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.

College WR Statistics, with Target Data (1 Viewer)

If this could somehow be balanced I would put more stock in college performance stats than I do now but as it is I am curious how you approached this problem?
I have a measure I use to compare WR performance that rolls things up into a single number. It's pretty straightforward, though there are some adjustments to it that aren't as obvious.

It turns out that if you compare that number for players across different divisions you get something like this...

There's basically no difference between BCS conference and non-BCS conference teams in D-I. In other words, if you're dealing with a team like Louisiana Tech you don't need to make any special allowances for the level of competition.

For playoff subdivision schools though you do need to account for level of competition by discounting that performance measure. Basically I just compared the average scores for big school and small school players and discovered that the average score was ~28% higher for small school players. Which is interesting because that yielded a virtually identical discount number as I got for RBs even though I worked them out separately - 78.2% for WRs and 77.7% for RBs (1/.78 = 1.28).

There's more randomness in that discounted number though -- you have to treat it with more skepticism than the big school measures.
Ok. Which schools are actually small time schools, which are big schools and what about the ones in between? How often does that fluctuate? Do you determine this by their recruiting?

What are the factors that go into the combined score?
The small school adjustemtnt isn't that refined. There's only so much time.

BCS conference

Other D-IA

FCS, DII and DIII

Lumping the three groups together as 'small school' is probably why there's a lot of variance, and I want to break out the FCS schools at some point to see how different they are from DII and DIII. But it's still useful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If this could somehow be balanced I would put more stock in college performance stats than I do now but as it is I am curious how you approached this problem?
I have a measure I use to compare WR performance that rolls things up into a single number. It's pretty straightforward, though there are some adjustments to it that aren't as obvious.

It turns out that if you compare that number for players across different divisions you get something like this...

There's basically no difference between BCS conference and non-BCS conference teams in D-I. In other words, if you're dealing with a team like Louisiana Tech you don't need to make any special allowances for the level of competition.

For playoff subdivision schools though you do need to account for level of competition by discounting that performance measure. Basically I just compared the average scores for big school and small school players and discovered that the average score was ~28% higher for small school players. Which is interesting because that yielded a virtually identical discount number as I got for RBs even though I worked them out separately - 78.2% for WRs and 77.7% for RBs (1/.78 = 1.28).

There's more randomness in that discounted number though -- you have to treat it with more skepticism than the big school measures.
Ok. Which schools are actually small time schools, which are big schools and what about the ones in between? How often does that fluctuate? Do you determine this by their recruiting?

What are the factors that go into the combined score?
The small school adjustemtnt isn't that refined. There's only so much time.

BCS conference

Other D-IA

FCS, DII and DIII

Lumping the three groups together as 'small school' is probably why there's a lot of variance, and I want to break out the FCS schools at some point to see how different they are from DII and DIII. But it's still useful.
Well I think this is a worthwhile thing to study and worth talking about what might be the best ways to go about looking into those questions. If we could collect the recruiting data then schools could be ranked and tiered based off of that information. I am not sure that would necessarily answer the question of which teams have better quality talent of players but that would be more information than I have now. I think recruiting does fluctuate somewhat so there are some swings of talent on teams over time.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top