawed.

1. Nobody I know drafts straight from the top down of their VBD list regardless of who is available. You compare what VBD tells you to what the ADP and your league's tendencies, (much like he does) so that you can get the guys you want as late as possible.

2. The notion that your projections will never be right, so the entire process is flawed. Of course some of your projections might be off, but in aggregate I bet they tend to group similar performing players together — and with a lot more reasoning behind it than your gut feeling does.

3. Also the notion that tiering/bucketing isn't the same thing as projecting, only lazier. How in the world can you put guys into tiers, especially tiers of differing numbers of players, if you're not at least intuitively projecting their performance for the upcoming year?

In reality, VBD is a better version of his tiered list because it puts players within a position into their tiers or buckets AND also gives the drafter some idea of how they should fit with the players at other positions. This doesn't mean that you should draft Gates in round one, but it sure is an advantage to know that he projects out that strong versus the other positions. Here's how: Say VBD tells you Gates is the 12th most "valuable" player on the board-so he's worth a first round pick. Your league draft data and ADP says Gates is being drafted in the beginning of the third round.

When the article's author is drafting, he has only a vague (and probably low, in my experience) idea of how much Gates is "worth." He's just trying to not grab him before ADP says he's going to go - and the later the better. And not knowing that, he's more likely to pick a marginal player at a more highly-valued position like RB.

I'd argue that the VBD drafter has an advantage. He knows that Gates is the best pick and can decide if he wants to jump the ADP gun a little bit and say pick him at the end of 2 to insure that he gets him. OR he can wait and try to get him at an even better value. But the knowledge of where Gates (or any player) fits in against other positions is never a disadvantage when you're drafting.

I used to use a system very much like the author does and it's a good one, but it doesn't beat having the tool of VBD on your side.

 

[Thom Yorke]

His approach makes sense and works for him, obviously. But some of his assumptions about how and why people use VBD are flawed.

1. Nobody I know drafts straight from the top down of their VBD list regardless of who is available. You compare what VBD tells you to what the ADP and your league's tendencies, (much like he does) so that you can get the guys you want as late as possible.

2. The notion that your projections will never be right, so the entire process is flawed. Of course some of your projections might be off, but in aggregate I bet they tend to group similar performing players together — and with a lot more reasoning behind it than your gut feeling does.

3. Also the notion that tiering/bucketing isn't the same thing as projecting, only lazier. How in the world can you put guys into tiers, especially tiers of differing numbers of players, if you're not at least intuitively projecting their performance for the upcoming year?

In reality, VBD is a better version of his tiered list because it puts players within a position into their tiers or buckets AND also gives the drafter some idea of how they should fit with the players at other positions. This doesn't mean that you should draft Gates in round one, but it sure is an advantage to know that he projects out that strong versus the other positions. Here's how: Say VBD tells you Gates is the 12th most "valuable" player on the board-so he's worth a first round pick. Your league draft data and ADP says Gates is being drafted in the beginning of the third round.

When the article's author is drafting, he has only a vague (and probably low, in my experience) idea of how much Gates is "worth." He's just trying to not grab him before ADP says he's going to go - and the later the better. And not knowing that, he's more likely to pick a marginal player at a more highly-valued position like RB.

I'd argue that the VBD drafter has an advantage. He knows that Gates is the best pick and can decide if he wants to jump the ADP gun a little bit and say pick him at the end of 2 to insure that he gets him. OR he can wait and try to get him at an even better value. But the knowledge of where Gates (or any player) fits in against other positions is never a disadvantage when you're drafting.

I used to use a system very much like the author does and it's a good one, but it doesn't beat having the tool of VBD on your side.

 

[Longshot88]

Ive been saying the same things about VBD...I like the concept but projections must be on the money ...likely they are not..But My "skill " at drafting Has greatly improved over the last few years..

I am In the middle of a draft now and as you can see I dont need VDB to have a good Draft..My team is the Colts By the way http://football34.myfantasyleague.com/2007...=81948&O=17

 

[redman]

His approach makes sense and works for him, obviously. But some of his assumptions about how and why people use VBD are flawed.

1. Nobody I know drafts straight from the top down of their VBD list regardless of who is available. You compare what VBD tells you to what the ADP and your league's tendencies, (much like he does) so that you can get the guys you want as late as possible.

2. The notion that your projections will never be right, so the entire process is flawed. Of course some of your projections might be off, but in aggregate I bet they tend to group similar performing players together — and with a lot more reasoning behind it than your gut feeling does.

3. Also the notion that tiering/bucketing isn't the same thing as projecting, only lazier. How in the world can you put guys into tiers, especially tiers of differing numbers of players, if you're not at least intuitively projecting their performance for the upcoming year?

In reality, VBD is a better version of his tiered list because it puts players within a position into their tiers or buckets AND also gives the drafter some idea of how they should fit with the players at other positions. This doesn't mean that you should draft Gates in round one, but it sure is an advantage to know that he projects out that strong versus the other positions. Here's how: Say VBD tells you Gates is the 12th most "valuable" player on the board-so he's worth a first round pick. Your league draft data and ADP says Gates is being drafted in the beginning of the third round.

When the article's author is drafting, he has only a vague (and probably low, in my experience) idea of how much Gates is "worth." He's just trying to not grab him before ADP says he's going to go - and the later the better. And not knowing that, he's more likely to pick a marginal player at a more highly-valued position like RB.

I'd argue that the VBD drafter has an advantage. He knows that Gates is the best pick and can decide if he wants to jump the ADP gun a little bit and say pick him at the end of 2 to insure that he gets him. OR he can wait and try to get him at an even better value. But the knowledge of where Gates (or any player) fits in against other positions is never a disadvantage when you're drafting.

I used to use a system very much like the author does and it's a good one, but it doesn't beat having the tool of VBD on your side.

Tiering only begs the question: is this RB2 > this WR1 > QB1 > TE1?

What I like about VBD is that it forces you to do your homework and study each player and team he fits into. The other things are shortcuts, and any time I've only relied upon them I've felt like I've gone into my drafts unprepared.

 

[KCC]

No drafting system is perfect. That's a charge that can be leveled at any draft strategy so, as a criticism, it's basicly meaningless. Tiering is nice, but how do you pick from players in the same tier to fill a need unless you are projecting one to out-perform the other? Flip a coin?? If you haven't researched the players enough to at least suspect that one might do slightly better than the other perhaps, but I like to think projections are a logical consequence for those who do their homework.

 

[FantasyTrader]

No drafting system is perfect. That's a charge that can be leveled at any draft strategy so, as a criticism, it's basicly meaningless. Tiering is nice, but how do you pick from players in the same tier to fill a need unless you are projecting one to out-perform the other? Flip a coin?? If you haven't researched the players enough to at least suspect that one might do slightly better than the other perhaps, but I like to think projections are a logical consequence for those who do their homework.

If you can't take ANY TWO players before your draft and immediately assess who you would take first (I mean - at least have a strong conviction about it - right or wrong), I'll gladly give you the 11 hole and I'll take the 12.

 

[chris1969]

I did the tiering thing before vbd and it does have some advantages you are less likely to lock in on RB #27 over RB #28 just because you project 4 more fantasy points over a season and more likely to look at bye weeks, match-ups ect... and make a choice between the 2 based on solid info. I think that once you realize the weaknesses of vbd though, they are easy to overcome by understanding that your trading a guy with a better bye week for a guy you think will score 20 more points. The hard part for me is when the top 2 guys on your list play different positions and your weighing those same things vs 2 different drop-offs, but I'm getting better and better at making those decisions.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Terrible article. I don't think that anyone out there says to use VBD exclusively and that's basically what he's railing against. VBD is a tool to help you compare values across positions. Period.

I'll bet if you were a fly on the wall you'd probably be shocked at how incorrect you are. My guess is that between 30%-60% of the people who purchase software to assist them in the draft do not deviate from what it tells them to do.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I have never been a fan of VBD myself. It is like many of my university classes I had to take that were good in theory but when put into actual use they were meh.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I've never used VBD or Draft Dominator and I don't need it.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

No drafting system is perfect. That's a charge that can be leveled at any draft strategy so, as a criticism, it's basicly meaningless. Tiering is nice, but how do you pick from players in the same tier to fill a need unless you are projecting one to out-perform the other? Flip a coin?? If you haven't researched the players enough to at least suspect that one might do slightly better than the other perhaps, but I like to think projections are a logical consequence for those who do their homework.

Agreed. VBD comes with its own set of problems (flawed projections, incorrect baselines), but what the writer has outlined are the tools to be used in conjunction with VBD. I've never heard Joe (or anyone else who knows what they're talking about) say to draft straight off of a VBD list, so the article's basic premise is disingenuous at best.To me, where VBD is most valuable is in looking at a particular league's setup & finding where value is among groups rather than any particular player. I probably use it more to look back (what really happened) than ahead (what might happen) because those "projections" (a previous year's stats) are 100% correct. I can then find the sweet spots for positions in my draft.

 

[TinHat]

sounds like what he does is dynamic vbd

 

[salmonstud]

The draft approach in the article seems quite vanilla. Doesn't everyone that has been playing FF for a number of years and is into the hobby do this?

His pearls of wisdom seem like nothing more than common sense. Projecting where players will be selected in the draft by knowing your opponent's drafting history and taking into account what players they have drafted at what positions....along with looking at drop off in projected fantasy production at different positions seems obvious. It's not rocket science.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Honestly, I'm actually thankful that this guy wrote this article and I'm thankful that so many people agree with him. That just means that there are that many more lazy drafters out there that will just start essentially throwing positional darts starting in about round 4.

I'd much rather draft against someone that just has a cheatsheet and is going to draft by their gut than someone that has the tools to break down the scoring system and has put in the time to understand how their league setup will affect player values.

 

[JayMan]

3. Also the notion that tiering/bucketing isn't the same thing as projecting, only lazier. How in the world can you put guys into tiers, especially tiers of differing numbers of players, if you're not at least intuitively projecting their performance for the upcoming year? In reality, VBD is a better version of his tiered list because it puts players within a position into their tiers or buckets AND also gives the drafter some idea of how they should fit with the players at other positions.

The draft approach in the article seems quite vanilla. Doesn't everyone that has been playing FF for a number of years and is into the hobby do this? His pearls of wisdom seem like nothing more than common sense. Projecting where players will be selected in the draft by knowing your opponent's drafting history and taking into account what players they have drafted at what positions....along with looking at drop off in projected fantasy production at different positions seems obvious. It's not rocket science.

2x ... identifying perfectly the flaws of the article... Quite terrible that one would be called "GridGuru" from a FF site and post something like this

 

[Jason Wood]

Joe and David created the concept of VBD, and publish and updated view of VBD each and every year in the magazine. Having just seen this year's article, I can say that it reads the same as it has in the last few years relative to the key points.

1) VBD is a means to an end, not the entire solution

2) Dynamic VBD is the only thing that really works [which is what the Draft Dominator allows]

3) VBD should only be used through the first 100 or so picks of a standard redraft league, from that point you work on filling in positional needs

At the end of the day, I don't think anyone, including the guys who invented VBD, would disagree that basic, X-value VBD is the way to go anymore. Seems like he's barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Hi tecmo,No worries - I've been dealing with that one since the early days when I published it in my friend Bob Harris' Fantasy Pro Forecast magazine.From the article where I laid out the principles back in 1996.

This may come as a shock to some, but the essential first step to a successful draft is developing a hard set of projected stats that you expect every player to post in the following year. I’m not interested in the grumbling about how unpredictable football players and the whining that normally follows any discussion about player performance projections. If you’re going to dominate in this game, it’s absolutely essential that you have all the pertinent stats that your league tracks projected for the entire season. In my league, it’s Rushing TD’s, Receiving TD’s, Passing TD’s, Interceptions, Fumbles, Passing Yardage, Rushing Yardage, Receiving Yardage, Field Goals (by distance), Missed Field Goals (by distance), Extra Points, and Missed Extra Points. I project these numbers for every player that I expect to be Drafted, not just starters. Is this too much work? If it is, maybe you’re not Shark material. Save yourself the effort, stop right here and return to the “baitfish ranks”. Go buy yourself a “cheat sheet” off the newsstand and have a good time. You may do well. More than likely however, you’ll pad the wallets of the Sharks in your league. It’s not really that much work though. If you’ll think about it, you’re probably doing these projections already, just not this specifically and probably not formally. Everyone thinks that Young will throw more TD’s than Bledsoe. We all think Watters will gain more yards than Murrell (although it’ll be closer than you think). Everyone expects Morten Andersen to boot some 50+ yarders. Those things we know. What you must do with your projections is get a handle on EXACTLY how many more TD’s you expect Young to throw than Bledsoe. It’s not enough to say “he’s better”. You must decide how much better. This becomes critical later because in a real draft, you’re not comparing Bledsoe to Young only. You’re comparing Bledsoe to Ben Coates, Edgar Bennett, and Brett Perriman perhaps. To see how Bledsoe compares to them, you MUST understand exactly how he compares to Young. You’ll see why in a moment.Hey, nobody’s perfect with projections. You’ll do well to get close. It’s a tough game to predict. However, you can’t just throw in the towel. You must take your best shot at projecting the stats. It’s the starting point from which everything else is based. Spend some time on it. Give it some thought. You’ll get better as seasons go by. I always keep old projections and look back to see how I did. Look back each year and try to learn something. Should you have identified Bruce last year? How about Curtis Martin? Everybody blew it on Bledsoe. Maybe an established track record IS important? Can you trust a kicker? These are the type of factors you’ll be looking at and making your projections from. Sure, I’ve made tons of inaccurate calls. BUT, they were MY calls and when I drafted that player, I had a definite reason behind it and could justify why that he earned that spot on my roster and in the draft order. Do not dismiss these projections. They’re vitally important. The entire system will not work if you lack the desire/effort to project stats. At the very least, go buy the Fantasy Football Pro Forecast magazine (the one with Mel Kiper on the cover) and use their projections. That’s a good start and you’ll be way ahead of most of the owners in your league. However, it’s much more rewarding to do your own projections. Not to mention more accurate since they’ll reflect all the current situations.

For me, it really comes down to finding a better alternative to rank players. I fully understand that stat projections won't be totally accurate. And trust me, I've looked for 11 years for something that be totally accuarate. But I always come back to the question - if I don't use projections, what am I going to use to rank these guys?Horoscope? Uniform colors? Jersey numbers? I mean seriously. We all think Manning will throw more TDs than Charlie Frye (even Eli). Why? Because you mentally project their numbers. Some of you guys can tell me exactly how many more TDs and how many more yards to last inch that Manning will be better than Frye. Most folks just know he's going to be "better". Both are projections. And the real difference of course is that it's all relative. You're playing against other people. The guy that wins your league won't have perfect projections. But I bet they're better than the guys that don't win.J

 

[coolnerd]

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

From the article:

Guess what Nostradamus? Every projection, regardless if you developed it yourself or if it was provided by some website (an idea which still boggles my mind) is inherently incorrect. Easily 99% of the time, the projections you feed into the formulas and use to rank the players will be incorrect. Ouch!

His objection is just as valid when turned against his own system as it is when made against VBD.From his system:

Tiered Player List: This is your typical player "rankings" list broken down by position. However, instead of just having WRs (for example) listed 1-60, I have them broken into 8-12 sub-groups. Each sub-group (tier) includes a group of players I feel will produce very similar numbers over the course of the year. Again, unlike VBD, I am not going to guess at what exactly those numbers will be. All I am concerned about is that those numbers will be similar for all of the players in this tier.

Guess what, Nostradamus? Your grouping of WRs is going to be wildly incorrect in hindsight.As Joe said, the point isn't to be perfectly accurate; that's impossible. The point is to be more accurate than your league-mates.

Will Larry Johnson outscore Steven Jackson? There are a number of ways of trying to answer that question. You might pick Johnson because you think he's the better player. Or you might pick Jackson because you think he's in a better situation and faces an easier schedule. The point of doing projections is that it gets you to take all of those factors into account -- along with anything else you can think of that is relevant -- and it gets you to weigh them all against each other and come up with some concrete predictions concerning each guy's expected performance.

You'll get some right and you'll get some wrong. But I can't think of any reason to think you'd be right more often by not doing projections than by doing them.

 

[BigRed]

For me, it really comes down to finding a better alternative to rank players. I fully understand that stat projections won't be totally accurate. And trust me, I've looked for 11 years for something that be totally accuarate. But I always come back to the question - if I don't use projections, what am I going to use to rank these guys?

Horoscope? Uniform colors? Jersey numbers? I mean seriously. We all think Manning will throw more TDs than Charlie Frye (even Eli). Why? Because you mentally project their numbers. Some of you guys can tell me exactly how many more TDs and how many more yards to last inch that Manning will be better than Frye. Most folks just know he's going to be "better". Both are projections.

And the real difference of course is that it's all relative. You're playing against other people. The guy that wins your league won't have perfect projections. But I bet they're better than the guys that don't win.

Joe, I agree that the idea of drafting players who will a) get you the most points per position, and b) who will seperate you "from the pack" the most - which pretty much by definition means tiering - makes total sense (although those ideas were around before VBD). But as I wrote in a similar article way back, it's when you get into the extreme stat projecting and microanalysis that that I have to shake my head and walk away. If some people feel like that helps them, great, but for my money it just doesn't buy me anything, because for me the cheatsheet is as much an art as it is a science (for lack of a better way to put it).

Clarification: it's a question of degree. I do agree that at least some degree of "casual" projections makes sense, eg thinking this RB should at least crack 1000 yds but this one won't so the first one is ranked higher, etc. It's the idea of projecting precise stats for all (or most) players that I disagree with. All that does is further quantify rankings which are all a guesstimate anyway; it doesn't make those rankings any more (or any less) likely to be correct.

In fairness, he says "almost all stat projections are wrong" - if he means it literally, ie projecting a RB to get 1200 yds rushing and he ends up with 1202 is "wrong," then his point is pointless. Who cares if you're off by a little? That's not a valid reason to disregard stat projecting. Hopefully his point is that stat projecting in the extreme doesn't really buy you much if anything, which again I agree with.

As for his strat, I agree that he's simply re-stating things which are already commonly known/done (not that he implies they're new though) but I will say regarding opponent drafting tendencies, I don't pay much attention to that either since those tendencies usually vary way too much to be worth paying much attention to (at least in my experience) - eg it's not like one guy always drafts WRs earlier than most, or always tries to draft the top TE, etc.

Of course auction drafts can trash his "strategy during the draft" idea very quickly - you can't sit there and go "OK Team X and Y need WRs but I know this guy probably won't pay this for that guy, but WRs always go about this time" etc etc. It all goes way too fast and change directions like Barry Sanders on crack. You can mostly just pay attention to what you have/need (both in terms of players and remaining money) and worry about that - at least that's the way ours have gone; maybe others slow it down some.

Anyway, pardon any offense....basically for me grouping by position and tiering within each one, along with some very casual/ballpark stat projections, is plenty.

You'll get some right and you'll get some wrong. But I can't think of any reason to think you'd be right more often by not doing projections than by doing them.

I honestly can't think of any reason to think you'd be right less often either -

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe, I agree that the idea of drafting players who will a) get you the most points per position, and b) who will seperate you "from the pack" the most - which pretty much by definition means tiering - makes total sense (although those ideas were around before VBD). But as I wrote in a similar article way back, it's when you get into the extreme stat projecting and microanalysis that that I have to shake my head and walk away.

Hi BR,When you're faced with drafting Larry Johnson or Steven Jackson, how do you decide?J

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Joe, I agree that the idea of drafting players who will a) get you the most points per position, and b) who will seperate you "from the pack" the most - which pretty much by definition means tiering - makes total sense (although those ideas were around before VBD). But as I wrote in a similar article way back, it's when you get into the extreme stat projecting and microanalysis that that I have to shake my head and walk away.

Hi BR,When you're faced with drafting Larry Johnson or Steven Jackson, how do you decide?J

The are still listed in order of preference within the tier.

 

[ookook]

I think the confusion is that VBD is not a draft strategy, nor is it a decision rule. It is a piece of information like ADP.

Is ADP a draft strategy? No. But it is hard to draft well without having an idea of the odds that a player will or will not make it back to you in the next round.

IS VBD a draft strategy? No. But it is hard to draft well without knowing the relative dropoff at different positons relative to SOME baseline.

 

[BigRed]

Hi BR,When you're faced with drafting Larry Johnson or Steven Jackson, how do you decide?

coin flip. As BST said, assuming they're in the same tier, they're still ranked within that tier. I know going in which of those 2 I'd prefer. Course it's not like I've never deviated from my rankings either, but I try not to.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Joe, I agree that the idea of drafting players who will a) get you the most points per position, and b) who will seperate you "from the pack" the most - which pretty much by definition means tiering - makes total sense (although those ideas were around before VBD). But as I wrote in a similar article way back, it's when you get into the extreme stat projecting and microanalysis that that I have to shake my head and walk away.

Hi BR,When you're faced with drafting Larry Johnson or Steven Jackson, how do you decide?J

The are still listed in order of preference within the tier.

How exactly do you determine the order of preference?J

 

[BigRed]

How exactly do you determine the order of preference?

There are many aspects of ranking one player over another, and yes stat projections - however casual or precise - one of them. There's also my estimation or info/knowledge on:- age/"wear n tear"- team situation - injury risk- schedule- etc

 

[BassNBrew]

I was wondering what Homer Simpson did in his free time...

What? So if your projections are wrong your entire draft strategy is now flawed? Guess what Nostradamus? Every projection, regardless if you developed it yourself or if it was provided by some website (an idea which still boggles my mind) is inherently incorrect. Easily 99% of the time, the projections you feed into the formulas and use to rank the players will be incorrect. Ouch! I personally can't live with banking my Fantasy Football season on a bunch of wrong guesses.

Each sub-group (tier) includes a group of players I feel will produce very similar numbers over the course of the year. Again, unlike VBD, I am not going to guess at what exactly those numbers will be. All I am concerned about is that those numbers will be similar for all of the players in this tier.

Be sure to rank your players within your tiers. Using whatever method you prefer (perhaps VBD), rank the players within each tier.

Hey folks rank your players within your tiers. By the way, use VBD even though I've trashed it, nevermind the fact that VBD isn't about ranking players in the first place.This article has so many holes and contradictions that it's laughable.

 

[Marek]

Pretty much every VBD criticism I've read starts with the (incorrect) assumption that "You must follow the list to a T and draft whomever shows the most value, else you're not doing VBD!" Here is a similar example of this line of thought: http://www.thehuddle.com/classics/02fs-vbd-madness.php

But hey, as already intimated earlier, the more misinformation they're armed with, the better for us <3

3. Also the notion that tiering/bucketing isn't the same thing as projecting, only lazier. How in the world can you put guys into tiers, especially tiers of differing numbers of players, if you're not at least intuitively projecting their performance for the upcoming year?

DING DING DING. You've been quoted several times, but let's do it once more. This point completely escapes the author, it seems. I respect a guy who will go out on a limb, but this article is quite questionable. Likewise, the reason people are "offended" that he says it is a method for "newbies", which I agree is true, is because he is deliberately saying it to be offensive and/or exclusive. He's not saying it as a casual observation. "Yeah, that car is appealing to women" may be a true statement, but if that's all you're saying about it, then your friend obviously knows the intent of your statement. This is a variant of the "I'm not saying this" fallacy, and it is horrific to use it when attempting to appear insightful or in a polite conversation.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I feel that one of the nuggets of this article (and something I've done for years myself) is the use of pas data to track the tendencies of the other owners in your league and their draft tendencies.

I print out my own set of labels each year (I might add with the average draft position) and put them in a notebook during the draft. I have a lot of books now on past drafts and they can come in very handy as I try to figure out what number QB, RB, WR, or TE is likely to be there when it comes my turn to draft (I have drafted in the 9 or 10 spot in this 10 team 2-keeper league for going on 7 years now).

-QG

 

[WisWolvrns]

Terrible article. I don't think that anyone out there says to use VBD exclusively and that's basically what he's railing against. VBD is a tool to help you compare values across positions. Period.

I'll bet if you were a fly on the wall you'd probably be shocked at how incorrect you are. My guess is that between 30%-60% of the people who purchase software to assist them in the draft do not deviate from what it tells them to do.

That is why you tell everyone in your league about FBG and VBD. Then, during the draft, you will have a better idea of what players others will be selecting when and can pick the guys you feel more highly about at the right times. It is a great way to "know" your opponents drafting strategies...

 

[Joe Bryant]

How exactly do you determine the order of preference?

There are many aspects of ranking one player over another, and yes stat projections - however casual or precise - one of them. There's also my estimation or info/knowledge on:- age/"wear n tear"- team situation - injury risk- schedule- etc

Thanks. When you say schedule or team situation or injury risk is a factor, it is a factor influencing what exactly?J

 

[LTsharks]

How exactly do you determine the order of preference?

There are many aspects of ranking one player over another, and yes stat projections - however casual or precise - one of them. There's also my estimation or info/knowledge on:- age/"wear n tear"

- team situation

- injury risk

- schedule

- etc

but your rankings come down to one thing - who will score more points. projections aren't another item in the above list - they are the one item that takes into account your entire list. when you "rank" them in your tiers you are just using all of the factors that go into projections to do your own projections. do you just do them in your head or do you try to assign a value to the factors you list?how do you know where to draw the line for your tiers? confindence on how well they will do? where does that value come from?

if you want to say that when it comes your turn to draft and your own "method" and "vbd" both recommend you take your 2nd wr, and the "vbd" projections show wr 15 (shares bye with your #1 wr) at 150 pts and wr 17 at 149.2 pts (different bye from your #1) that you should go away from "true vbd" and draft wr 17, well of course. i think it has been said, vbd isn't something that is followed to the letter all the way through a draft.

Bryant is going to get this out of you eventually in this thread anyway. He does a good job leading the discussion. There just isn't any other way around it.

 

[TLEF316]

How exactly do you determine the order of preference?

There are many aspects of ranking one player over another, and yes stat projections - however casual or precise - one of them. There's also my estimation or info/knowledge on:- age/"wear n tear"- team situation - injury risk- schedule- etc

Thanks. When you say schedule or team situation or injury risk is a factor, it is a factor influencing what exactly?J

its pretty obvious where joe is going with this, and to me, it makes sense.When you make tiers, or buckets, or whatever you want to call them, you are grouping players that you (either consciously or subconsciously) expect to put up similar statistics (or in our case, fantasy points)When you "factor in" age, O-line, schedule, ect, you are using these factors to make an educated guess about future performance. Essentially, you're doing projections without actually puting down numbers. You're still projecting performance, but your doing it in a totally half-assed way. Ok, player A has a better O-line, but player B has an easier schedule. Which is the bigger "factor"? How do you tell the diference? If you are gonna go through all the effort to figure out stuff like this, you might as well just do projections. It will probably take just as long, and you'll actually have something tangible to plug into your scoring system.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

And on the reverse, I'd say you are complicating something that does not need it.

You are wasting time when it could be used for other fantasy matters.

If you say he is #15 and I say he is #15, I dont see how it matters that I spent 1/1000th the time as you inputting ficticious stats to arrive at the same result. In fact Id say my time is better used for evaluation purposes instead of prognistication.

The breaking of tiers allows for enough seperation (i.e. droppoff) to understand when to (and not to) make a move regarding a player and/or position.

And at the draft I am always a big time trader. The cpu input would certainly hinder that aspect. BTW: Ive used it before. It didnt help me.

But I will say (again) that it does help lots of owners. Im just not one of them. And there are others that are the same way as I.

 

[LTsharks]

In fact Id say my time is better used for evaluation purposes instead of prognistication.

this is a fair point. there is a definite work / reward curve here. but i'm not sure the method you choose really changes that.what are you evaluating? how the players will perform in the coming year? something else?

what is the difference between a ficticious stat and ficticious evaluation? if you spend 1 minute coming up with your evaluation, i would rather be the guy taking 15 minutes to come up with a different evaluation. you can't just use time as the difference. if you spent 1/1000th of the time coming up with how you think all fantasy players will perform in the coming season then i would much rather use my "evaluations" or "projections". Using you logic (and I'm sure you exagerated to make a point, but i don't think it helps your point at all), if Dodds / Bryant spent 33 hours projecting players for the coming year you would be happier with the evaluations you did in less then 2 minutes. Sorry, I'm going with their projections over your 2 minute guess.

the more time spent on the "evaluation" or "projection" the better the result. (to a point - i agree, but i don't think that changes with the method).

i'm not sure what any of this has to do with draft day trades. what cpu input are you talking about?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Actually I look at the Dodds/Bryant listing and use it to my advantage. Very knowledgeable folks are good to read and interpret.

But I do not recount and relist all the stats they post for them. And I dont need to. It serves me no purpose.

To have a listing and tiering is perfect. Especially when its constantly being changed as the factors change.

You really asked whats the difference between making up ficticious stats for every player in the NFL - and not doing it?

And changing them everytime it needs updating?

If that works for you... great.

 

[Pictus Cat]

VBD seems to just quantify tiers to me. (How much are two players apart?)

It is more important that they are relative, than accurate, IMHO.

Then team needs, Bye weeks, League tendancies (ADP, Trade probabilities) gain in importance as the draft progresses.

 

[BigRed]

Thanks. When you say schedule or team situation or injury risk is a factor, it is a factor influencing what exactly?

?? Influencing how I rank each player. What else could it be? If you're setting me up I wish you'd just get to it already

but your rankings come down to one thing - who will score more points.

A bit of oversimplification, but pretty much.

projections aren't another item in the above list - they are the one item that takes into account your entire list. when you "rank" them in your tiers you are just using all of the factors that go into projections to do your own projections.

I see what you're saying, but not quite. When I rank them it is or can be partly about some projected stats, but also their likelihood of obtaining those stats. eg I might consider LJ a boom/bust and don't think I'll feel like gambling on my 1st rounder, so I rank a safer player above him. Or all things weighed in I could consider them equal (ie one riskier but more upside) so they're basically "tie" in my mind. So a ranking isn't simply "I think he'll do this." More like "I think he could do as much as this, but it could be a lot less, so given all that, he goes here." True, even then I'm probably tossing around some vague numbers......but as I said before, it's largely a question of degree. I'm not saying never project stats in any way. I just don't go "OK Larry Johnson = 1427 yds, 10 TDs, 33 receps for 277 yds" etc etc. Much more ballpark - in fact I might not even do a ballpark stat projection. Might be simply a question of thinking his "boom" potential and "bust" potential level out to about whatever ranking I give him.

Basically I agree stat projections of some kind or other can be useful - in fact often are - but mandatory? Nah.

do you just do them in your head or do you try to assign a value to the factors you list?

?? In my head. The idea of assigning a numerical value to things like age and team situation would be IMO pointless if not silly. Again this is as much an art as a science (or at least both factor in - hard to say what the % of each is).

how do you know where to draw the line for your tiers? confindence on how well they will do? where does that value come from?

I've already addressed this.

if you want to say that when it comes your turn to draft and your own "method" and "vbd" both recommend you take your 2nd wr, and the "vbd" projections show wr 15 (shares bye with your #1 wr) at 150 pts and wr 17 at 149.2 pts (different bye from your #1) that you should go away from "true vbd" and draft wr 17, well of course.

Nothing personal but frankly I only made a token attempt to really read/understand this para as it was too busy for my lazy self. In fact, I think this is an example the diff in FF mindsets here. For starters, I won't have any idea what VBD (ie the DD or whatever) recommends as I don't use it (PS that's not a slam at all; I'm sure it proves very useful to a lot of people). As for "my method," it never "tells" me it's time to draft any given position. I simply have a list of player's values relative to their position and each other which I use as a guide/reference only. Whether I draft WR2 over RB3 (etc) depends partly on those rankings, partly how the draft is unfolding and my feeling at the time.

Bryant is going to get this out of you eventually in this thread anyway. He does a good job leading the discussion. There just isn't any other way around it.

"Get" what?

 

[LTsharks]

I see what you're saying, but not quite. When I rank them it is or can be partly about some projected stats, but also their likelihood of obtaining those stats. eg I might consider LJ a boom/bust and don't think I'll feel like gambling on my 1st rounder, so I rank a safer player above him. Or all things weighed in I could consider them equal (ie one riskier but more upside) so they're basically "tie" in my mind. So a ranking isn't simply "I think he'll do this." More like "I think he could do as much as this, but it could be a lot less, so given all that, he goes here." True, even then I'm probably tossing around some vague numbers......but as I said before, it's largely a question of degree. I'm not saying never project stats in any way. I just don't go "OK Larry Johnson = 1427 yds, 10 TDs, 33 receps for 277 yds" etc etc. Much more ballpark - in fact I might not even do a ballpark stat projection. Might be simply a question of thinking his "boom" potential and "bust" potential level out to about whatever ranking I give him. Basically I agree stat projections of some kind or other can be useful - in fact often are - but mandatory? Nah.

I think this is the best summary of your position so far. For the record, I don't think projections are mandatory either. Obviously there are a bunch of ways to have success at a draft. The value of projections and how to do them can be an entire different discussion as well (some people factor injuries, others project everyone for an entire season, etc). A lot of this also depends on how an individual likes to approach problems like a draft. I wouldn't argue that different ways can't work, even extremely well.I do think that going through projections is the best way to take into account every players situation for the coming year and what they will do. If you have a more quantitative style, then writing down the numbers will probably work best. If you don't, then rankings and tiers will probably work just fine. That said, I think we would all agree the most important thing is the knowledge you have about the players/teams and the time spent working on either rankings or projections.and the paragraph you didn't understand - i could explain better, but i don't really need the answer and lets just say it was too many last night at 11:27pm that confused the post.

 

[BigRed]

I'd say you are complicating something that does not need it.

Exactly.

if you spend 1 minute coming up with your evaluation, i would rather be the guy taking 15 minutes to come up with a different evaluation. if you spent 1/1000th of the time coming up with how you think all fantasy players will perform in the coming season then i would much rather use my "evaluations" or "projections".

Re. these 2: do you honestly think more time spent automatically equals "better" evaluations/rankings?

Using you logic (and I'm sure you exagerated to make a point, but i don't think it helps your point at all), if Dodds / Bryant spent 33 hours projecting players for the coming year you would be happier with the evaluations you did in less then 2 minutes. Sorry, I'm going with their projections over your 2 minute guess.

? Because?What if he lied and told you he spent 50 hrs on his projections? Based on your logic, you would then take his projections of Dodds/Bryant, easily. Yet they're the same projections.

the more time spent on the "evaluation" or "projection" the better the result.

VERY generally speaking that's probably a pretty good rule of thumb, but time spent and quality of evals are not necessarily in direct proportion whatsoever.

I think this is the best summary of your position so far. For the record, I don't think projections are mandatory either. Obviously there are a bunch of ways to have success at a draft. The value of projections and how to do them can be an entire different discussion as well (some people factor injuries, others project everyone for an entire season, etc). A lot of this also depends on how an individual likes to approach problems like a draft. I wouldn't argue that different ways can't work, even extremely well.I do think that going through projections is the best way to take into account every players situation for the coming year and what they will do. If you have a more quantitative style, then writing down the numbers will probably work best. If you don't, then rankings and tiers will probably work just fine. That said, I think we would all agree the most important thing is the knowledge you have about the players/teams and the time spent working on either rankings or projections.and the paragraph you didn't understand - i could explain better, but i don't really need the answer and lets just say it was too many last night at 11:27pm that confused the post.

lol I think we agree at a high level more than it might seem. Just implement it differently.

 

[LTsharks]

I'd say you are complicating something that does not need it.

Exactly.

if you spend 1 minute coming up with your evaluation, i would rather be the guy taking 15 minutes to come up with a different evaluation. if you spent 1/1000th of the time coming up with how you think all fantasy players will perform in the coming season then i would much rather use my "evaluations" or "projections".

Re. these 2: do you honestly think more time spent automatically equals "better" evaluations/rankings?

Using you logic (and I'm sure you exagerated to make a point, but i don't think it helps your point at all), if Dodds / Bryant spent 33 hours projecting players for the coming year you would be happier with the evaluations you did in less then 2 minutes. Sorry, I'm going with their projections over your 2 minute guess.

? Because?What if he lied and told you he spent 50 hrs on his projections? Based on your logic, you would then take his projections of Dodds/Bryant, easily. Yet they're the same projections.

the more time spent on the "evaluation" or "projection" the better the result.

VERY generally speaking that's probably a pretty good rule of thumb, but time spent and quality of evals are not necessarily in direct proportion whatsoever.

I think this is the best summary of your position so far. For the record, I don't think projections are mandatory either. Obviously there are a bunch of ways to have success at a draft. The value of projections and how to do them can be an entire different discussion as well (some people factor injuries, others project everyone for an entire season, etc). A lot of this also depends on how an individual likes to approach problems like a draft. I wouldn't argue that different ways can't work, even extremely well.I do think that going through projections is the best way to take into account every players situation for the coming year and what they will do. If you have a more quantitative style, then writing down the numbers will probably work best. If you don't, then rankings and tiers will probably work just fine. That said, I think we would all agree the most important thing is the knowledge you have about the players/teams and the time spent working on either rankings or projections.and the paragraph you didn't understand - i could explain better, but i don't really need the answer and lets just say it was too many last night at 11:27pm that confused the post.

lol I think we agree at a high level more than it might seem. Just implement it differently.

i think so too.i wasn't saying that more time has to = better results. i even mentioned that there is a work / reward curve here. doubling the time spent does not make the results twice as valid. the post i was replying too there implied that projections took much more time that just ranking players and that time was wasted since in the end the projections were all false. i don't believe that at all and strongly disagree. you have to spend just as much time working on rankings / tiers as you do projections if they are going to be any good. in that case it was implied that just ranking and tiering only took 1 / 1000th the time it did to make projections. My point was actually much like yours above. If the quality of two people's work was equal, I would go with the guy that spent more time. If I was doing it myself, I would quit when the work / reward curve started to show little improvement for the extra time spent.

 

[BigRed]

i wasn't saying that more time has to = better results. i even mentioned that there is a work / reward curve here. doubling the time spent does not make the results twice as valid.

OK thx (sounded that way)

the post i was replying too there implied that projections took much more time that just ranking players and that time was wasted since in the end the projections were all false.

If so, that's stoopit. (ie saying it's a waste of time because the projections will be wrong) My implication/point (and I think BST's) was that all other things being equal, detailed, specific/precise projections take more time than more casual or general ones (or not doing them at all) and it's generally overkill.

you have to spend just as much time working on rankings / tiers as you do projections if they are going to be any good. in that case it was implied that just ranking and tiering only took 1 / 1000th the time it did to make projections.

? As you yourself pointed out earlier, that was just an (obvious) exaggeration to make a point. As for how much time to spend on all this, that's also debatable too, with no definite answer.

My point was actually much like yours above. If the quality of two people's work was equal, I would go with the guy that spent more time.

? Not my point at all. Why does anything other than quality matter? If the quality of two people's work was equal, you might as well flip a coin. The catch is that the quality of the work is also very subjective. I'd go with whoever explained the logic behind their rankings/etc better.

If I was doing it myself, I would quit when the work / reward curve started to show little improvement for the extra time spent.

Bingo, exactly. And that's why I stop short of specific stats for each player.Again it's just my way. Doesn't make it right or wrong, and I realize VBD/DD have a lot of fans, and rightfully so.

 

[Gatorman]

VBD can be used a number of ways, and joe's inital approach is correct, even though over the years we have all become so well versed in it that we need a "next level" system.

VBD is the start of a draft. You project players. Or someone projects them for you (lazy, but what you pay for here in some cases). It is not the end all be all of the draft, but the start of your draft map.

The article in question sounds like it has been cribbed from the discussion that occurs on this message board around this time every year. The idea that VBD is not perfect.

Well, actually, it is (to a point).

It is stat projection that is imperfect, and thus the reason for our problems.

I will sometimes look at the VBD sheet in a vacumn. I get a new league to play in, I plug the numbers into the system and see which positions are going to be over and undervalued. I go from there. If my projections are perfect, then great. If not, I am screwed. I will sometimes simply look at where Joe and David are wrong (Brarlow anyone, Tiki and Dunn when they were undervalued) and use those spots to strengthen my team.

If you simply went from your gut to VBD you would go from moron to formidable. That does not mean championship caliber, but at least someone I have to worry about in the draft.

Most of us here already understand the ins and outs of VBD. Much like a foundation poker book, we now look to expand upon its teaching to develop "our game".

VBD is Joe's Hand rankings if you will. The rest is fashioned after you. I am sure VBD must be more interesting in an auction than in a serpentine draft, because you are more able to catch the undervalued player. In drafting you may see value fall and miss it becasue someone takes him before you.

Anyhow, carry on.