Early Draft Spot Advantage in Snake Drafts (1 Viewer)

[shnikies]

I've recently gotten into one of those fantasy football arguments that baffles you because you don't how this person has made it this far in life with the way that their brain works. The argument started when I said people drafting from an early position in a regular snake draft have a small edge over the rest of the draft positions. He claims that there is no actual advantage, that any advantage is simply perceived and can't be calculated. I have this quote from the forum from a guy who wrote a fantasy football book, Gimenez:

"ESPN stated that for 2005 the draft position for their site that won the most championships was number two. Most large fantasy football contest leagues will not give out information related to the best draft position(s), as it would only serve as a detriment to their contest growth.

(Sidebar: In drafting from the last six spots, the odds are stacked against you almost 2-to-1. You must have a strategy to overcome this.)

In doing my research, I found if you want to reach the playoffs, you have a 57 percent chance if drafting from the first six spots vs a 35 percent chance from the bottom six positions."

Do you know of any additional articles or such that further shows this advantage? Thanks!

 

[shnikies]

I think I found what I'm looking for: http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/publish/Lab_Test_Snake_Draft.htm

 

[flc735]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal,

this is my letter to him:

then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.

since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.

that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...

the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.

and then you go through the pairs of picks

1+24>12+13

25+48>36+37 ect...

...................................

you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

 

[shnikies]

I think the simplest way to make the argument is to ask these questions:

Q: Do you think the first pick has an advantage in a regular NON snake draft where the draft order doesn't reverse every round?

A: Obviously

Q: Let's use an arbitrary number to represent the advantage. Let's say the first pick has an advantage of 5. Out of the infinite amount of possible effects that implementing a snake draft can have on the advantage of the first pick, you think it magically makes the advantage zero? That it's that simple?

A: But uh duh, uh, ya know. Uhhhhhhhh

Basically what I told him is, "Tell me the first pick has a disadvantage, if you'd like, but saying that the advantage of having a high pick over a lower pick is exactly zero is preposterous. Preposterous I say!"

 

[kutta]

If the draft had 100 teams in it, would he want the first pick or the 100th pick?

 

[Voice Of Reason]

Which spots do you guys think would be the best if a draft went ABBABABABABA rather than the traditional snake order of ABABABABA?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Banzai Method!

 

[amicsta]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal, this is my letter to him:then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.and then you go through the pairs of picks1+24>12+1325+48>36+37 ect......................................you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

 

[shnikies]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal, this is my letter to him:then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.and then you go through the pairs of picks1+24>12+1325+48>36+37 ect......................................you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

 

[simsarge]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal, this is my letter to him:then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.and then you go through the pairs of picks1+24>12+1325+48>36+37 ect......................................you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

 

[shnikies]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal, this is my letter to him:then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.and then you go through the pairs of picks1+24>12+1325+48>36+37 ect......................................you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

Not a hijack. I think I already mentioned it but the link in the second post says snake and then reverse the order for the 3rd round and continue the snake from there.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal,

this is my letter to him:

then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.

since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.

that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...

the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.

and then you go through the pairs of picks

1+24>12+13

25+48>36+37 ect...

...................................

you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

Not a hijack. I think I already mentioned it but the link in the second post says snake and then reverse the order for the 3rd round and continue the snake from there.

No.The correct answer is the Banzai Method.

Pasquino did a article on this a couple years ago.

Its damn near even-steven for each draft spot.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal,

this is my letter to him:

then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.

since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.

that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...

the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.

and then you go through the pairs of picks

1+24>12+13

25+48>36+37 ect...

...................................

you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

Not a hijack. I think I already mentioned it but the link in the second post says snake and then reverse the order for the 3rd round and continue the snake from there.

No.The correct answer is the Banzai Method.

Pasquino did a article on this a couple years ago.

Its damn near even-steven for each draft spot.

What's the difference between banzai and what I said?

You dont "continue the snake from there".Every round is preset just like a normal serpentine.

Then you simply reverse the 3rd rounds order to offset the first rounds advantage.

At first glance its offsetting/surprising to look at, but the points are near perfect - every spot is good.

 

[shnikies]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal,

this is my letter to him:

then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.

since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.

that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...

the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.

and then you go through the pairs of picks

1+24>12+13

25+48>36+37 ect...

...................................

you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

Not a hijack. I think I already mentioned it but the link in the second post says snake and then reverse the order for the 3rd round and continue the snake from there.

No.The correct answer is the Banzai Method.

Pasquino did a article on this a couple years ago.

Its damn near even-steven for each draft spot.

What's the difference between banzai and what I said?

You dont "continue the snake from there".Every round is preset just like a normal serpentine.

Then you simply reverse the 3rd rounds order to offset the first rounds advantage.

At first glance its offsetting/surprising to look at, but the points are near perfect - every spot is good.

From what I'm seeing, banzai is when you reverse the order for rounds 2-4 and then snake from there (ABBBABABA...). He also said for 12 team leagues, as opposed to 14, that double snake is a little better (ABBAABBAABBAABB....).EDIT: Nevermind, he said banzai is best for 12 also.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Yeah, his study stated the Banzai Method having less then 1% difference in the end.

14 team - http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/08pasquino_3rr14.php

Finally, the clear winner is Third Round Flip, or "Banzai" style of drafting. Right at the start after four rounds, the variation is just 3% in point values and it even gets smaller at times (sometimes just 2%) as the draft progresses. The best team is still #1, but the worst team is now Team #8 for the first eight rounds. After both 10 and 12 rounds have passed, Team #8 and Team #9 are both tied for worst, but ultimately Team #9 finished last after 14 rounds.

12 team - http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/08pasquino_3rr12.php

Finally, the clear winner is Third Round Flip, or "Banzai" style of drafting. Right at the start after four rounds, the variation is just 2% in point values and it even gets smaller as the draft progresses, ultimately approaching just 1% difference. The best team is still #1, but the worst team is now Team #6, but again the separation between all teams is nearly gone.

 

[kutta]

It's not all bad to give the early drafters an advantage. Our league bases draft order on the order of finish in the previous year. There are usually a few teams that always draft in the top 6 and a few that always draft in the bottom six, because some teams are pretty good each year and others seem to struggle each year. Giving the teams that struggle a little advantage on draft day makes the league a little more competitive.

 

[Isotopes]

I've recently gotten into one of those fantasy football arguments that baffles you because you don't how this person has made it this far in life with the way that their brain works. The argument started when I said people drafting from an early position in a regular snake draft have a small edge over the rest of the draft positions. He claims that there is no actual advantage, that any advantage is simply perceived and can't be calculated. I have this quote from the forum from a guy who wrote a fantasy football book, Gimenez:"ESPN stated that for 2005 the draft position for their site that won the most championships was number two. Most large fantasy football contest leagues will not give out information related to the best draft position(s), as it would only serve as a detriment to their contest growth.(Sidebar: In drafting from the last six spots, the odds are stacked against you almost 2-to-1. You must have a strategy to overcome this.)In doing my research, I found if you want to reach the playoffs, you have a 57 percent chance if drafting from the first six spots vs a 35 percent chance from the bottom six positions." Do you know of any additional articles or such that further shows this advantage? Thanks!

The way I would present the argument to him is to illustrate how the number one pick has 3 selections in the top 25 (assuming 12 team snake draft) versus two for every other spot.

 

[rocketsauce]

My 12 team PPR redraft, champs have drafted from:

2011: 5th overall.

2010: 8th overall

2009: 5th overall

OMG Huge bias for 5th overall. I'm not buying it. You can draft well or horrible from any spot, and you can fix any mess through trades and free agency.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

My 12 team PPR redraft, champs have drafted from:2011: 5th overall.2010: 8th overall2009: 5th overallOMG Huge bias for 5th overall. I'm not buying it. You can draft well or horrible from any spot, and you can fix any mess through trades and free agency.

I'm not buying it either. Most of the "studies" I have seen rely on previous year statistics and current year rankings, which makes little sense to me. Sure, if you KNOW ADP #1 will be end of year VBD #1, you can determine all kinds of value determinations based on draft slot. But the real world doesn't work that way. ADP #1 doesn't always (or even OFTEN) end up as VBD #1. Making that assumption (all the way down the board) is mega-cherry-picking.When given a choice, I have often selected a later draft pick over an early one (and done pretty well), but it depends very heavily on the year and my personal draft board. Some years I'd like to have #1, some years #3, some years #14, etc.In short, I think regular serpentine works just fine and until I see a study that proves otherwise using data that actually makes sense to me, I'll just roll with it.

 

[Sweet Love]

You really want to even things out, do blind WW. I was in a snake with a guy (who admitted years later) that he would tank week one, to get the best WW pick (something always happens week one), and then, at "worst" in week two, he would be WW in the middle of the pack. If he happened to lose (even while trying in week 2), he would pick 1st or 2nd in week two, and get another good FA. Guy always seemed to be middle of the road for a bit, and then just set the world one fire. When we all found out over drinks one night, we were not even angry...we kinda tipped our hats to his ingenuity...and then changed the rule to blind bidding that night!

 

[ChromeWeasel]

It's not all bad to give the early drafters an advantage. Our league bases draft order on the order of finish in the previous year. There are usually a few teams that always draft in the top 6 and a few that always draft in the bottom six, because some teams are pretty good each year and others seem to struggle each year. Giving the teams that struggle a little advantage on draft day makes the league a little more competitive.

This. There's a slight edge to the #1 draft spot so we give it to the worst team from the previous season. I'd generally rather draft early in the round but I wouldnt give up very much to take the #1 spot from anyone else. On the other hand, if we did a ridiculous Banzai Method then I'd hate to have the #1 draft pick and would trade it away.

 

[Hoosier16]

I've recently gotten into one of those fantasy football arguments that baffles you because you don't how this person has made it this far in life with the way that their brain works. The argument started when I said people drafting from an early position in a regular snake draft have a small edge over the rest of the draft positions.

There was a post or an article here a few years ago about a study that examined the results of the WCOFF (I think). The study looked at those teams that made the playoffs and their draft position. The results were that the playoff teams overwhelmingly came from the early draft positions. I just tried to find it but couldn't. Maybe someone else will remember.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

It's not all bad to give the early drafters an advantage. Our league bases draft order on the order of finish in the previous year. There are usually a few teams that always draft in the top 6 and a few that always draft in the bottom six, because some teams are pretty good each year and others seem to struggle each year. Giving the teams that struggle a little advantage on draft day makes the league a little more competitive.

This. There's a slight edge to the #1 draft spot so we give it to the worst team from the previous season. I'd generally rather draft early in the round but I wouldnt give up very much to take the #1 spot from anyone else. On the other hand, if we did a ridiculous Banzai Method then I'd hate to have the #1 draft pick and would trade it away.

Its just a simple flip of the 3rd round (and everything else stays exactly the same), nothing ridiculous about it.What is ridiculous is 33% of the draft slots taking up 75% of the winnings.*Though its understandable to handicap/assess the owners in such a fashion. Provided your league has weak owners and needs to do so while it makes use of the inequality naturally inherent to a normal serpentine.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I've recently gotten into one of those fantasy football arguments that baffles you because you don't how this person has made it this far in life with the way that their brain works. The argument started when I said people drafting from an early position in a regular snake draft have a small edge over the rest of the draft positions.

There was a post or an article here a few years ago about a study that examined the results of the WCOFF (I think). The study looked at those teams that made the playoffs and their draft position. The results were that the playoff teams overwhelmingly came from the early draft positions. I just tried to find it but couldn't. Maybe someone else will remember.

It was here...

Points for based on draft position...Taken from one of the guys at wcoff... 4 years of Data...

the numbers of 2004-2007:

DP-----PF-----% >1500

1-----1453-----0.38

2-----1427-----0.27

3-----1409-----0.26

4-----1374-----0.14

5-----1383-----0.18

6-----1385-----0.17

7-----1371-----0.17

8-----1354-----0.10

9-----1353-----0.13

10-----1354-----0.11

11-----1343-----0.10

12-----1347-----0.10

So as to understand the above data... 1500 was determined as the "make the playoffs" break mark.

Thus a % of teams from each spot that make the playoffs is correlated. Top 3 picks ea made the playoffs 30%; which is double the rate of any of the other positions.

Also note the league WINNERS racked up a 75% winning percentage from the top 4 selections, despite being just 33% of the field.

 

[bigbrownbag]

Nerds

 

[12punch]

in ongoing leagues, general practice is usually reverse order of finish, and that's not to give the winners an advantage the following year, so it's commonly accepted, at the very least.

still could be a myth, but I was suspicious of something that I wanted to check out after seeing that 2004-07 data showing the big advantage to the top 3 spots.

1-----1453-----0.38

2-----1427-----0.27

3-----1409-----0.26

4-----1374-----0.14

etc

I think drafting top 3 really only impacts win % in the first round, so I want to look at just that round and see if I can uncover an advantage -- I don't care about players commonly drafted outside that round.

here is a year by year look at adp from 2004=07, with corresponding vbd values from pfr

2007

Tomlinson 174 1900/19 (60 catches, 16 games)

Steven Jackson 34

Larry Johnson -

Frank Gore 54

Joseph Addai 98

Shaun Alexander -

Brian Westbrook 147

Willie Parker 24

Rudi Johnson -

Reggie Bush -

Peyton Manning 81

Travis Henry -

Laurence Maroney -

Willis McGahee 56

brady 241

moss 170

bolded are the top 4 vbd values for the year, with romo coming in 5th at only 115.

there were pretty much 3 dominant game changers that year -- brady, moss, and tomlinson.

brady and moss could have gone from any spot, as they aren't 1st rounders, so that will all average out, but coming off one of the greatest statistical seasons in history at his position, tomlinson probably accounted for a pretty high % of top picks, and certainly top 3.

looking at that first (and early second) round, tomlinson was the difference maker that year, as I'm sure he was on many successful teams, and tilted results towards the top 3 picks.

player preceded by average pick

2006

2.39 tomlinson 270 2300/33

2.40 larry johnson 173 2200/19

3.09 shaun alexander -

7.18 steven jackson 168

10.95 p manning 140

2006 was a year for a big 3 early picks of tomlinson, johnson, and alexander.

2 of those 3 having the 2 best vbd values on the year, with tomlinson, in particular, putting up historically great numbers and nearly doubling the 4th ranked vbd value.

once again, tomlinson slants this year heavily towards the top 3 picks, with johnson throwing another log on there.

2005

1.99 tomlinson 180 1800/23

3.51 alexander 221 1900/28

4.99 p manning 51

6.15 edge 125

17.54 barber 162

larry johnson 192

another top heavy draft with the strong top 2 picks finishing with 2 of the top 3 vbd values -- tomlinson making another appearance.

alexander's vbd 75% higher than edge's 5th ranked value of 125.

2004

1.80 p holmes 41

2.09 tomlinson 130 1800/18

4.17 ahman green 41

5.41 deuce

5.68 portis

5.87 alexander 149 1800/20

8.44 edge

15.71 p manning 199 4600/49

15.04 culpepper 193 5100/41

barber 142

I'd say this year was characterized by holmes and tomlinson being the most common decision for many top spot drafters, while manning and culpepper were taken by many late spot drafters, and were probably the 2 biggest difference makers that year.

to sum up, of the 4 year period of this study, 2004-07, 2004 seems somewhat different than the following 3 years, which I think may be tainted by the tomlinson effect.

3 of the 4 years of this study just happen to coincide with one of the league's greatest statistical players in his prime, and I think this possibly slants things towards the top 3 spots.

I'd be curious to see the years broken down individually, to compare 2004 with the following 3 years.

if we're using this study to predict 2012 and onward, I think the first question would be whether there's a dominant vbd value that commands a top 3 pick, or maybe whether the consensus top 3 (foster, mccoy, rice) carry enough vbd differential between them to win out against lesser draft spots.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Truth be told, the problem was known to exists long before 2004.

It just took awhile for someone to break it down with a TON of stats/info from a place like wcoff.

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

 

[Warrior]

AUCTION DRAFT

/thread

you guys are living in the 1900's of fantasy football. Get with the times, grandpas!

 

[12punch]

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

I can understand concerns in a random order, or start up league, etc, but isn't the whole point of inverse order of finish to even the field by giving the chumps some kind of advantage over the winners?same as real nfl.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

AUCTION DRAFT/threadyou guys are living in the 1900's of fantasy football. Get with the times, grandpas!

This is a perfect option if it is only about "fair".However, drafts are preferred by many for the increased fun, speed and interactions.That's why so many leagues are drafts and not auctions, auctions are very ham-handed.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

I can understand concerns in a random order, or start up league, etc, but isn't the whole point of inverse order of finish to even the field by giving the chumps some kind of advantage over the winners?same as real nfl.

Sure, in some lesser leagues.But I would think most push towards better (more competitive) leagues and league-mates.Why must a good owner get continuously punished in his draft position? **We are talking redraft.Seems like a "everyone gets 1 at bat per inning and we dont keep score" approach.

 

[Hoosier16]

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

I can understand concerns in a random order, or start up league, etc, but isn't the whole point of inverse order of finish to even the field by giving the chumps some kind of advantage over the winners?same as real nfl.

In a dynasty, yes. In a redraft, no.

 

[12punch]

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

I can understand concerns in a random order, or start up league, etc, but isn't the whole point of inverse order of finish to even the field by giving the chumps some kind of advantage over the winners?same as real nfl.

Sure, in some lesser leagues.But I would think most push towards better (more competitive) leagues and league-mates.

Why must a good owner get continuously punished in his draft position? **We are talking redraft.

Seems like a "everyone gets 1 at bat per inning and we dont keep score" approach.

as I mentioned, same reason as the real nfl.don't shy away from the challenge -- patriots manage to do pretty well every year, and they're usually picking very late.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

As well as it becoming a topic of interest amongst masses who actually wanted a fair draft.

I can understand concerns in a random order, or start up league, etc, but isn't the whole point of inverse order of finish to even the field by giving the chumps some kind of advantage over the winners?same as real nfl.

Sure, in some lesser leagues.But I would think most push towards better (more competitive) leagues and league-mates.

Why must a good owner get continuously punished in his draft position? **We are talking redraft.

Seems like a "everyone gets 1 at bat per inning and we dont keep score" approach.

as I mentioned, same reason as the real nfl.don't shy away from the challenge -- patriots manage to do pretty well every year, and they're usually picking very late.

But we are talking REDRAFT. If its holdover/dynasty, I agree 100%.

I dont even think it was stated it was the same owners returning or anything like that.

Should they do that to wcoff/ffpc past winners in new seasons or something? seems absurd.

 

[flc735]

are the 12th and 13th best wr going to score the same amount as the 1st and 24th best wr's? no they aren't, the 1+24 will out score the 12+13. if it was equal,

this is my letter to him:

then we would have a linear progression as we move up the rankings (a straight line on a graph). if there were a linear progression, then the 1+24th pick would be equal to the 12+13th pick.

since this is not true, that means there is an exponentially increasing gain as you move up to the #1 player.

that means the difference between 1 and 2 is greater than the difference from 2 and 3n. the difference between 10 and 20 is greater than the difference from 40 and 50 and so on...

the gap between the #1 and #12 player is greater than the gap between the #13 and #24 player. therefore, 1+24 is more valuable than 12+13.

and then you go through the pairs of picks

1+24>12+13

25+48>36+37 ect...

...................................

you can't look a past years and say 'see, larry johnson, the 6th pick turned out to be the best running back, therefore your argument is invalid'. first of all, thats cherry picking. you can just as easily use LT at 1.1 as a counter example. looking at specific years is way too specific and too easy to manipulate in order to prove your argument. the problem is the sample size is way too small. to test this, you would need a few hundred years worth of fantasy seasons. that doesn't exist, but we do have basic math, which is correct and is explained above. it's a more accurate answer because again, the sample size we have to go off of is way too small.

I agree with what youre saying about point differential. However, there is not just one position in fantasy. A great draft involves building a team. That complicates things quite a bit, so while i would agree that there probably is some quantifiable advantage to picking early (you do, after all, have a shot at more players) at some point the draft spot probably becomes moot given all the possible combinations. Where that point is would be a matter of much debate.

Sure, once you get into later rounds, the difference in pick values decreases greatly. The difference between picks 125 and 137 is minimal. The point is that the difference in value between picks 1 and 12 is much, much greater than the difference between 13 and 24.

Slight hijack. If the snake gives an unfair advantage to the first few drafters, what would be a the Fairest draft process?

auction, since everyone is on an equal playing field. if you want to draft, than banzai is good. its a snake draft but the 3rd round is flippedso you get the 1.1, 2.12, 3.12, 4.1, 5.12, 6.1...

 

[flc735]

My 12 team PPR redraft, champs have drafted from:2011: 5th overall.2010: 8th overall2009: 5th overallOMG Huge bias for 5th overall. I'm not buying it. You can draft well or horrible from any spot, and you can fix any mess through trades and free agency.

irrelevant. 1 example out of the millions of leagues that have been played means nothing.dont get me wrong, ff skill and knowledge far out weights draft position, but there is an advantage given to the higher pick

 

[flc735]

My 12 team PPR redraft, champs have drafted from:2011: 5th overall.2010: 8th overall2009: 5th overallOMG Huge bias for 5th overall. I'm not buying it. You can draft well or horrible from any spot, and you can fix any mess through trades and free agency.

irrelevant. 1 example out of the millions of leagues that have been played means nothing.dont get me wrong, ff skill and knowledge far out weights draft position, but there is an advantage given to the higher pick

 

[flc735]

My 12 team PPR redraft, champs have drafted from:2011: 5th overall.2010: 8th overall2009: 5th overallOMG Huge bias for 5th overall. I'm not buying it. You can draft well or horrible from any spot, and you can fix any mess through trades and free agency.

irrelevant. 1 example out of the millions of leagues that have been played means nothing.dont get me wrong, ff skill and knowledge far out weights draft position, but there is an advantage given to the higher pick