Has anyone played in a league like this?
I was playing around with some data to come up with a system that actually rewards bad players and not just "who fumbles a lot" or something like that.
What I came up with:
QB
1.5 pts - pass attempt
-.25 pts - pass yd
-9 pts - pass TD
20 pts - INT
This does a pretty good job of bringing the crap to the top, but it also shows that there are HUGE gaps among the worst players. A back-up can stink it up bad enough in 4 games to match a below average QB's full season scoring. Alex Smith could score double the next guy in a full season.
RB
3 pts - rush attempt
-.66 pts - rush yd
- 12 pts - rush TD
This does a pretty good job and is not that imbalanced. Only issue is that in Yahoo the receiving scoring has to be applied to RBs so guys like LaMont, LT2, and Westbrook score on both and get a big boost.
WR
7.5 pts - rec
-.45 pts - rec yd
-12 pts - rec TD
It's really difficult to come up with what even constitutes a bad WR let alone measure it by the stats. This puts the elite WRs down into the negatives pretty well though (on the other hand Boldin scores pretty well.)
All lost fumbles are -18.
PK and DEF are less interesting to design. I ended up giving PKs small negatives for makes and HUGE positives for misses. It makes for an extremely high variance. That's actually the big issue with all of these.
The idea is to award "wasted opportunities." So a pass attempt, rush, or reception scores you points but anything you do with it (yds, TDs) takes those points back. It ends up being very high variance because of TDs and TO's having to be worth so much to be "noticed" in the mass of each individual play.
Anyway, I'm wondering what other systems are out there. I think this one definitely identifies the awful players effectively but is very high variance and sort of unstable (like the possibility for a truly bad QB or PK to outscore a whole team).
I was playing around with some data to come up with a system that actually rewards bad players and not just "who fumbles a lot" or something like that.
What I came up with:
QB
1.5 pts - pass attempt
-.25 pts - pass yd
-9 pts - pass TD
20 pts - INT
This does a pretty good job of bringing the crap to the top, but it also shows that there are HUGE gaps among the worst players. A back-up can stink it up bad enough in 4 games to match a below average QB's full season scoring. Alex Smith could score double the next guy in a full season.
RB
3 pts - rush attempt
-.66 pts - rush yd
- 12 pts - rush TD
This does a pretty good job and is not that imbalanced. Only issue is that in Yahoo the receiving scoring has to be applied to RBs so guys like LaMont, LT2, and Westbrook score on both and get a big boost.
WR
7.5 pts - rec
-.45 pts - rec yd
-12 pts - rec TD
It's really difficult to come up with what even constitutes a bad WR let alone measure it by the stats. This puts the elite WRs down into the negatives pretty well though (on the other hand Boldin scores pretty well.)
All lost fumbles are -18.
PK and DEF are less interesting to design. I ended up giving PKs small negatives for makes and HUGE positives for misses. It makes for an extremely high variance. That's actually the big issue with all of these.
The idea is to award "wasted opportunities." So a pass attempt, rush, or reception scores you points but anything you do with it (yds, TDs) takes those points back. It ends up being very high variance because of TDs and TO's having to be worth so much to be "noticed" in the mass of each individual play.
Anyway, I'm wondering what other systems are out there. I think this one definitely identifies the awful players effectively but is very high variance and sort of unstable (like the possibility for a truly bad QB or PK to outscore a whole team).
