I'd like to have a rational conversation (1 Viewer)

[-jb-]

Hi There,

Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):

- What attracted you to the format?

- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?

- If you converted, when did you do so and why?

- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?

My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.

Thanks.

 

[J. Cyrus]

Hi There,Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):- What attracted you to the format?- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?- If you converted, when did you do so and why?- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.Thanks.

^I'll preface my statement by saying that I use 0.4 PPR and 0.1 PPC (point per carry). The primary reason is that I think consistent usage should be rewarded to some degree (guys that contribute consistently to their team's efforts to rack up first downs/TDs/etc.)-I was attracted to the format as another wrinkle to the scoring system that would produce a more "accurate" result (relative to what occurs on the field)-I converted 2 years ago-I converted because I thought that a guy with 12 catches for 113 yards and a TD accomplished more positive things for his football team than some 4th WR hauling in a 85 yard TD catch did (I don't mean to say that only 4th WRs haul in 85 yard TD catches, I'm just presenting one of the more extreme examples that I dislike here). I also think that RBs who bring something to the table in the passing game should be rewarded.That being said, 1 PPR is too drastic IMO. It marginalizes other actions on the field too much and overvalues receptions within the context of most scoring systems.SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC:In my leagues, between the 0.4 PPR, 0.1 PPC and extra flex spot, I found it appropriate to make ALL yards (yes, including passing yards) worth 1 point for every 10. I also -4 for INTs and count 6 for every TD. The result is that 8 of the top 20 players (and 9 of the top 50) in my scoring are QBs (based on 2009 stats), with the rest being split almost dead even between RBs and WRs (with a couple of TEs sprinkled in). I believe this is more true to life. Having to start 6 RBs/WRs combined and only 1 QB is what equalizes the *value* between QB and RB/WR.

 

[-jb-]

Thanks J. Cyrus. Playing the devil's advocate here, but aren't pass-catching RBs rewarded by their production? Why the need to reward something that <> field advancement? This has been my biggest challenge with PPR. If one RB has 20 carries for 100 yards, and another has 15 carries and 5 receptions for 100 yards, it creates a pretty significant imbalance for the same amount of production. I realize that this is offset in your league for getting points for carries, but that's not usually the case.

I do appreciate your point for WR vs. WR comparison, and hadn't thought of that.

Regarding your OT comment, I agree that QBs should somehow be more valuable, which is another thing that PPR seems to negate. Good to see some creativity towards adjusting for that. We are already in a 6pt TD pass format, so that does help as well.

 

[rizzler]

Ive played in PPR for one season... and to be honest, I don't think I would do it again.

I am perfectly fine with people playing in one. It has its merits. But being rewarded for merely catching a ball as opposed to making a "play" just kinda throws me off.

(ie: a guy catches a ball for -2yds and still gets rewarded for the catch?)

Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

 

[VaTerp]

I've been playing FF since 98'. Started with PPR when my friend and I started our league about 7-8 years ago. When I played in my original non-ppr after that I just found it to be too boring for that and some other reasons.

To me PPR adds more to the game, moreso because it increases the pool of players who can contribute signigicant points (both Wrs and Rbs), and also increases the value of WRs relative to other positions to make them more of a serious consideration earlier in drafts so that it's not just always 15 stratight RBs off the board.

I play almost exclusively in PPR, all TD 6 pt leagues because to me they are more fun. My main league also gives points for some other things that most would probably frown at but it makes the game more enjoyable for me. It makes more plays have relevance from a FF perspective when I am watching NFL games.

After many years of debating the merits of various pt systems on other forums I have pretty much given up trying to convince people. To each his own and people play in whatever leagues they enjoy. Me and my friends enjoy points. Our games are high scoring shootouts with team pt totals sometimes going over 200 on a really good week. That's not for everybody and that's cool.

I wont give a breakdown of the top scorers in my league b/c we have other pt categories in addition to PPR that would make it moot for this discussion.

 

[KellysHeroes]

1 PPR is a little heavy.. especially when you play against a guy like Welker and his 1 Rec for 3 yards. or when its 3rd and 4 and the RB gets a Rec for 2 yards... does he really deserve an extra pt for that Rec. To counter it most of my leagues give .2 a carry / .5 PPR for RBs and .2 a QB completion.

I have been creating and Commishing leagues for about 5 yrs now. My 1st league has a very interesting scoring system.. 1 PPR for WRs and 20 yards a Ru/RE yard. Now that we all have experience in the system I think everyone scores Recs as the #1 when valuing WRs.

http://football12.myfantasyleague.com/2010...=24125&O=09

The next league was very similar but it was 10 RU/RE yards a pt and the results were better

http://football11.myfantasyleague.com/2010...=25151&O=09

Then this league is a little crazy looking but really came out pretty good

http://football16.myfantasyleague.com/2010...=13486&O=09

 

[Jason Wood]

There's no perfect answer. I like the added element PPR gives to helping further differentiate players into tiers. I find with traditional scoring, too many players are at replacement level in a given week, and that always bothered me. But if I had my druthers, the scoring system would be as complex as the league mates are comfortable with. In most of my long running local leagues we use tiered PPR (0.5 for RBs, 1 for WRs, 2 for TEs), bonuses for long runs/catches/passes, bonuses for big games (e.g., 300 yards passing, 100 yards rushing), etc...

 

[radballs]

Don't have time to debate it, but PPR is a great way to add some flexibility to a league.

 

[redBourne]

I've been playing FF since 98'. Started with PPR when my friend and I started our league about 7-8 years ago. When I played in my original non-ppr after that I just found it to be too boring for that and some other reasons.To me PPR adds more to the game, moreso because it increases the pool of players who can contribute signigicant points (both Wrs and Rbs), and also increases the value of WRs relative to other positions to make them more of a serious consideration earlier in drafts so that it's not just always 15 stratight RBs off the board.I play almost exclusively in PPR, all TD 6 pt leagues because to me they are more fun. My main league also gives points for some other things that most would probably frown at but it makes the game more enjoyable for me. It makes more plays have relevance from a FF perspective when I am watching NFL games.After many years of debating the merits of various pt systems on other forums I have pretty much given up trying to convince people. To each his own and people play in whatever leagues they enjoy. Me and my friends enjoy points. Our games are high scoring shootouts with team pt totals sometimes going over 200 on a really good week. That's not for everybody and that's cool.I wont give a breakdown of the top scorers in my league b/c we have other pt categories in addition to PPR that would make it moot for this discussion.

This. When my league first adopted PPR, it was 1 pt per. That was the year someone had LT's 100 catch performance. Domination. It quickly adopted to a .5 pt reception league and since I've had more excitement watching games and the scoring. Now I'm in two leagues that do .5 ppr (both chose this on their own) and I wouldn't go back unless I had to. It doesn't blow up scoring in my opinion at all.

 

[-jb-]

Thanks, VaTerp. I can appreciate the fact that it adds plays of relevance. I could see how that would enhance the excitement of the game. When you say that it increases the pool of players, I'm with you. When you draft, however, does it impact how you draft? Understanding that the value of WR is elevated simply by the point structure, does the added depth of the position tend to offset that value?

 

[go2extrems]

- What attracted you to the format?

I like that it gives some WRs who would normally be overlooked more value. Possession receivers get their due, you could say. Also, 3rd down RBs become viable bye week fillers and depth.

- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?

We converted, but I've preferred PPR since first playing in a PPR league.

- If you converted, when did you do so and why?

My homeboy league just converted last year, but I've been playing in PPR leagues for a few years. It's an easy way to boost scores and adds another element to consider when deciding on value for a player.

- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?

9, 5, 6, We use 6pts for all TDs, so QBs score well. We also give all players 1pt per reception. Your results will depend on your scoring system.

 

[-jb-]

Glad to hear that 0.5PPR is common. I did throw that out there for the league in question. Hopefully, that one wins out should we go down the PPR road.

 

[rzrback77]

Don't have time to debate it, but PPR is a great way to add some flexibility to a league.

This is my reason also. It especially adds flexibility in leagues with a flex position. You can go strong early at WR while others are hogging all the RBs. I just really enjoy the diversity of draft planning and leagues which incorporate these two together.

 

[sn0mm1s]

I despise PPR leagues for the very fact a player can put up a mediocre game yet put up a great fantasy day. If you just want another scoring metric PPR is fine and good but it really sin't representative of production. I much prefer 1pt per 7 or 8 yards receiving *for WR only* to balance the RB/WR scoring discrepancy (keeping the RB at 1pt/10yards). Adding 1st downs as a metric is good as well because, generally speaking, a reception by a WR goes for a 1st down while a dump off pass doesn't.

 

[redBourne]

Glad to hear that 0.5PPR is common. I did throw that out there for the league in question. Hopefully, that one wins out should we go down the PPR road.

Other than that first season I mentioned above, I've never been apart of or seen one (locally) that did a full pt per. That I believe would skew the scoring too much.

 

[dagwood]

PPR adds more flexibility to your roster, but what really sold me on is that it made scoring TD's less critical to your performance. As an example - use 1 pt per rec; 1 pt per 10 yds; 6 pts per TD

So Randy Moss catches 10 balls for 100 yards and scores 10 points in basic scoring system.

Meanwhile Steve Breaston catches 2 passes for 40 yards and a TD and also scores 10 points.

Randy Moss had a much better game than Steve Breaston but Steve Breaston helped his FF team just as much as Randy Moss.

In a PPR format, Randy Moss scored 20 and Steve Breaston scored 12. This is a much better result in my mind.

 

[Crash and Walk Away]

It also makes TEs more viable contributors to fantasy football lineups, as their (minimal yardage) contributions become more relevant to the scoring.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

PPR makes very little sense to me and never has. It's just a personal opinion of course, but I think there are MUCH better ways to change the relative value of the positions than PPR.

What matters in football? Yards (field position) and points. It doesn't matter how those yards are gained. A run for 10 yards by a running back has the same value to his team as a pass reception for 10 yards by a running back.

Having 10 catches for 50 yards be worth 3 times as much as 10 rushes for 50 yards is ridiculous. Having 5 catches for 0 net yards worth the same as 10 rushes for 50 yards is even MORE ridiculous. And changing the value of those receptions doesn't really change the point, it just makes the problems more or less significant depending on the direction you are going. Why have the problem at all?

In this day and age, it is very easy to customize your scoring system. And for YEARS already, we have already been doing with QBs what I think should be done with WRs/RBs. Just change the value of yards for each position relative to how hard it is to gain yards in that position. Why don't we give QBs 20 points for 200 yards (like we would for RBs or WRs)? Simply because it's is fairly easy for them to do it. So do the same for WRs/RBs/TEs if you want to change relative value. Give receiving yards slightly more value than rushing yards for example. Or give all WR yards slightly more value than RB yards. Either way, it's much better than some arbitrary boost in value to an event (reception) that may or may not even have any real value for a football team. You want to give "bonuses"? Do it for first downs, that would be better than catches at least (and should favor WRs).

I also hate how SO many people categorize folks who DON'T like PPR leagues as dinosaurs resistant to change. I'm not resistant to change at all. I'm FOR change if it makes sense. I'm resistant to arbitrary scoring for things that don't have a direct relationship with how good a player is.

I'm IN a few PPR leagues, and I can "handle" them just fine, but it bugs me that it is becoming the "standard" scoring system out there.

 

[radballs]

It really doesn't change anything as far as competing. If you want to look at how it may change player rankings, simply plug in your league's scoring options into the Draft Dominator and see how it changes values. Everyone always says that it gives WRs too much value, but I think the positional starting requirements is just as impactful as well.

In other words, changing starting WRs from 2 to 3 probably makes as big a difference as the PPR.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

PPR adds more flexibility to your roster, but what really sold me on is that it made scoring TD's less critical to your performance. As an example - use 1 pt per rec; 1 pt per 10 yds; 6 pts per TDSo Randy Moss catches 10 balls for 100 yards and scores 10 points in basic scoring system.Meanwhile Steve Breaston catches 2 passes for 40 yards and a TD and also scores 10 points.Randy Moss had a much better game than Steve Breaston but Steve Breaston helped his FF team just as much as Randy Moss.In a PPR format, Randy Moss scored 20 and Steve Breaston scored 12. This is a much better result in my mind.

If you want TDs to be less critical, a better way to accomplish that IMO is to DIRECTLY make TDs less valuable relative to yards. Drop TDs to 3 points. Or if the 3 pts sticks in the craw of the traditionalists, keep TDs at 6 points, but give a point for every 5 yards instead of 10.In that system, Moss scores 10 points, and Breaston scores 7 (or 20 and 14 with the second option - it works out the same). Of course, different leagues will want to do different things with the relative value, but the point is that you don't NEED an arbitrary bonus system to change the balance between yards and TDs (as mentioned before, the two things that really matter for an offense).

 

[Shutout]

My main leagues all have a hybrid system that awards points per yard (typical is .1 for each yard ran and caught and something like .05 for a yard passed, 4 pts per Td).

But it also has varying PPR. A TE may be 1PPR, a WR at .75, and a RB at .5. The points may be different but the scale ia about the same. I have to say that this has made some great changes in the relative value of players at those three skill positions in these leagues. At the end of the day, the top tier TEs match up with about the top 1-12 WRs and the top tier WRs match up with about the top 10-12 RBs. The TRUE STUD RBS (those tope 3-4 each year) still are true difference makers and carry more weight (as they should), but it really makes a lot of different players valuable and definitely opens up trading (and I would imagine drafting if you are re-drafting...worst thing in the world is a draft where the top 20 picks are 15 RBs, Manning, Brees, Arod, AJ and Fitz).

 

[VaTerp]

Thanks, VaTerp. I can appreciate the fact that it adds plays of relevance. I could see how that would enhance the excitement of the game. When you say that it increases the pool of players, I'm with you. When you draft, however, does it impact how you draft? Understanding that the value of WR is elevated simply by the point structure, does the added depth of the position tend to offset that value?

Good question. I imagine that the increased depth does somewhat offset the value but I havent really looked at it that closely.

I would say though that Andre Johnson is a perfect example of how PPR makes the draft more interesting. In non-ppr leagues I don't think you consider him as early as 1.06 or whereever it is he will end up going.

I think it's good that the WR can actually be considered early in a draft and adds to the strategies and approaches an owner can take when building their team.

 

[Godsbrother]

About 3 years ago we began awarding WR 0.5 PPR and TEs 1.0 PPR. The result was that WRs became about as valued as RBs. TEs are still not on par with RBs & WRs but they can have very big games. Their ADP has inceased at least 2 rounds or so.

In our league QBs are valued the highest since we give 6 pts for a passing TD and you can start a second QB as flex.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

PPR makes very little sense to me and never has. It's just a personal opinion of course, but I think there are MUCH better ways to change the relative value of the positions than PPR.What matters in football? Yards (field position) and points. It doesn't matter how those yards are gained. A run for 10 yards by a running back has the same value to his team as a pass reception for 10 yards by a running back.Having 10 catches for 50 yards be worth 3 times as much as 10 rushes for 50 yards is ridiculous. Having 5 catches for 0 net yards worth the same as 10 rushes for 50 yards is even MORE ridiculous. And changing the value of those receptions doesn't really change the point, it just makes the problems more or less significant depending on the direction you are going. Why have the problem at all?In this day and age, it is very easy to customize your scoring system. And for YEARS already, we have already been doing with QBs what I think should be done with WRs/RBs. Just change the value of yards for each position relative to how hard it is to gain yards in that position. Why don't we give QBs 20 points for 200 yards (like we would for RBs or WRs)? Simply because it's is fairly easy for them to do it. So do the same for WRs/RBs/TEs if you want to change relative value. Give receiving yards slightly more value than rushing yards for example. Or give all WR yards slightly more value than RB yards. Either way, it's much better than some arbitrary boost in value to an event (reception) that may or may not even have any real value for a football team. You want to give "bonuses"? Do it for first downs, that would be better than catches at least (and should favor WRs).I also hate how SO many people categorize folks who DON'T like PPR leagues as dinosaurs resistant to change. I'm not resistant to change at all. I'm FOR change if it makes sense. I'm resistant to arbitrary scoring for things that don't have a direct relationship with how good a player is.I'm IN a few PPR leagues, and I can "handle" them just fine, but it bugs me that it is becoming the "standard" scoring system out there.

very I like how you explained this, and I think if more people would have taken a look at this prior to jumping straight to PPR , it might have been more of the norm...that said....we go .33 ppr......going to bump up TE's to .5

 

[bagger]

Hi There,Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):- What attracted you to the format?- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?- If you converted, when did you do so and why?- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.Thanks.

- Adds another layer of strategy when drafting. In non PPR leagues you have the first 13 players go off the board as RB and there isn't much variation. RBs are overly valued compared to other positions based on scarcity and it allows someone with the #1-#3 picks to have a significant advantage. With PPR there are now more RBs of equal "stud" value (factoring in RBs like Bush who can equal production via their receiving game) and of course stud WRs are now viable round 1 picks. It allows everyone in the first round to get a "stud".- Converted.- About 3 years ago. Played in a PPR league and realized my main leagues should also convert.- FBG should have this information you can look up.

 

[Jayrod]

I've only ever played in leagues that give some kind of PPR. The more scoring categories the better, IMO. It gives me more to analyze and allows more chances to gain an edge on the competition.

Since PPR is so mainstream now, IDP leagues are currently the new PPR and once enough leagues pick up on the joys of IDP, return yards will be the new PPR.

People like a challenge, not 2 straight rounds of RB's.

 

[dagwood]

PPR adds more flexibility to your roster, but what really sold me on is that it made scoring TD's less critical to your performance. As an example - use 1 pt per rec; 1 pt per 10 yds; 6 pts per TDSo Randy Moss catches 10 balls for 100 yards and scores 10 points in basic scoring system.Meanwhile Steve Breaston catches 2 passes for 40 yards and a TD and also scores 10 points.Randy Moss had a much better game than Steve Breaston but Steve Breaston helped his FF team just as much as Randy Moss.In a PPR format, Randy Moss scored 20 and Steve Breaston scored 12. This is a much better result in my mind.

If you want TDs to be less critical, a better way to accomplish that IMO is to DIRECTLY make TDs less valuable relative to yards. Drop TDs to 3 points. Or if the 3 pts sticks in the craw of the traditionalists, keep TDs at 6 points, but give a point for every 5 yards instead of 10.In that system, Moss scores 10 points, and Breaston scores 7 (or 20 and 14 with the second option - it works out the same). Of course, different leagues will want to do different things with the relative value, but the point is that you don't NEED an arbitrary bonus system to change the balance between yards and TDs (as mentioned before, the two things that really matter for an offense).

If you lower relative values, of course you bring everyone closer together. The point I was trying to make was PPR tends to have the better players score better. And it also makes better WR's score more than average RB's and gives some value to TE's.Thus it gives more flexibility to your roster.

 

[bagger]

PPR makes very little sense to me and never has. It's just a personal opinion of course, but I think there are MUCH better ways to change the relative value of the positions than PPR.

What matters in football? Yards (field position) and points. It doesn't matter how those yards are gained. A run for 10 yards by a running back has the same value to his team as a pass reception for 10 yards by a running back.

Having 10 catches for 50 yards be worth 3 times as much as 10 rushes for 50 yards is ridiculous. Having 5 catches for 0 net yards worth the same as 10 rushes for 50 yards is even MORE ridiculous. And changing the value of those receptions doesn't really change the point, it just makes the problems more or less significant depending on the direction you are going. Why have the problem at all?

In this day and age, it is very easy to customize your scoring system. And for YEARS already, we have already been doing with QBs what I think should be done with WRs/RBs. Just change the value of yards for each position relative to how hard it is to gain yards in that position. Why don't we give QBs 20 points for 200 yards (like we would for RBs or WRs)? Simply because it's is fairly easy for them to do it. So do the same for WRs/RBs/TEs if you want to change relative value. Give receiving yards slightly more value than rushing yards for example. Or give all WR yards slightly more value than RB yards. Either way, it's much better than some arbitrary boost in value to an event (reception) that may or may not even have any real value for a football team. You want to give "bonuses"? Do it for first downs, that would be better than catches at least (and should favor WRs).

I also hate how SO many people categorize folks who DON'T like PPR leagues as dinosaurs resistant to change. I'm not resistant to change at all. I'm FOR change if it makes sense. I'm resistant to arbitrary scoring for things that don't have a direct relationship with how good a player is.

I'm IN a few PPR leagues, and I can "handle" them just fine, but it bugs me that it is becoming the "standard" scoring system out there.

Fantasy football scoring isn't about assessing value on the actual field of play. If it was you would penalize a RB 10 points or 20 points for a turnover due to how detrimental turnovers are in actual NFL games. Most leagues don't penalize them at all or maybe 1-2 points. Fantasy football scoring ideally is to create a system where 12 drunk fatties in NFL jerseys can get together at a draft and have a chance, regardless of the randomness of where their draft slot is, allow them a viable strategy to win their league via roster options that are equal (or close to being equal). PPR does just this. I can get two RBs on the turn at 1.12 and 2.01 (or a RB and WR or even 2 WRs...*gasp*) that are equal (or closer to equal) to the value of the 1.01 and 2.12 picks than you would in a non-PPR league.

I don't think I would ever play in a league without it again...just because it enhances the strategic options of increasing the value of WRs and giving people more options to win.

If anything, PPR is now more realistic to how the NFL is today. It is focused on RBBC, increased passing game, and a de-emphasis on one stud RB carrying a team to victory.

 

[-jb-]

I've only ever played in leagues that give some kind of PPR. The more scoring categories the better, IMO. It gives me more to analyze and allows more chances to gain an edge on the competition. Since PPR is so mainstream now, IDP leagues are currently the new PPR and once enough leagues pick up on the joys of IDP, return yards will be the new PPR.People like a challenge, not 2 straight rounds of RB's.

This league is already on board with both IDP and return yards...those elements are awesome. In a dynasty format, it really gives you the feeling of managing the team. I would like to add the head coach points for wins to cover it all.

 

[Kevrunner]

Having auction drafts is the most even playing field you can have. Re-draft leagues where there is no PPR scoring give a heavy advantage to the teams who were lucky enough to be able to get an early draft pick. Teams who were slotted towards the end of the drafts were basically screwed. PPR at least gives owners who are not picking early in the draft almost an even chance of competing. But, there are always years like last year where Chris Johnson blew up and he probably was picked towards the end of most 1st round re-draft leagues and Matt Forte was picked in the top 3 or 4 and really laid an egg.

 

[Mark Wimer]

I think that tiered PPR is the way to go (.5 PPR for RBs, 1 PPR for WRs, 1.5 PPR for TEs) . Guys like Brian Westbrook in his prime or Marshall Faulk in his prime (60-70 receptions per year or more) are more valuable to a NFL team than a player like Cedric Benson (who catches hardly any passes each season). They should be more valuable to a fantasy roster at RB, too.

But, you need to score WR and TE receptions more heavily to balance fantasy values between the RB/WR/TE ranks IMO - I think it is clear that HOU Andre Johnson, ARI Larry Fitzgerald and IND Reggie Wayne are as important as contributors for their their teams as Brian Westbrook once was for the Eagles. To do 1 PPR across the board makes pass-catching RBs disproportionately valuable compared to the elite WRs.

Enjoy, whatever your league decides. Just make sure you understand the impact any given set of PPR rules will have on the relative values of the various positions and you'll be just fine.

 

[SSOG]

Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

Nope. Last year, NFL offenses ran 31,854 total plays. 11,331 of those plays (35.6%) went for no gain or negative yardage. Now, a huge chunk of those were incompletions (6,006, to be exact), and another chunk was sacks (1,101), neither of which are relevant to RBs and WRs. If you strip those plays out of the data, then there were 24,747 offensive plays last year that resulted in either a carry or a receptions. 4,224 of them went for no gain or lost yardage. That's 17% of all carries and receptions last year. For those that think that this is because those darn RBs are skewing the numbers with all of their carries for negative yardage... NFL RBs, on average, get tackled at or behind the LoS 19% of the time. Those carries resulted in somewhere around 2,675 of the 4,224 no-gain plays. That leaves about 1550 receptions getting 0 or negative yardage, which represents about 15% of all receptions. So, no, this isn't a carry-specific phenomenon. A whopping FIFTEEN PERCENT of receptions wind up getting no yardage, or worse, losing yardage.Most damning of all, in my opinion, is that we've only taken a look at plays that get 0 or negative yardage. We haven't even looked at 3rd down plays that didn't result in a 1st down (such as a 4 yard gain on 3rd and 6), or at plays that gained such a ludicrously small yardage total that they wound up hurting the team (like a 3 yard carry on 1st and 20). PPR and PPC wind up rewarding those plays, too. I don't think it's any stretch at all to say that, for most players, at least 25% of their touches wind up actively hurting their team's chances of scoring. At LEAST. And yet, PPC and PPR scoring systems reward those plays every bit as much as critical, valuable plays like a 2 yard gain on 4th and 2.I'm all for changing the value of players relative to each other, but I think the best way to do that is to increase or decrease scarcity. If RBs are too valuable, then instead of starting 1 QB, 2 RBs, and 3 WRs, start 1 QB, 1 RB, 3 WRs, and 1 QB/RB flex. Watch the value of RBs plummet down in line with WRs while QBs start dominating the first rounds. To me, the biggest appeal of fantasy football is that it rewards players for helping their team. Players don't gain points for interceptions. Players don't gain points for fumbles. Why should they gain points for losing yardage? If you want to balance the positions, then that's absolutely fine, but personally, I'd much rather do it in a way that retains some semblance of actually mirroring reality (such as changing positional requirements or increasing the value of yards for positions where yards are harder to come by).

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

I only do ppr now after starting with non ppr 7 years ago. I simply find it more fun. I prefer .5, 1, 2 to a straight 1 ppr but either way I greatly prefer a ppr variation.

That said, I wouldn't switch an existing dynasty league from non ppr to ppr.

 

[bagger]

Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

Nope. Last year, NFL offenses ran 31,854 total plays. 11,331 of those plays (35.6%) went for no gain or negative yardage. Now, a huge chunk of those were incompletions (6,006, to be exact), and another chunk was sacks (1,101), neither of which are relevant to RBs and WRs. If you strip those plays out of the data, then there were 24,747 offensive plays last year that resulted in either a carry or a receptions. 4,224 of them went for no gain or lost yardage. That's 17% of all carries and receptions last year. For those that think that this is because those darn RBs are skewing the numbers with all of their carries for negative yardage... NFL RBs, on average, get tackled at or behind the LoS 19% of the time. Those carries resulted in somewhere around 2,675 of the 4,224 no-gain plays. That leaves about 1550 receptions getting 0 or negative yardage, which represents about 15% of all receptions. So, no, this isn't a carry-specific phenomenon. A whopping FIFTEEN PERCENT of receptions wind up getting no yardage, or worse, losing yardage.Most damning of all, in my opinion, is that we've only taken a look at plays that get 0 or negative yardage. We haven't even looked at 3rd down plays that didn't result in a 1st down (such as a 4 yard gain on 3rd and 6), or at plays that gained such a ludicrously small yardage total that they wound up hurting the team (like a 3 yard carry on 1st and 20). PPR and PPC wind up rewarding those plays, too. I don't think it's any stretch at all to say that, for most players, at least 25% of their touches wind up actively hurting their team's chances of scoring. At LEAST. And yet, PPC and PPR scoring systems reward those plays every bit as much as critical, valuable plays like a 2 yard gain on 4th and 2.I'm all for changing the value of players relative to each other, but I think the best way to do that is to increase or decrease scarcity. If RBs are too valuable, then instead of starting 1 QB, 2 RBs, and 3 WRs, start 1 QB, 1 RB, 3 WRs, and 1 QB/RB flex. Watch the value of RBs plummet down in line with WRs while QBs start dominating the first rounds. To me, the biggest appeal of fantasy football is that it rewards players for helping their team. Players don't gain points for interceptions. Players don't gain points for fumbles. Why should they gain points for losing yardage? If you want to balance the positions, then that's absolutely fine, but personally, I'd much rather do it in a way that retains some semblance of actually mirroring reality (such as changing positional requirements or increasing the value of yards for positions where yards are harder to come by).

How many of those receptions that go for negative yardage are done by bad players who are never on a fantasy football team (or in the starting lineup).I would guess a large percentage of those plays are made by bad players who by definition are not on a starting fantasy football lineup.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Ive played in PPR for one season... and to be honest, I don't think I would do it again. I am perfectly fine with people playing in one. It has its merits. But being rewarded for merely catching a ball as opposed to making a "play" just kinda throws me off. (ie: a guy catches a ball for -2yds and still gets rewarded for the catch?)Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

I never understood PPR's. Why not give RB's a point per carry or QB's a point per attempt?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Hi There,Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):- What attracted you to the format?- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?- If you converted, when did you do so and why?- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.Thanks.

Hi JB,I think I researched one year and PPR only had an impact on 1-2 games in my league/leagues across the board. What I'm saying is that it has little impact on the outcome of most games. What it does however is impact drafting. I get bored in non PPR leagues with RB TD heavy formats because the 1st 18 players off the board are RBs...I like the PPR format because it allows for more diversity come draft day.Another plus is to make TEs worth a little more in PPR leagues. If you go .5-RB, 1-WR, 1.5 TEs...or 2PPR TEs, those things can really make a league more interesting and provide additional ways to the championship. Good topic.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Hi There,Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):- What attracted you to the format?- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?- If you converted, when did you do so and why?- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.Thanks.

^I'll preface my statement by saying that I use 0.4 PPR and 0.1 PPC (point per carry). The primary reason is that I think consistent usage should be rewarded to some degree (guys that contribute consistently to their team's efforts to rack up first downs/TDs/etc.)-I was attracted to the format as another wrinkle to the scoring system that would produce a more "accurate" result (relative to what occurs on the field)-I converted 2 years ago-I converted because I thought that a guy with 12 catches for 113 yards and a TD accomplished more positive things for his football team than some 4th WR hauling in a 85 yard TD catch did (I don't mean to say that only 4th WRs haul in 85 yard TD catches, I'm just presenting one of the more extreme examples that I dislike here). I also think that RBs who bring something to the table in the passing game should be rewarded.That being said, 1 PPR is too drastic IMO. It marginalizes other actions on the field too much and overvalues receptions within the context of most scoring systems.SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC:In my leagues, between the 0.4 PPR, 0.1 PPC and extra flex spot, I found it appropriate to make ALL yards (yes, including passing yards) worth 1 point for every 10. I also -4 for INTs and count 6 for every TD. The result is that 8 of the top 20 players (and 9 of the top 50) in my scoring are QBs (based on 2009 stats), with the rest being split almost dead even between RBs and WRs (with a couple of TEs sprinkled in). I believe this is more true to life. Having to start 6 RBs/WRs combined and only 1 QB is what equalizes the *value* between QB and RB/WR.

I like it, sounds pretty interesting and a new way to keep track of scores.

 

[AcerFC]

We went to it because there were 25 RBs chosen in the first 26 picks

Maybe not that much but it gave people a different option instead of the old RB-RB draft strategy.

We do .5 for RB, 1 for WR and 1.5 for TE

Everyone is very happy we made the switch

Now that we have so many RBBC though it seems to be slanting the other way. I guess we will see what happens in the next few years

When we started it was a RB league, now it has turned into a QB-WR league

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Hi There,

Over the last 1-2 years, PPR has seemingly taken over as the default scoring system on this board. So, a few questions for those that play in it (pretty much all of you):

- What attracted you to the format?

- Did you convert, or have you always played in PPR?

- If you converted, when did you do so and why?

- At the end of the season, how many QBs, RBs and WRs are in the top 20, respectively?

My dynasty league has put converting to PPR up for vote this year, and I've never really understood or cared for the format...but I'm a pretty open-minded guy and would like to hear about the advantages from those who enjoy it.

Thanks.

Hi JB,I think I researched one year and PPR only had an impact on 1-2 games in my league/leagues across the board. What I'm saying is that it has little impact on the outcome of most games.

What it does however is impact drafting. I get bored in non PPR leagues with RB TD heavy formats because the 1st 18 players off the board are RBs...I like the PPR format because it allows for more diversity come draft day.

Another plus is to make TEs worth a little more in PPR leagues. If you go .5-RB, 1-WR, 1.5 TEs...or 2PPR TEs, those things can really make a league more interesting and provide additional ways to the championship.

Good topic.

We had the same issue in our league about a decade ago. Instead of going to a ppr we went to a system that rewards TD's based on length. It's much harder to predict something like TD length vs number of catches, but it does put a bit more of a premium on guys that are home run hitters.

 

[SSOG]

How many of those receptions that go for negative yardage are done by bad players who are never on a fantasy football team (or in the starting lineup).I would guess a large percentage of those plays are made by bad players who by definition are not on a starting fantasy football lineup.

I would guess exactly the opposite. Bad players get a proportionally smaller percentage of the total receptions. As a result, I suspect they get a proportionally smaller percentage of the negative plays.Look at Arizona last season, for instance. Fitzgerald and Boldin dominated Arizona's reception total. I'd be willing to bet that they dominated the negative reception total, too. After all, every other receiver on the team averaged more yards per reception than those two did. How many of Early Doucet's 17 receptions could have been negative? And if he did have that many negative plays, how awesome would his other plays have to be in order for him to average 1.3 more yards per reception than Larry Fitzgerald? I'm sure Tim Hightower was a negative play machine, but Tim Hightower was also RB14 in PPR leagues last year, so I'd hardly call him a "bad" player unless you play in a 6-team, start-1-RB league.The guys who get the most negative receptions are also the guys who get the most total receptions. The guys who get the most receptions are the guys that have the most value in PPR leagues. Therefore, the guys who have the most value in PPR leagues are generally the guys who benefit the most from getting garbage receptions that provide no value to the offense.

 

[dagwood]

Ive played in PPR for one season... and to be honest, I don't think I would do it again. I am perfectly fine with people playing in one. It has its merits. But being rewarded for merely catching a ball as opposed to making a "play" just kinda throws me off. (ie: a guy catches a ball for -2yds and still gets rewarded for the catch?)Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

I never understood PPR's. Why not give RB's a point per carry or QB's a point per attempt?

Its about balancing the production from RB's/WR's/TE's/QB'sQB's - throw for more yards and TD's than other categoriesRB's - tend to gain more yards and score more TD's than WR's or TE'sWR - without some level of PPR, a good WR is about as valuable as an average RB, sometimes less valuable.TE - without some level of PPR, all but the elite TE's are basically irrelevant.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

PPR

I like using "first down receptions" instead of "receptions" for the points (available on most host sites).

PPR can be tiered by position - i.e., 1.5 for TE, 1 for WR 0.4 for RB or subject to other algorithm.

PPR should be integrated with other bonuses. We give 1 bonus point for any run over 20 yards and 2 bonus points for any run or reception over 40 yards. Big plays change the complexion of the game beyond simply the credit for yardage gained. Don't limit these big play bonuses to TDs.

 

[Buddy Ball 2K3]

Ive played in PPR for one season... and to be honest, I don't think I would do it again. I am perfectly fine with people playing in one. It has its merits. But being rewarded for merely catching a ball as opposed to making a "play" just kinda throws me off. (ie: a guy catches a ball for -2yds and still gets rewarded for the catch?)Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

I never understood PPR's. Why not give RB's a point per carry or QB's a point per attempt?

Its about balancing the production from RB's/WR's/TE's/QB'sQB's - throw for more yards and TD's than other categoriesRB's - tend to gain more yards and score more TD's than WR's or TE'sWR - without some level of PPR, a good WR is about as valuable as an average RB, sometimes less valuable.TE - without some level of PPR, all but the elite TE's are basically irrelevant.

We do not have PPR in my league and we had 16 WR's/TE's in the top 30 of non QB scorers. Last year there were 13 RB's with 9 or more TDs, there were 15 wr's/te's. I still do not understand why leagues want all the positions to have balanced scoring by use of the PPR. The NFL is changing and clearly becoming more of a passing game that features two half backs. Using the PPR theory, at some point RB's will need to get a point per carry.

 

[SSOG]

Its about balancing the production from RB's/WR's/TE's/QB'sQB's - throw for more yards and TD's than other categoriesRB's - tend to gain more yards and score more TD's than WR's or TE'sWR - without some level of PPR, a good WR is about as valuable as an average RB, sometimes less valuable.TE - without some level of PPR, all but the elite TE's are basically irrelevant.

As has been mentioned, if you want to balance the scoring, then tweak how much yards are worth rather than rewarding a completely arbitrary and pointless statistic. The reception has absolutely zero value in and of itself. Or, if you really want to come up with something new to reward, award a point per first down receptions.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I can see both sides and I can see how PPC may be on the horizon....cause a workhorse 32 carry, 102 yard, no TD, no rec day by a RB who really grinds it out picking up key first downs etc....could be beat out by some very pedestrian days by a TE who catches a few meaningless passes for a few yards.....that RB may have been the key to a tough NFL victory but the TE at a 1.5 PPR clip would be scoring more points.......

 

[dagwood]

Its about balancing the production from RB's/WR's/TE's/QB'sQB's - throw for more yards and TD's than other categoriesRB's - tend to gain more yards and score more TD's than WR's or TE'sWR - without some level of PPR, a good WR is about as valuable as an average RB, sometimes less valuable.TE - without some level of PPR, all but the elite TE's are basically irrelevant.

As has been mentioned, if you want to balance the scoring, then tweak how much yards are worth rather than rewarding a completely arbitrary and pointless statistic. The reception has absolutely zero value in and of itself. Or, if you really want to come up with something new to reward, award a point per first down receptions.

Why does this topic always degenerate into these kind of responses from guys who are very defensive about non-ppr scoring. I am done with this conversation.

 

[-jb-]

Its about balancing the production from RB's/WR's/TE's/QB'sQB's - throw for more yards and TD's than other categoriesRB's - tend to gain more yards and score more TD's than WR's or TE'sWR - without some level of PPR, a good WR is about as valuable as an average RB, sometimes less valuable.TE - without some level of PPR, all but the elite TE's are basically irrelevant.

As has been mentioned, if you want to balance the scoring, then tweak how much yards are worth rather than rewarding a completely arbitrary and pointless statistic. The reception has absolutely zero value in and of itself. Or, if you really want to come up with something new to reward, award a point per first down receptions.

Why does this topic always degenerate into these kind of responses from guys who are very defensive about non-ppr scoring. I am done with this conversation.

Not sure what got under your skin about the comment. It's a pretty logical alternative to PPR in terms of increasing WR/TE value, and it seems to vet out.So far, I think everyone on both sides of the aisle have made some good points. Bottom line, it's just a game and you should be able to play it however you want.It's not like you're calling Beirut by the name of Beer Pong or anything...

 

[Bears_Man2]

My local does a PPR + PPRFD (first down).

PPR:

.5 RB

.75 WR

1.00 TE

Rush/ Reception resulting in first down - .25 each

We had a couple that weren't crazy about PPR & we all settled on this setup. Has worked out fine.

 

[Ranethe]

PPR makes very little sense to me and never has. It's just a personal opinion of course, but I think there are MUCH better ways to change the relative value of the positions than PPR.

What matters in football? Yards (field position) and points. It doesn't matter how those yards are gained. A run for 10 yards by a running back has the same value to his team as a pass reception for 10 yards by a running back.

Having 10 catches for 50 yards be worth 3 times as much as 10 rushes for 50 yards is ridiculous. Having 5 catches for 0 net yards worth the same as 10 rushes for 50 yards is even MORE ridiculous. And changing the value of those receptions doesn't really change the point, it just makes the problems more or less significant depending on the direction you are going. Why have the problem at all?

In this day and age, it is very easy to customize your scoring system. And for YEARS already, we have already been doing with QBs what I think should be done with WRs/RBs. Just change the value of yards for each position relative to how hard it is to gain yards in that position. Why don't we give QBs 20 points for 200 yards (like we would for RBs or WRs)? Simply because it's is fairly easy for them to do it. So do the same for WRs/RBs/TEs if you want to change relative value. Give receiving yards slightly more value than rushing yards for example. Or give all WR yards slightly more value than RB yards. Either way, it's much better than some arbitrary boost in value to an event (reception) that may or may not even have any real value for a football team. You want to give "bonuses"? Do it for first downs, that would be better than catches at least (and should favor WRs).

I also hate how SO many people categorize folks who DON'T like PPR leagues as dinosaurs resistant to change. I'm not resistant to change at all. I'm FOR change if it makes sense. I'm resistant to arbitrary scoring for things that don't have a direct relationship with how good a player is.

I'm IN a few PPR leagues, and I can "handle" them just fine, but it bugs me that it is becoming the "standard" scoring system out there.

Fantasy football scoring isn't about assessing value on the actual field of play. If it was you would penalize a RB 10 points or 20 points for a turnover due to how detrimental turnovers are in actual NFL games. Most leagues don't penalize them at all or maybe 1-2 points. Fantasy football scoring ideally is to create a system where 12 drunk fatties in NFL jerseys can get together at a draft and have a chance, regardless of the randomness of where their draft slot is, allow them a viable strategy to win their league via roster options that are equal (or close to being equal). PPR does just this. I can get two RBs on the turn at 1.12 and 2.01 (or a RB and WR or even 2 WRs...*gasp*) that are equal (or closer to equal) to the value of the 1.01 and 2.12 picks than you would in a non-PPR league.

I don't think I would ever play in a league without it again...just because it enhances the strategic options of increasing the value of WRs and giving people more options to win.

If anything, PPR is now more realistic to how the NFL is today. It is focused on RBBC, increased passing game, and a de-emphasis on one stud RB carrying a team to victory.

 

[Ranethe]

Yes, I know that 99% of plays are for positive yardage... but I guess I am too traditional and stubborn to change.

Nope. Last year, NFL offenses ran 31,854 total plays. 11,331 of those plays (35.6%) went for no gain or negative yardage. Now, a huge chunk of those were incompletions (6,006, to be exact), and another chunk was sacks (1,101), neither of which are relevant to RBs and WRs. If you strip those plays out of the data, then there were 24,747 offensive plays last year that resulted in either a carry or a receptions. 4,224 of them went for no gain or lost yardage. That's 17% of all carries and receptions last year. For those that think that this is because those darn RBs are skewing the numbers with all of their carries for negative yardage... NFL RBs, on average, get tackled at or behind the LoS 19% of the time. Those carries resulted in somewhere around 2,675 of the 4,224 no-gain plays. That leaves about 1550 receptions getting 0 or negative yardage, which represents about 15% of all receptions. So, no, this isn't a carry-specific phenomenon. A whopping FIFTEEN PERCENT of receptions wind up getting no yardage, or worse, losing yardage.Most damning of all, in my opinion, is that we've only taken a look at plays that get 0 or negative yardage. We haven't even looked at 3rd down plays that didn't result in a 1st down (such as a 4 yard gain on 3rd and 6), or at plays that gained such a ludicrously small yardage total that they wound up hurting the team (like a 3 yard carry on 1st and 20). PPR and PPC wind up rewarding those plays, too. I don't think it's any stretch at all to say that, for most players, at least 25% of their touches wind up actively hurting their team's chances of scoring. At LEAST. And yet, PPC and PPR scoring systems reward those plays every bit as much as critical, valuable plays like a 2 yard gain on 4th and 2.I'm all for changing the value of players relative to each other, but I think the best way to do that is to increase or decrease scarcity. If RBs are too valuable, then instead of starting 1 QB, 2 RBs, and 3 WRs, start 1 QB, 1 RB, 3 WRs, and 1 QB/RB flex. Watch the value of RBs plummet down in line with WRs while QBs start dominating the first rounds. To me, the biggest appeal of fantasy football is that it rewards players for helping their team. Players don't gain points for interceptions. Players don't gain points for fumbles. Why should they gain points for losing yardage? If you want to balance the positions, then that's absolutely fine, but personally, I'd much rather do it in a way that retains some semblance of actually mirroring reality (such as changing positional requirements or increasing the value of yards for positions where yards are harder to come by).