Have We Gone Too Far....With PPR...? (1 Viewer)

[Stinkin Ref]

seems like ppr was implented years ago to bring the other positions "back to the pack" so to speak when everybody was implementing the "stud rb theory" and it seemed like the workhorse backs were dominating the fantasy world...well with the rule changes and the NFL seeming to become more pass happy/friendly...and there seeming to be less bell cow running backs and more RBBC, is it time to take a look at going backwards...

omg no way jose....

with the rule changes, etc in the NFL and more RBBC....wondering if that hasn't skewed the way things are a little too far.....now maybe the stud bell cow RB's are not getting their just do......

most websites will let you customize ppr down to the tenth....

a few leagues I am in go

.33 rb/wr

.50 or .75 te

so receptions are still a benefit, but the Ben Watson's (70 rec) of the world aren't creeping up the VBD depth charts on the Michael Turners of the world...(just a couple of names, have no idea how it actually works out without looking)..

do we really need to be straight up PPR to balance things out anymore...?....I think some of the workhorse RB's who impact the game may be getting the raw end of the deal in fantasy a little these days...

and yes I am an old school stud RB theory guy who dominated when I hoarded RB's years ago...I have adjusted, but not sure it seems right anymore....

 

[FF Ninja]

Personally, I find ppr makes things too easy. I see it as nothing more than a gimmick to mix things up, such as 2QB, but it has caught on to such an extent that we'll never get rid of it. Most even contend that it adds a new level of strategy, but it really doesn't. It just changes the strategy. Waters it down a bit even.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Personally, I find ppr makes things too easy. I see it as nothing more than a gimmick to mix things up, such as 2QB, but it has caught on to such an extent that we'll never get rid of it. Most even contend that it adds a new level of strategy, but it really doesn't. It just changes the strategy. Waters it down a bit even.

Beats the hell out of drafting RB with the first 3 or 4 picks How boring is that?

 

[Jedi Knight]

I think it's all in how you utilize it. Our league's top 12 non-QB offensive players:

1- A. Foster 52.923

2- A. Gates 50.416

3- R. White 49.708

4- J. Witten 49.060

5- A. Johnson 48.573

6- D. McFadden 48.257

7- L. McCoy 47.723

8- D. Clark 47.544

9- H. Nicks 46.371

10- A. Peterson 46.202

11- J. Charles 46.141

12- B. Lloyd 45.306

Granted, this is each player's points-per-game average, but that's 5 RB's, 4 WR's and 3 TE's in the top 12. To me, that makes the draft's first few rounds completely unpredictable- and much more fun.

 

[Dez]

If you played in a high stakes league and it was non PPR and you drew a back end up wouldn't you feel like your behind the 8 ball against the top few teams who get that stud RB.

Maybe not as much this year but imagine back in 2006 the 3 guys getting LT, Larry Johnson and Shaun Alexander were way ahead right off the bad over teams drafting 4-12. At least in PPR it gave you more of a chance to catch back up.

 

[J Giles Band]

I can identify with the original poster's premise...

The first season in my current keeper/contract league we used 1.0 ppr for WR/TE and 0.5 ppr for RB. We found that it overvalued WR's. It made many middle-of-the-road #2/#3 WR types more valuable than the 2nd tier everydown RB's. So much so the guys in our league began characterizing our league a 'WR league'.

Not to mention the bigger issue to me was that our original scoring devalued TD's. As a result, we adjusted our scoring to 0.5 ppr across the board in year two which seems to be the perfect balance in my experience.

This is obviously a 'to each his own' type of thing, but for the guys in our league and myself 1.0 ppr is too skewed.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Full PPR is unnecessary (10 yards receiving /= 20 yards rushing), partial PPR is less bad, adjust your starting lineup requirements to even out the rankings/VBD/whatever. Easy.

OP's premise seems correct.

 

[Multiple Scores]

PPR is stupid.

 

[eakfootball]

I prefer .5 ppr

 

[Pictus Cat]

.75 PPR with 40yds/Return

seemed to deepen the pool enough to make people pay attention to trends in the NFL during the season

without crippling teams with bad spots in the draft.

Auction or 3rd round reversal help too.

 

[sihaokills]

Love PPR

 

[Nicolas Cocaign]

I prefer PPR over all other formats.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

Love PPR

+1

 

[shortbow]

PPR should be the future, "standard" scoring is pretty stupid. It revolves entirely around TDs, PPR rewards the players that do the work. A TE that catches 60-100 balls should get more points than a TE that has 6 touchdowns. Every draft is exactly the same.

Honestly I think the standard should be 0.5 RB PPR, 1 WR PPR, 1.5 TE PPR, and 0.1 per rush attempt.

 

[mjr]

I remember ppr coming into my league BECAUSE of the shift towards rbbc as a new standard in the nfl. Ppr was exactly what made guys like MJD startable in leagues back during his first 2 seasons.

What I don't understand is ppr for WRs. As far as Im concerned ppr is only good for bringing those rbbc RBs back into the mix. Giving WRs ppr kind of negates that whole effort.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

PPR is stupid.

na a no ppr is stupider

 

[Uruk-Hai]

so receptions are still a benefit, but the Ben Watson's (70 rec) of the world aren't creeping up the VBD depth charts on the Michael Turners of the world...(just a couple of names, have no idea how it actually works out without looking)..

do we really need to be straight up PPR to balance things out anymore...?....I think some of the workhorse RB's who impact the game may be getting the raw end of the deal in fantasy a little these days...

Assuming that, by RBs "getting the raw end of the deal", you mean they're not drafted where they should be - well, then you should be cleaning up by drafting RBs because you also say that PPR hasn't affected the VBD values in your league. Otherwise, these two statements seem a little contradictory to me. You're right in that PPR won't change much VBD-wise (Watson not creeping up on Turner), so how is Turner getting a raw deal? More points don't equal more value (at least, not on a one-to-one basis).In any case, what PPR really affects is a league with flex players. It can bring WRs (& even TEs) into play as a viable flex in leagues that have scoring weighted toward RB/QB.

 

[Crippler]

IN todays NFL WR's are more valuable than RB's. Why should they not be in fantasy. It is why 2 QB leagues are now taking off. QB is the most important position in NFL by far and 2 QB leagues reflect this.

You can still have value for RB if you make it a start 2. Position requirements still dictate the value of players also. I know if I only need 1 RB, that I will go WR in PPR instead but if I need 2 or 3, than RB is a way to go also. Same with league size will impact values also

 

[roadkill1292]

I recommend that some of you take a closer look at substituting Point Per First Down Reception for PPR. MFL and Sportsline both support it (though not in live scoring). A 2-yard reception on third-and-four just isn't worth a point but a 3-yard reception on third-and-two is.

There's an old article around here somewhere by Jeff Pasquino, who did a pretty good analysis of PPFDR vs PPR. It convinced my local league to make the switch and we've never reconsidered it.

 

[No Way Jose]

I think you would be surprised at how well teams do with stud wrs in nonppr leagues. In the one nonppr league that I play in, the team that won had marginal rbs and great wr/TE that were touchdown machines. Here is his roster...

Kolb, Kevin PHI QB -

Ponder, Christian MIN QB ® -

Schaub, Matt HOU QB -

Brown, Donald IND RB -

Maroney, Laurence DEN RB -

McGahee, Willis BAL RB -

Mendenhall, Rashard PIT RB -

Wells, Chris ARI RB -

Austin, Miles DAL WR

Britt, Kenny TEN WR -

Evans, Lee BUF WR

Gonzalez, Anthony IND WR (P)

Hankerson, Leonard WAS WR ®

Jackson, DeSean PHI WR

Jennings, Greg GBP WR

Thomas, Devin NYG WR

Williams, Damian TEN WR

Williams, Mike TBB WR -

Gronkowski, Rob NEP TE

Keller, Dustin NYJ TE -

Nelson, Shawn BUF TE (P)

Akers, David PHI PK

Now this is even a 2,2,2 flex start. And QB gets 6 PTs/TD. I do not care for the scoring of this league because the nonppr actually makes the qb's too valuable. The top 17 scorers were QB and the next 13 non QB scorers were RBs. However If you have the stud wr's the score tds, you have a leg up on everyone because the drop off between a guy like Dwayne Bowe to Welker is so steep. Actually looking back at this I have no idea how he won. Lol. I guess what I am trying to say is nonppr sucks.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I like and play all different formats. Re-draft/Dyansty/Keeper/Survivor/Best-ball/H2H/Total points. PPR/Non-ppr/two QB etc.

I have found that PPR is the best (IMO) way to play

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

PPR has never balanced out the difference between RB, WR, and TE. If you want to accomplish that you have to adjust the supply/demand of the position. When you are required to start 2 RB and only 2 WR, for example, RB are going to have much more value no matter how many points per reception you give out. If you start adding multiple flex positions to a lineup then PPR can start achieving balance amongst the positions.

 

[noneother]

We have added PPR in our leagues with the intent of increasing the population of startable RBs. And making the TE position relevant. In most cases I would say there is a direct relation to yards receiving yards and #of catches for WRs, (Randy and DesJax examples of exceptions). So PPR doesn't (IMO) move WRs that much higher on the curve.

 

[zed2283]

PPR is stupid.

Just another reason not to use it.

 

[zilladog]

PPR should be the future, "standard" scoring is pretty stupid. It revolves entirely around TDs, PPR rewards the players that do the work. A TE that catches 60-100 balls should get more points than a TE that has 6 touchdowns. Every draft is exactly the same.Honestly I think the standard should be 0.5 RB PPR, 1 WR PPR, 1.5 TE PPR, and 0.1 per rush attempt.

Why should a TE catching 60-100 balls get more points than a TE that gets 6 td's? TD's after all, are the single most important thing a team or player can accomplish to help their team win a football game. Why shouldn't it be the same for FF? Why are we, as fantasy owners rewarding a player who goes out in the flat or wherever because the protection broke down, he catches a last ditch outlet pass and gets rocked for no gain, or worse, a loss? Sure, you could say he helped his QB avoid a sack. Yay.....so what? This is deserving of a half a point? Just because the play was designed for him as a last ditch pass option? So many catches in football games accomplish little to nothing for a team. A WR or TE who catches a ball on 3rd and 6 and fails to get enough YAC for a first down should not be rewarded with a full or even half a point. That's silly. Many RB's also fail to rush for a 1st down on 3rd and short. The difference is, he doesn't reward your fantasy team with points for accomplishing little to nothing. Instead, in a non ppr world, the players who gain yards, score td's and otherwise help teams win get the points. As it should be.Call me a purist, but in the real world, the talent doesn't get 'evened out'. The best players accomplish the most for their teams. This is most closely reflected in FF in non ppr. Its not perfect, but its a whole lot better than an arbitrary scoring system that gives FF owners an excuse to not know or care a whit about talent and focus only on statlines, opportunities and situations. All I'm suggesting is to go back to a time in FF when the best players were the most valuable. Danny Amendola, while a decent pass catcher, should never score anywhere close to Reggie Wayne or Roddy White. But in many crazy bizarro world ppr leagues, he does exactly that, and even scores better sometimes. How can the true fantasy heads who care about and evaluate talent ever get rewarded for actually knowing or watching football in this type of league?Ppr is arbitrary, stupid, and adds yet another level of disconnect between the fantasy and the reality. Sorry for the rant.

 

[-jb-]

PPR is stupid.

Just another reason not to use it.

This. Never liked it, never will.

 

[smackdaddies]

I prefer ppr, but I like variation - nothing is more boring than running every league the same. So I don't mind td heavy leagues, but I would hate for them all to be that way

 

[CalBear]

PPR isn't the be-all and end-all of systems, but to claim you don't like it because it "goes too far" makes no sense. PPR would go too far if it made 10 of the top 12 draft picks WRs instead of RBs. The reality is, even in PPR leagues 10 of the top 12 draft picks are still RBs, so clearly PPR, if anything, isn't going far enough.

There may be better ways to address the over-valuing of RBs in traditional FF league setups; I like 1/2/2 flex lineups for example. But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

 

[ookook]

Okay, I don't like PPR. At all.

The goal is to make drafting more fun and challenging by making WRs valued more relative to the huge RB run we have all come to know if not love. Often PPR is included with a flex option to serve this master.

The major objections to PPR are twofold.

For one, it disrupts the ranking of players within positions. So WRs who get few yards and few TDs but catch lots of short passes are more highly valued than those who actually contribute toward moving the football. Worse, RBs who catch short passes get way over-valued. It adds confusion to value discussions, rankigns etc. Reggie Bush is a poster child for this.

Second and related, plays that contribute less to the success of a team (e.g., a 2-yard reception) count more than those that may contribute more (a 9-yard run).

Although fiddlingwith supply-and-demand can help (e.g., start 2 QB, 4 WR), some players dislike this as it does not seem like real NFL team.

And yet many of us live with QBs throwing 4 pt TDs. Heck, 20 years ago we used to split 6 pts for thrown TD between QB and WR involved.

A much better solution is to increase to value of WRs and TEs WITHOUT changing the ranking within a position. That means increasing proportionally the things they score for: yards and TDs. And we better do something about QBs too.

Here is what that can look like.

RB: .10/yd, 6 pt/TD

WR: .18/yd, 8 pt/TD

TE: .20/yd, 8 pt/TD

QB: .15/yd rushing, .075 YD throwing, 6pt/TD, -1.5 INT

Let us call this "balanced performance" scoring.

I know, some folks hate decimal scoring. But the computer does it and we all get live score updates.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

PPR isn't the be-all and end-all of systems, but to claim you don't like it because it "goes too far" makes no sense. PPR would go too far if it made 10 of the top 12 draft picks WRs instead of RBs. The reality is, even in PPR leagues 10 of the top 12 draft picks are still RBs, so clearly PPR, if anything, isn't going far enough.There may be better ways to address the over-valuing of RBs in traditional FF league setups; I like 1/2/2 flex lineups for example. But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

never said I didn't like it...I actually do like it in modified form...I just see a bunch of leagues really taking it to the extreme with 1.5 or even 2 PPR for TE's and such....

 

[matuski]

Wouldn't consider NOT playing PPR anymore. Standard = boring as hell.

 

[netnalp]

Stud RB could come back in 5 years. As RBs get drafted later and their salaries drop, I could see some teams loading up on RBs and use the best one is the main ball carrier.

It seems teams went away from stud RB because the cost of investing so much money into one player with a short career span and high injury risk and how much it set a team back when a RB busted. Now with RB value dropping, I could see some teams becoming like the Dilfer Ravens teams. Build a stiff defense and a good stable of RBs, it's easier to find good run blockers than pass blockers, game managing QB and serviceable WR & TE. Then keep the ball away from the other team with time killing drives that eat up 7-10 minutes of a quarter, like Parcell's Giants teams used to.

 

[FF Ninja]

Personally, I find ppr makes things too easy. I see it as nothing more than a gimmick to mix things up, such as 2QB, but it has caught on to such an extent that we'll never get rid of it. Most even contend that it adds a new level of strategy, but it really doesn't. It just changes the strategy. Waters it down a bit even.

Beats the hell out of drafting RB with the first 3 or 4 picks How boring is that?

This is always the retort of the ppr lovers, but I'm sure most of you realize that the turnover at the RB position is too great for that to actually be a beneficial strategy. A top RB may be quite valuable in non-ppr but you draft a running back knowing that their stats could fall off a cliff this year (and that injury risk is higher), but if you spend your early picks on dependable players at other positions then you can swing for the fences at RB later in the draft.Aside from that, it just isn't true. You never see people draft all RB with their first 3-4 picks in 2RB leagues. But I guess that time has just warped the perception of non-ppr leagues. But it's whatever... there are still plenty of non-ppr leagues and I'm down to play a ppr league or a 2QB league from time to time because it is fun to mix it up.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Personally, I find ppr makes things too easy. I see it as nothing more than a gimmick to mix things up, such as 2QB, but it has caught on to such an extent that we'll never get rid of it. Most even contend that it adds a new level of strategy, but it really doesn't. It just changes the strategy. Waters it down a bit even.

Beats the hell out of drafting RB with the first 3 or 4 picks How boring is that?

This is always the retort of the ppr lovers, but I'm sure most of you realize that the turnover at the RB position is too great for that to actually be a beneficial strategy. A top RB may be quite valuable in non-ppr but you draft a running back knowing that their stats could fall off a cliff this year (and that injury risk is higher), but if you spend your early picks on dependable players at other positions then you can swing for the fences at RB later in the draft.Aside from that, it just isn't true. You never see people draft all RB with their first 3-4 picks in 2RB leagues. But I guess that time has just warped the perception of non-ppr leagues. But it's whatever... there are still plenty of non-ppr leagues and I'm down to play a ppr league or a 2QB league from time to time because it is fun to mix it up.

I would assume most leagues nowadays also have a flex option....so if it is start 2 RB's with a flex option as well, this could most definately happen....have done it myself...depending on the backs you can get, it is often beneficial to fill that flex spot with a RB....and heck if your goal is to always fill that flex spot with a RB it is good to have four knowing that you will for sure need him to cover 3 bye weeks...let alone injuries or awful matchups, etc.....most of my starting lineups end up going 1/3/2/1/1/1....harder to do these days with less studs and more RBBC....

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

PPR isn't the be-all and end-all of systems, but to claim you don't like it because it "goes too far" makes no sense. PPR would go too far if it made 10 of the top 12 draft picks WRs instead of RBs. The reality is, even in PPR leagues 10 of the top 12 draft picks are still RBs, so clearly PPR, if anything, isn't going far enough.There may be better ways to address the over-valuing of RBs in traditional FF league setups; I like 1/2/2 flex lineups for example. But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

never said I didn't like it...I actually do like it in modified form...I just see a bunch of leagues really taking it to the extreme with 1.5 or even 2 PPR for TE's and such....

If everyone can start 1 and only 1 tight end then their value compared to RB and WR doesn't change even if you give TEs 5 points per reception. The only thing that changes is the value of the individual player against other TEs.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

PPR isn't the be-all and end-all of systems, but to claim you don't like it because it "goes too far" makes no sense. PPR would go too far if it made 10 of the top 12 draft picks WRs instead of RBs. The reality is, even in PPR leagues 10 of the top 12 draft picks are still RBs, so clearly PPR, if anything, isn't going far enough.There may be better ways to address the over-valuing of RBs in traditional FF league setups; I like 1/2/2 flex lineups for example. But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

never said I didn't like it...I actually do like it in modified form...I just see a bunch of leagues really taking it to the extreme with 1.5 or even 2 PPR for TE's and such....

If everyone can start 1 and only 1 tight end then their value compared to RB and WR doesn't change even if you give TEs 5 points per reception. The only thing that changes is the value of the individual player against other TEs.

agreed...guess my mindset is that most leagues (redraft) have a flex option, so prior to PPR it was probably a no brainer to try and have a RB in the flex spot....now with PPR and more RBBC that is not such a slam dunk...

 

[ChromeWeasel]

PPR has never balanced out the difference between RB, WR, and TE. If you want to accomplish that you have to adjust the supply/demand of the position. When you are required to start 2 RB and only 2 WR, for example, RB are going to have much more value no matter how many points per reception you give out. If you start adding multiple flex positions to a lineup then PPR can start achieving balance amongst the positions.

Great point. Flex is where its at. No league should ever require more than 1 starting RB. I'd go as far as to make starters 1QB,2WR,1TE with 2 flex spots for RB/WR/TE. With some factor of PPR, and few required RB starters, you have far more options. And any league that allows more than 2 RB starters is ridiculous. You do not see 3 RBs on the field in the NFL. You do occassionally see 0 RB sets. It's insane that some comissioners allow for that with crazy lineup slots.As to the OP yearing for the days when everyone lined up to select RBs with their first 2 or 3 picks, I say good riddence. How pathetic is it to chase running backs for the first few rounds until they are all gone, because that's the only way to build a team? With PPR and flex you can build a team with no starter RB and win with a different strategy. Plus it makes trades easier, since you arent pigeonholed into hoarding RBs on every team. Great WRs are just as valuable.

 

[J Giles Band]

But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

CalBear, the main reason RB's still dominate the 1st round in drafts is not a result of PPR or non-PPR but instead primarily a product of position scarcity. You definitely see WR's move up draft boards in PPR, but where guys are drafted doesn't necessarily serve as an accurate reflection of PPR as a more balanced method. How their play on the field translates in your scoring system does that.I agree with your general line of thinking that starting lineup format is a more prominent factor in this discussion. And I completely understand why guys prefer PPR. It's like the flavor of ice cream, there is no right and wrong answer. But in regards to your quote above, let's not confuse opinion with fact.

I actually prefer PPR as long as it is 0.5. Going above that (1.0 or more) tilts the balance in my experience. Not just in terms of between positions (RB-WR) but more importantly the relative value of TD's, etc. But again, this still comes down to personal preference and how each of us values play will always differ.

On a side note, I was in Berkeley in May interviewing for a coaching job. Beautiful campus.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

PPR isn't the be-all and end-all of systems, but to claim you don't like it because it "goes too far" makes no sense. PPR would go too far if it made 10 of the top 12 draft picks WRs instead of RBs. The reality is, even in PPR leagues 10 of the top 12 draft picks are still RBs, so clearly PPR, if anything, isn't going far enough.There may be better ways to address the over-valuing of RBs in traditional FF league setups; I like 1/2/2 flex lineups for example. But 1.0 PPR for all players clearly does not cause over-valuing of WRs.

never said I didn't like it...I actually do like it in modified form...I just see a bunch of leagues really taking it to the extreme with 1.5 or even 2 PPR for TE's and such....

If everyone can start 1 and only 1 tight end then their value compared to RB and WR doesn't change even if you give TEs 5 points per reception. The only thing that changes is the value of the individual player against other TEs.

this is simply not true

 

[CalBear]

I just see a bunch of leagues really taking it to the extreme with 1.5 or even 2 PPR for TE's and such....

If everyone can start 1 and only 1 tight end then their value compared to RB and WR doesn't change even if you give TEs 5 points per reception. The only thing that changes is the value of the individual player against other TEs.

This is 100% untrue. Let's look at last year's VBD rankings. In non-PPR, the top WR (Lloyd) had 209 VBD points; the top RB (Foster) had 330; the top TE (Witten) had 58. Lloyd and Foster were way more valuable than Witten. If you give TEs 5PPR, and change nothing else, Witten gets 250 VBD points. He goes from being a minor contributor, to the second most valuable player in the league. The #6 TE (Winslow) has 59 VBD points in that scenario, more than the #1 TE had in the non-PPR scenario.The same is true with any system which awards points differentially to positions; if it increases the points scored at the position, it will increase the difference between players at the position, which will increase the value of the position relative to other positions.

 

[FF Ninja]

Personally, I find ppr makes things too easy. I see it as nothing more than a gimmick to mix things up, such as 2QB, but it has caught on to such an extent that we'll never get rid of it. Most even contend that it adds a new level of strategy, but it really doesn't. It just changes the strategy. Waters it down a bit even.

Beats the hell out of drafting RB with the first 3 or 4 picks How boring is that?

This is always the retort of the ppr lovers, but I'm sure most of you realize that the turnover at the RB position is too great for that to actually be a beneficial strategy. A top RB may be quite valuable in non-ppr but you draft a running back knowing that their stats could fall off a cliff this year (and that injury risk is higher), but if you spend your early picks on dependable players at other positions then you can swing for the fences at RB later in the draft.Aside from that, it just isn't true. You never see people draft all RB with their first 3-4 picks in 2RB leagues. But I guess that time has just warped the perception of non-ppr leagues. But it's whatever... there are still plenty of non-ppr leagues and I'm down to play a ppr league or a 2QB league from time to time because it is fun to mix it up.

I would assume most leagues nowadays also have a flex option....so if it is start 2 RB's with a flex option as well, this could most definately happen....have done it myself...depending on the backs you can get, it is often beneficial to fill that flex spot with a RB....and heck if your goal is to always fill that flex spot with a RB it is good to have four knowing that you will for sure need him to cover 3 bye weeks...let alone injuries or awful matchups, etc.....most of my starting lineups end up going 1/3/2/1/1/1....harder to do these days with less studs and more RBBC....

Well, there isn't always a flex, and even more likely, there wasn't a flex back when ppr was nonexistent. And even if there was a flex, no one would take a 4th RB for depth over a first starting WR, QB, or TE. The opportunity/cost just wouldn't weigh out. When I play in a flex league I feel like it gives me an excuse to load up on sleepers/value plays with upside at the RB position rather than using all my early picks on the position. I'd rather have Lynch/Grant round out my flex than use a 3rd round pick there.

 

[LawFitz]

2 RB, 3 WR, 0.5 PPR

Try this and I promise you will never go back.

I've found it to be the perfect balance in terms of bringing WRs up to par, but not overdoing it. Also helps to make pass TDs worth 6 pts if you do the above, unless you start 2 QB (in which case keep pass TD = 4 pts). Flex is unnecessary.

 

[moderated]

2 RB, 3 WR, 0.5 PPRTry this and I promise you will never go back. I've found it to be the perfect balance in terms of bringing WRs up to par, but not overdoing it. Also helps to make pass TDs worth 6 pts if you do the above, unless you start 2 QB (in which case keep pass TD = 4 pts). Flex is unnecessary.

That is how I do my redraft league. I agree it's the most balanced setup.

 

[Tony Soprano]

I like a graduated PPR system:

.5 PPR for RBs

1.0 PPR for WRs

1.5 PPR for TEs

 

[Saint]

PPR has never balanced out the difference between RB, WR, and TE. If you want to accomplish that you have to adjust the supply/demand of the position. When you are required to start 2 RB and only 2 WR, for example, RB are going to have much more value no matter how many points per reception you give out. If you start adding multiple flex positions to a lineup then PPR can start achieving balance amongst the positions.

This.If you have flex allowing folks to balance their line-ups, it changes everything in the draft. I have found a graduating PPR (0.5 RB, 1.0 WR, 1.5 TE) with lineup requirements of 1 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 FLEX (RB/WR), and 1 FLEX (WR/TE) balances the draft out amazingly. We typically see an even number of RBS and WRs in the first 3 rounds, as well as your top QBs and top TEs... Pretty nice mix if you ask me.

 

[shortbow]

PPR should be the future, "standard" scoring is pretty stupid. It revolves entirely around TDs, PPR rewards the players that do the work. A TE that catches 60-100 balls should get more points than a TE that has 6 touchdowns. Every draft is exactly the same.Honestly I think the standard should be 0.5 RB PPR, 1 WR PPR, 1.5 TE PPR, and 0.1 per rush attempt.

Why should a TE catching 60-100 balls get more points than a TE that gets 6 td's? TD's after all, are the single most important thing a team or player can accomplish to help their team win a football game. Why shouldn't it be the same for FF? Why are we, as fantasy owners rewarding a player who goes out in the flat or wherever because the protection broke down, he catches a last ditch outlet pass and gets rocked for no gain, or worse, a loss? Sure, you could say he helped his QB avoid a sack. Yay.....so what? This is deserving of a half a point? Just because the play was designed for him as a last ditch pass option? So many catches in football games accomplish little to nothing for a team. A WR or TE who catches a ball on 3rd and 6 and fails to get enough YAC for a first down should not be rewarded with a full or even half a point. That's silly. Many RB's also fail to rush for a 1st down on 3rd and short. The difference is, he doesn't reward your fantasy team with points for accomplishing little to nothing. Instead, in a non ppr world, the players who gain yards, score td's and otherwise help teams win get the points. As it should be.Call me a purist, but in the real world, the talent doesn't get 'evened out'. The best players accomplish the most for their teams. This is most closely reflected in FF in non ppr. Its not perfect, but its a whole lot better than an arbitrary scoring system that gives FF owners an excuse to not know or care a whit about talent and focus only on statlines, opportunities and situations. All I'm suggesting is to go back to a time in FF when the best players were the most valuable. Danny Amendola, while a decent pass catcher, should never score anywhere close to Reggie Wayne or Roddy White. But in many crazy bizarro world ppr leagues, he does exactly that, and even scores better sometimes. How can the true fantasy heads who care about and evaluate talent ever get rewarded for actually knowing or watching football in this type of league?Ppr is arbitrary, stupid, and adds yet another level of disconnect between the fantasy and the reality. Sorry for the rant.

First of all, short answer: 1. It is about evening out the player pool. In standard scoring the RBs dont just lead the field, they dominate it. In ppr RBs still lead the field but they dont dominate any other singular position. 2. In standard scoring WRs and TEs value is hugely offset by their teams offense, its way more advantageous to draft a WR that is likely to get 6+ touchdowns a season than one who will get 80-90 receptions and the latter is way more impressive and should be rewarded, while not devaluing the former.3. It adds much needed diversity in drafting, standard drafts typically go 1-20 rbs with the top 6 QB and th top 6 WR thrown in along with the top 1-3 TEs. In PPR draft strategy is radically different.I think a portion of the problem has been mentioned above, part of the value of a specific position is the player pool vs the demand, there are fewer rbs so they should be worth more, the argument against that is, make the WR starting slots deeper to make WRs more valuable a combination of that I believe is the best solution.In my more competitive leagues owners are required to start two TEs making the position more valuable, along with adding an additional WR slot which works perfectly for a 10-12 owner league.

 

[DropKick]

PPR should be the future, "standard" scoring is pretty stupid. It revolves entirely around TDs, PPR rewards the players that do the work. A TE that catches 60-100 balls should get more points than a TE that has 6 touchdowns. Every draft is exactly the same.

Honestly I think the standard should be 0.5 RB PPR, 1 WR PPR, 1.5 TE PPR, and 0.1 per rush attempt.

Why should a TE catching 60-100 balls get more points than a TE that gets 6 td's? TD's after all, are the single most important thing a team or player can accomplish to help their team win a football game. Why shouldn't it be the same for FF? Why are we, as fantasy owners rewarding a player who goes out in the flat or wherever because the protection broke down, he catches a last ditch outlet pass and gets rocked for no gain, or worse, a loss? Sure, you could say he helped his QB avoid a sack. Yay.....so what? This is deserving of a half a point? Just because the play was designed for him as a last ditch pass option? So many catches in football games accomplish little to nothing for a team. A WR or TE who catches a ball on 3rd and 6 and fails to get enough YAC for a first down should not be rewarded with a full or even half a point. That's silly. Many RB's also fail to rush for a 1st down on 3rd and short. The difference is, he doesn't reward your fantasy team with points for accomplishing little to nothing. Instead, in a non ppr world, the players who gain yards, score td's and otherwise help teams win get the points. As it should be.

Call me a purist, but in the real world, the talent doesn't get 'evened out'. The best players accomplish the most for their teams. This is most closely reflected in FF in non ppr. Its not perfect, but its a whole lot better than an arbitrary scoring system that gives FF owners an excuse to not know or care a whit about talent and focus only on statlines, opportunities and situations.

All I'm suggesting is to go back to a time in FF when the best players were the most valuable. Danny Amendola, while a decent pass catcher, should never score anywhere close to Reggie Wayne or Roddy White. But in many crazy bizarro world ppr leagues, he does exactly that, and even scores better sometimes. How can the true fantasy heads who care about and evaluate talent ever get rewarded for actually knowing or watching football in this type of league?

Ppr is arbitrary, stupid, and adds yet another level of disconnect between the fantasy and the reality. Sorry for the rant.

Both White and Wayne had about 30 more receptions than Amendola, 500+ more yards and found the end zone more frequently. White and Wayne were the top 2 WRs in my scoring system, For the season about 150% better than Amendola.As a "purist", why not revert to "TD Only" scoring since TDs are the single most important success factor? Now THAT can be arbitrary! Nothing worse than having a RB move the chains down the field only to have a FB or QB sneak the ball in. That scoring system proved to be one dimensional and was much improved with credit for yardage.

The addition of PPR is just another layer to the scoring system. In fact, our system awards points per carry too - as well as points per completion. In terms of game contribution, we think of it as role in the game plan. It is designed around expected contribution; five receptions equates to twenty-five carries. Michael Turner may not catch many balls but he may rush the ball 30+ times.

You are correct that a reception can be meaningless within the context of an NFL game. But so can turn-overs, yardage and even TDs. Should you penalize a QB for a pick on a Hail Mary? Ever see a RB break a 40 yard run at the end of a half against a prevent defense? How about a QB pile up HUGE numbers in a game that is far out of reach? Can you really ever correlate individual achievement with victory/defeat?

Overall, I've liked the addition of PPR. Stud WRs can offset stud RBs. The pool of viable RBs became larger (think the Kevin Faulk role). The TE position gains significance. It's just a scoring system... there is nothing arbitrary, stupid or "dumbed down" about it.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

I recommend that some of you take a closer look at substituting Point Per First Down Reception for PPR. MFL and Sportsline both support it (though not in live scoring). A 2-yard reception on third-and-four just isn't worth a point but a 3-yard reception on third-and-two is. There's an old article around here somewhere by Jeff Pasquino, who did a pretty good analysis of PPFDR vs PPR. It convinced my local league to make the switch and we've never reconsidered it.

I haven't played in one yet, but I don't think it makes more real world sense. It also doesn't seem like that it would be that big of a change from normal PPR.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Why are we, as fantasy owners rewarding a player who goes out in the flat or wherever because the protection broke down, he catches a last ditch outlet pass and gets rocked for no gain, or worse, a loss? Ppr is arbitrary, stupid, and adds yet another level of disconnect between the fantasy and the reality. Sorry for the rant.

That's why people are advocating PPFDR.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Why are we, as fantasy owners rewarding a player who goes out in the flat or wherever because the protection broke down, he catches a last ditch outlet pass and gets rocked for no gain, or worse, a loss? Ppr is arbitrary, stupid, and adds yet another level of disconnect between the fantasy and the reality. Sorry for the rant.

That's why people are advocating PPFDR.

PPFDR?