Comparison of 6pts/TD and 25 yards/pt vs 4pts/TD and 20yards/pt QB Sco (1 Viewer)

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Almost all my leagues use either 6 pts/TD and 25 yards/point or 4 pts/TD and 20 yards/point as the scoring for QBs. So I decided to take a look at the differences between the two systems.

If you don't want to read all the blah blah blah below, the bottom line is that both scoring systems have very similar averages for the top 15 or so QBs, but the 4/20 system enhances the value of the QBs from #15-25 and reduces the gap between QB1s and QB2s. And I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that.

Using 2008 data:

Brees, Drew NOS QB 23.2 23.1 0.0Rivers, Philip SDC QB 21.7 20.6 -1.1Rodgers, Aaron GBP QB 21.6 21.5 -0.2Cutler, Jay DEN QB 20.4 21.3 0.8Warner, Kurt ARI QB 20.1 20.1 0.0Romo, Tony DAL QB 19.7 19.4 -0.3Manning, Peyton IND QB 19.3 19.1 -0.1Schaub, Matt HOU QB 18.6 19.5 0.9Hill, Shaun SFO QB 18.4 18.6 0.3McNabb, Donovan PHI QB 18.1 18.4 0.3Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 18.1 18.2 0.1Cassel, Matt NEP QB 17.9 18.3 0.4Pennington, Chad MIA QB 16.0 16.3 0.4Garcia, Jeff TBB QB 15.6 16.4 0.8Garrard, David JAC QB 15.5 16.6 1.1Manning, Eli NYG QB 15.0 15.1 0.0Favre, Brett NYJ QB 14.7 15.5 0.8Orton, Kyle CHI QB 14.6 14.9 0.4Ryan, Matt ATL QB 14.3 15.1 0.8Campbell, Jason WAS QB 14.1 14.9 0.8RoethlisbergerPIT QB 13.3 14.2 0.9Flacco, Joe BAL QB 13.3 14.1 0.8Delhomme, Jake CAR QB 12.8 13.8 0.9Edwards, Trent BUF QB 12.6 13.6 1.1The first column is PPG for the top 24 QBs using 6 points per TD and 25 yards/point. The 2nd column is 4 points per TD and 20 yards/point. The third column is 4/20 minus 6/25.Down to Garcia the average difference is only a tenth of a point - very similar scores, on average.

But from Garcia through Edwards you can see a real trend where the 4-20 system increases the average value by almost a full PPG.

Looking at 2007, we see very similar results, only more pronounced - with Brady's epic season reduced in value by about 10% while the QB2s again see their value improved. And for this season there is virtually no difference in the average scoring for all QBs.

Brady, Tom NEP QB 30.63 27.9 -2.7Delhomme, Jake CAR QB 24.43 21.5 -2.9Romo, Tony DAL QB 22.99 22.3 -0.7RoethlisbergerPIT QB 21.65 20.2 -1.4Manning, Peyton IND QB 21.06 20.6 -0.5Brees, Drew NOS QB 19.71 20.0 0.3Anderson, Derek CLE QB 19.45 19.4 -0.1Hasselbeck, Matt SEA QB 18.9 18.6 -0.3Garrard, David JAC QB 18.73 18.1 -0.7Favre, Brett GBP QB 18.71 18.8 0.0Warner, Kurt ARI QB 18.56 18.4 -0.2McNabb, Donovan PHI QB 17.61 17.8 0.2Palmer, Carson CIN QB 17.51 18.1 0.6Hill, Shaun SFO QB 17.13 16.2 -1.0Cutler, Jay DEN QB 15.66 16.2 0.5Griese, Brian CHI QB 15.56 17.0 1.4McCown, Luke TBB QB 14.4 15.0 0.6Manning, Eli NYG QB 14.39 14.9 0.5Kitna, Jon DET QB 14.18 15.7 1.5Garcia, Jeff TBB QB 13.93 14.1 0.2Rivers, Philip SDC QB 13.72 14.0 0.3Lemon, Cleo MIA QB 13.54 14.9 1.3Pennington, Chad NYJ QB 13.54 14.3 0.7 So the 4-20 scoring doesn't diminish the value of the QB position vs other positions and in 2008 it actually increased the average value of the QBs on the list by about a half point per game. What switching from 6-25 to 4-20 does do is deemphasize the difference in value between the QB1s and QB2s.

Again, why would anyone would want to do that?

 

[joffer]

why did you group 6/TD with 25 yards per point and 4/TD with 20 yards per point?

 

[CalBear]

Bottom Line: both scoring systems have very similar averages for the top 15 or so QBs, but the 4/20 system enhances the value of the QBs from #15-25 and reduces the gap between QB1s and QB2s.

...

So the 4-20 scoring doesn't diminish the value of the QB position vs other positions and in 2008 it actually increased the average value of the QBs on the list by about a half point per game. What switching from 6-25 to 4-20 does do is deemphasize the difference in value between the QB1s and QB2s.

And I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that.

Interesting analysis, but I don't think your conclusion is correct. If QB15-25 are closer in scoring to QB1-14, it definitely diminishes the value of QB1-14 relative to other positions; that's basic VBD principles.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

why did you group 6/TD with 25 yards per point and 4/TD with 20 yards per point?

All my leagues use either 6/25 or 4/20. It seems fairly standard to choose one or the other.

 

[Chaka]

No such thing as standard scoring anymore.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Bottom Line: both scoring systems have very similar averages for the top 15 or so QBs, but the 4/20 system enhances the value of the QBs from #15-25 and reduces the gap between QB1s and QB2s.

So the 4-20 scoring doesn't diminish the value of the QB position vs other positions and in 2008 it actually increased the average value of the QBs on the list by about a half point per game. What switching from 6-25 to 4-20 does do is deemphasize the difference in value between the QB1s and QB2s.

And I'm not sure why anyone would want to do that.

Interesting analysis, but I don't think your conclusion is correct. If QB15-25 are closer in scoring to QB1-14, it definitely diminishes the value of QB1-14 relative to other positions; that's basic VBD principles.

I was trying to think that through as I was hitting send. The VBD for the top 24 QBs is unchanged, but the top QB1s take a hit and the bottom QB2s get a bump and the middle QBs are about even. So if your league only ever starts the first 10 QBs I think you're right.But still... I'm not sure I agree with an effort to reduce the value of the elite QBs if the only way it can only be done is by bumping the value of the also-rans at the same position.

 

[CalBear]

But still... I'm not sure I agree with an effort to reduce the value of the elite QBs if the only way it can only be done is by bumping the value of the also-rans at the same position.

I think the goal should be to increase the value of the top QBs; it's annoying that QBs have so little value in fantasy.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Following up on CalBear's point...

If you combine the top QBs from 2007 and 2008 here's what you find:

--The top eight QBs (the elite QB seasons) have their value diminished by a bit over one point per game.

--The next twenty QBs (the bulk of the QB1s) are essentially unchanged

--The bottom nineteen QBs (the QB 2s) see their value bumped by just under one point per game

So the VBD is reduced only for the ELITE QBs. The back half of the QB1s aren't affected on average. And the QB2s' value is enhanced.

I guess if your goal is to prevent the occasional historic season (Manning 2004, Brady 2007) from unbalancing your league this might make sense, but we don't try to diminish similar seasons for RBs so I don't care for it. And I really disagree with diminishing the value of the good QBs in the league vs the borderline guys.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

But still... I'm not sure I agree with an effort to reduce the value of the elite QBs if the only way it can only be done is by bumping the value of the also-rans at the same position.

I think the goal should be to increase the value of the top QBs; it's annoying that QBs have so little value in fantasy.

Agree completely. The one start-two QB league I'm in is enjoyable for that reason.

 

[fsufan]

No such thing as standard scoring anymore.

my 3 leagues use 1 PT/20 yards pass and 6 PTs for passing TDs

 

[bostonfred]

We found 1/20 to be a little high, but 1/25 to be a little low, so we use 5/117 yard passing. As a twist, we only score in whole number increments. It makes the game much more exciting when you're sitting on 233 yards passing and your QB just needs one more pass for positive yardage to get over that bump. Plus it's much more realistic.

 

[thehornet]

we use 1 point for 25 yards passing, 3 points per passing TD, -2 for interceptions in my start 2 QB. It's very even.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

We found 1/20 to be a little high, but 1/25 to be a little low, so we use 5/117 yard passing. As a twist, we only score in whole number increments. It makes the game much more exciting when you're sitting on 233 yards passing and your QB just needs one more pass for positive yardage to get over that bump. Plus it's much more realistic.

It's not realistic. At all. Realistic is decimal scoring. I thought that fantasy football moved away from the 1 point for 10 yards, etc.. scoring like 5 years ago.

 

[Judge Smails]

We have 6pt TD's, 1 pt for 25 yards, 5 point bonus for 300 yards, and -2 for INT's and fumbles. The drop off in our scoring is huge my friends. When the guys who throw for 30+ TD's are also the guys going over 300 yards 5-8 times it is huge over a Garrard type who may throw 20 TD's and not hit 300 yards once.

 

[the spanker]

Following up on CalBear's point...If you combine the top QBs from 2007 and 2008 here's what you find:--The top eight QBs (the elite QB seasons) have their value diminished by a bit over one point per game.--The next twenty QBs (the bulk of the QB1s) are essentially unchanged--The bottom nineteen QBs (the QB 2s) see their value bumped by just under one point per gameSo the VBD is reduced only for the ELITE QBs. The back half of the QB1s aren't affected on average. And the QB2s' value is enhanced. I guess if your goal is to prevent the occasional historic season (Manning 2004, Brady 2007) from unbalancing your league this might make sense, but we don't try to diminish similar seasons for RBs so I don't care for it. And I really disagree with diminishing the value of the good QBs in the league vs the borderline guys.

Got to agree with this 1000 percent.

 

[Das Boot]

We found 1/20 to be a little high, but 1/25 to be a little low, so we use 5/117 yard passing. As a twist, we only score in whole number increments. It makes the game much more exciting when you're sitting on 233 yards passing and your QB just needs one more pass for positive yardage to get over that bump. Plus it's much more realistic.

It's not realistic. At all. Realistic is decimal scoring. I thought that fantasy football moved away from the 1 point for 10 yards, etc.. scoring like 5 years ago.

Scientific Notation scoring (SNS leagues) is where it's at now, decimal scoring started being replaced last year.

 

[Chaka]

We found 1/20 to be a little high, but 1/25 to be a little low, so we use 5/117 yard passing. As a twist, we only score in whole number increments. It makes the game much more exciting when you're sitting on 233 yards passing and your QB just needs one more pass for positive yardage to get over that bump. Plus it's much more realistic.

It's not realistic. At all. Realistic is decimal scoring. I thought that fantasy football moved away from the 1 point for 10 yards, etc.. scoring like 5 years ago.

Scientific Notation scoring (SNS leagues) is where it's at now, decimal scoring started being replaced last year.

Noobs.Imaginary Number Scoring (INS leagues) is the future.

 

[bostonfred]

We found 1/20 to be a little high, but 1/25 to be a little low, so we use 5/117 yard passing. As a twist, we only score in whole number increments. It makes the game much more exciting when you're sitting on 233 yards passing and your QB just needs one more pass for positive yardage to get over that bump. Plus it's much more realistic.

It's not realistic. At all. Realistic is decimal scoring. I thought that fantasy football moved away from the 1 point for 10 yards, etc.. scoring like 5 years ago.

Scientific Notation scoring (SNS leagues) is where it's at now, decimal scoring started being replaced last year.

Noobs.Imaginary Number Scoring (INS leagues) is the future.

We did that for a while, until a game ended game 5i to -5^2 and we couldn't figure out who had the higher score.