Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
My general FF strategy for re-drafts (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LHUCKS
- Start date
Nice to have a solid FF thread going here. I'm curious LHUCKS: who were some of your 'high ceiling' guys who didn't pan out last season?
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I rarely draft rookies as their risk/reward usually does not warrant their ADP. That is not a blanket statement as I loved Cadillac's upside so I drafted him in some "expert" drafts and my hometown re-draft. I never make blanket statements in FF, but generally I don't like rookies, especially at QB and WR. I just drafted two rookies in a 16 team survivor(that I will post today so you guys can see a very solid '06 draft), but that was with over 90 WRs getting drafted. In your standard 12 team re-draft I usually stay away.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Man your gonna give him a big head.
wannabee
Footballguy
LHUCKS, on topic:
how do you evaluate QB injuries? To me, this will decide some championships this year. There are several QBs injured and several more on the move.
To me, deciding whether Palmer, Culpepper, Pennington, Brees, etc. will come back, and to what extent, will affect many a team. In addition, how will new QBs react to their situations?
Two questions:
How do you subjectively evaluate the growth and improvement for young QBs? I think of guys like Simms, Boller, Smith, Eli, etc. Do you take last year's numbers at face value? What subjective variables do you incorporate into their high side? I assume most will have similar supporting casts as last year. But, how do you determine how much they have progressed as fantasy QBs (rather than NFL)?
Also, one thing I learned this year is that we, as fantasy guys, overestimate some situations and underestimate how difficult it is for QBs to come into new teams/situations. It takes a lot longer than we can appreciate to acclimate to the coaches, system, and receivers. Agree?
how do you evaluate QB injuries? To me, this will decide some championships this year. There are several QBs injured and several more on the move.
To me, deciding whether Palmer, Culpepper, Pennington, Brees, etc. will come back, and to what extent, will affect many a team. In addition, how will new QBs react to their situations?
Two questions:
How do you subjectively evaluate the growth and improvement for young QBs? I think of guys like Simms, Boller, Smith, Eli, etc. Do you take last year's numbers at face value? What subjective variables do you incorporate into their high side? I assume most will have similar supporting casts as last year. But, how do you determine how much they have progressed as fantasy QBs (rather than NFL)?
Also, one thing I learned this year is that we, as fantasy guys, overestimate some situations and underestimate how difficult it is for QBs to come into new teams/situations. It takes a lot longer than we can appreciate to acclimate to the coaches, system, and receivers. Agree?
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I usually don't draft young QBs as my QB#1...way too eratic and I usually have solid veteran plays that work out for me. That being said, I like a couple of the guys you mentioned. The most important factor(IMHO) for young QBs is offensive scheme/coaching philosophy. Next, I look at prior season progression and surrounding talent. But like I said, they're so erratic you don't see many of those type of guys on my team. This is an area where I think everybody could use some improvement though...very few had Palmer pegged for the ppg he put up.
QB this year will be interesting, because as you mentioned there has been a lot of turbulence surrounding the position...and last year the difference in total points from one QB to the next was lower than in year's past. This opens the door for value at the position and is where sharks will be circlling. Based on early rankings...I see two HUGE value plays. As a matter of fact, my entire draft may very well revolve around getting one of those two players. Since ADPs aren't out yet it's hard to say definitively.
Last edited by a moderator:
wannabee
Footballguy
follow up:
what is your perspective on taking flyers on guys like Brad Johnson this year? I see a few others in similar situations, where a late rounder could have high upside. Also, I think many will be bumping Warner too far up thinking he will be a steal.
Care to share who those HUGE value guys are?
Thanks for sharing your perspective with the rest of us.
what is your perspective on taking flyers on guys like Brad Johnson this year? I see a few others in similar situations, where a late rounder could have high upside. Also, I think many will be bumping Warner too far up thinking he will be a steal.
Care to share who those HUGE value guys are?
Thanks for sharing your perspective with the rest of us.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Johnson is interesting. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up on some of my redraft teams. A lot of this depends on the progression of Daunte's health...not to say Johnson can't beat him out, but no competition is better than some competition.Warner - I think we'll see him getting drafted all over the place. If you build your team expecting he'll miss some games then I like the play...the positional risk portfolio strategy is one that is overlooked by about 99% of most ffers. Basically, if you draft Warner for his high ppg...be sure to have a solid backup because he's likely to miss games.
No-can-do on sharing my sleepers...too many competitors lurking.
Last edited by a moderator:
LHUCKS
Footballguy
To an extent this is accurate, homers have better/more detailed information from their local media outlets. there are several homers around here that when I read, my ears perk up. I even drop in on some homer boards to get the inside scoop on some pivotal players.Fixed.
Information is very key. Sites like FBG are a must for those that are serious.
Last edited by a moderator:
I find huge value in watching the pre-season games. Pre-season gave me clues to nail down the value of guys like Smith, Davis, Colbert, Shelton, and Carter. Basically there was no reason to miss on any of these guys. I hope to expand on this later in the Shark Pool and roll out an idea that will benefit all of us.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
You're leaving FBG?
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
or are you going to get over to the Mock Draft forum to draft in WSL2?
Tick
Footballguy
Just to play devil's advocate here...
In 2004 you weren't as successful as you wanted to be. What changed in your methodology between 2004 and 2005? What are the chances that you just got luckier in the guys you saw as sleepers this season?
The reason I ask is that I didn't change anything substantial in my draft preparation between 2004 and 2005, but I was much less successful in 2005 than in 2004 on average. The reason was that I chose the wrong players to target as bargains - Michael Bennett and Reche Caldwell were on most of my teams. However, since nothing changed in my approach, it's hard to say what the deal is:
Methodology is good, just unlucky in 2005
Methodology is bad, just lucky in 2004
Methodology makes no difference, I'm giving myself too much credit.
In 2004 you weren't as successful as you wanted to be. What changed in your methodology between 2004 and 2005? What are the chances that you just got luckier in the guys you saw as sleepers this season?
The reason I ask is that I didn't change anything substantial in my draft preparation between 2004 and 2005, but I was much less successful in 2005 than in 2004 on average. The reason was that I chose the wrong players to target as bargains - Michael Bennett and Reche Caldwell were on most of my teams. However, since nothing changed in my approach, it's hard to say what the deal is:
Methodology is good, just unlucky in 2005
Methodology is bad, just lucky in 2004
Methodology makes no difference, I'm giving myself too much credit.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Good point Tick,I think starting from 2003 would be a more complete picture, and I would typify my results as the following:
2003 - Very successful(expert leagues)
2004 - Average(expert leagues)
2005 - Extremely successful(expert leagues)
I have tweaked my methodology quite a bit, but more importantly I have put more time into the hobby. I think my 2005 season is a result of both. More specifically, I have put more emphasis on when to take risks and when not to. I also have put more time into quantifying risk.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Tick. I think you bring up a good point, I try NOT to focus on take a player X in round Y .
But rather look for the best value at that point and access risk. if risk is to high for this rounds pick, look for a safer play.
I didnt go into drafts saying I'm taking Galloway in round 10 because his adp is 11.5 and I want him on every team. but rather when I needed WR4, if he was available and he was the best pick, with the lowest risk ( or if I could aford his risk) at the time.
Can I ask why you focused in on Mike Bennett?
LHUCKS
Footballguy
In expert leagues I've found that it helps to drive your strategy around certain players if you find that certain players are significantly undervalued...for the most part players follow their ADPs. It's a bit risky, but more often than not it works out for me. Not to mention I always have a backup plan or two.Last year I had Steve Smith ranked higher than most, but was only able to land him in about 30% of my leagues because people continued to draft him well ahead of his ADP and FBG ranking....so you're right...it doesn't always work out.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tick
Footballguy
Bennett... it's hard to say. Tice said he'd emphasize the running game. Moss was gone, so that made sense anyway. Bennett was the clear starter in preseason. Moore had no role - Moe was supposed to be the guy spelling Bennett. Bennett's ADP was very low - if he put up the kinds of numbers he did a few years ago, he would have been a huge bargain considering that getting him in the 3rd/4th freed me up to take a WR or QB in the 2nd or 3rd. I just felt that the risks weren't as high as people were making them sound, and that the payoff was high.I was obviously wrong - he got injured, just as everyone said he would. Tice juggled RBs, just as everyone said he would. In the end, Bennett wasn't totally useless for survivors, but in leagues where you choose starters, I never started him all season - the only weeks he was any good were out of the blue when Moore got hurt on the first series or something, then Bennett would bomb the next game.
There were too many red flags on him - I think I just chose an opinion on him early and refused to budge, which was stupid.
I had identified three mid-round RBs and one late-round RB to target: Bennett, FTaylor, Barlow, and SDavis. The last three were useful for parts of the season, though none were useful by the time playoffs came around. That's part of the reason that I got knocked out early in the playoffs in all my leagues this year.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Fixed.
Family Matters
Footballguy
A comment regarding your original post. You stated you were suprised the ff industry was still using a "oversimplified" method.
I think the thing to remember when talking about the masses is they like and do what they understand. Magazines for example tend to offer over simplified rankings because people look at that and say I agree or disagree because they understand it. And they then but into it.
When you begin talking at the level you propose you will lose alot of people because if becomes more complicated and requires more time invested. People want to be told who to draft, not how to to invent the wheel. That's what you can sell.
I think the thing to remember when talking about the masses is they like and do what they understand. Magazines for example tend to offer over simplified rankings because people look at that and say I agree or disagree because they understand it. And they then but into it.
When you begin talking at the level you propose you will lose alot of people because if becomes more complicated and requires more time invested. People want to be told who to draft, not how to to invent the wheel. That's what you can sell.
Brock Middlebrook
Footballguy
I've done this for years
And what's wrong with a little subjectivity? Unless you have the absolutely perfect objective model to measure player value, any "objective" determination is going to be wrong to some degree. A subjective opinion deserves some weight alongside the purely objective factors.
radballs.
Footballguy
Construx,You da man but it's not a bad read if anyone takes the time to check it out. Z burned his own bridge by coming across so cocky that he made LHUCKS
look like he has an inferiority complex. But, there's some decent stuff in there in a couple chapters. I still whupped his butt in a WCOFF satellite league so my season got a little bonus there.
Last edited by a moderator:
radballs.
Footballguy
No, I totally agree with you. But LHUCKS was making it sound like there's some magic formula that you can plug in 20 different risk attributes that then reduce the potential upside of a player. We all know that none of our player evaluations are completely objective. At the same time, you might be fooling yourself by thinking that you can attribute specific percentages to a player's increase or decrease in their player value. What I'm getting at is, just coming up with the percentages is an art too. LHUCKS shouldn't be so concerned about his proprietary scoring system since it's all still very subjective. That's my only point. Most above average FF players do all of these things subconsciously if not similarly.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I agree with the concept of a high-low range projection that takes into account risk and other mitigating factors.
I have often been mocked for posting projections on players that shows a range (800-1150 yards for example) on this message board. However I think it is a more honest assesment of what to realisticly expect from a player than to just average the range or be overly optimistic/pessimistic.
Some players are in situations that are less certain than others. For example rbs who have compitition. You might project the team to rush for a total number of yards then assign a percentage split between 2 or more rbs on that team. This is less than perfect though and assigning a range for each that would fill the whole pie is a better way to look at it I think. Gives you a upside and downside of what to expect from the player.
Other risks are injury tendencies. Loss of key coaching staff, offensive linemen or other facets of an offense that could impact each players situation.
bottom line I think it is more useful to project a range for each player than a static number. Once doing so I look for the players who I found to have a tighter range group than others as players that are more reliable/consistent. These are players I tend to target earlier in a redraft because they have less risk. Players that I find having more risk or a larger variance in what I expect thier projections to be I will target later in a draft when the reward begins to outweigh the risk.
If I am looking at a tier of similarly ranked players ADP wise having this range of projections really helps my decisions. I can go for a player who I consider to have less risk if I am at a point where I want a player who I feel comfortable starting most weeks and holding down a slot for me (rb 2 or wr 2 for example) or I can take the player who has a much higher upside if I feel comfortable I can cover that players bust potential with someone else I allready have or can pick later in the draft.
I have often been mocked for posting projections on players that shows a range (800-1150 yards for example) on this message board. However I think it is a more honest assesment of what to realisticly expect from a player than to just average the range or be overly optimistic/pessimistic.
Some players are in situations that are less certain than others. For example rbs who have compitition. You might project the team to rush for a total number of yards then assign a percentage split between 2 or more rbs on that team. This is less than perfect though and assigning a range for each that would fill the whole pie is a better way to look at it I think. Gives you a upside and downside of what to expect from the player.
Other risks are injury tendencies. Loss of key coaching staff, offensive linemen or other facets of an offense that could impact each players situation.
bottom line I think it is more useful to project a range for each player than a static number. Once doing so I look for the players who I found to have a tighter range group than others as players that are more reliable/consistent. These are players I tend to target earlier in a redraft because they have less risk. Players that I find having more risk or a larger variance in what I expect thier projections to be I will target later in a draft when the reward begins to outweigh the risk.
If I am looking at a tier of similarly ranked players ADP wise having this range of projections really helps my decisions. I can go for a player who I consider to have less risk if I am at a point where I want a player who I feel comfortable starting most weeks and holding down a slot for me (rb 2 or wr 2 for example) or I can take the player who has a much higher upside if I feel comfortable I can cover that players bust potential with someone else I allready have or can pick later in the draft.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Yeah, I don't doubt that. But to be a guy that no one really knew on these boards and come on talking like he did was just not a way to sell any books or make any friends. At least I know that LHUCKS knows what he's talking about.Construx,You da man but it's not a bad read if anyone takes the time to check it out. Z burned his own bridge by coming across so cocky that he made LHUCKS
