Player Profiling based on Style of play/Physical Skills (1 Viewer)

[Matt Waldman]

About two months ago, I wrote about unusual draft strategies and demonstrated how picking players according to a specific factor they all had in common could yield good results for a fantasy team. Obviously picking a player with a projected likelihood of strong production still takes precedence, but I saw that if you used a secondary factor with your selection process, you could theoretically fill a fantasy roster with excellent players and shake up your draft because everyone else is following the same guidelines in a very similar order.

For instance, if you picked players at their position who could be classified as "physical" style players one might consider these factors:

-QBs/RBs/WRs that can take/dish out physical punishment

-RBs/WRs where breaking tackles is considered a strength of theirs

-WRs who routinely out-muscle their coverage to get open

-QBs with strong arms, physical style of play at their position

Players I would have considered to fit this profile would have been - Michael Turner, Adrian Peterson, Terrell Owens, Brandon Marshall, Brett Favre, David Garrard, Jay Cutler, Anquan Boldin, Hines Ward, etc.

It occurred to me that if you were to build your team like a GM in the NFL, you would draft players based on physical skill sets an not just past production. Obviously, production is what wins games in fantasy football but if you were using a different criteria to develop your draft list, then you might have an advantage when you face opponents who build with heavy factoring of ADP and stats value into their draft list because your criteria would generate a very different rating of players.

I'm not sure this is something that will pan out, but I want to research it for the coming year because I think it's an interesting concept. It might lead one to use a draft strategy where the players are first sorted by a collection of skill sets and then by their production.

The example above might be too simple, but if I developed a rating system for current players based on physical attributes, then one could theoretically cross reference 2-3 very important skills and find a list of 8-10 players who fit that skill set and sort by projected production to create your list. Maybe the skills are power and speed. Or elusiveness and vision. Maybe it's three things, but I imagine the more factors you cross reference, the smaller the list will be.

So where I'm thinking we might want to begin is to establish some skill type/physical type profiles for each position.

If you're game, list them by fantasy position and we'll consolidate, add, subtract, etc.

Then the next step might be to rate players by those skills to great a spectrum of performance within each, which will likely mean defining those skills first.

Thanks

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Good thoughts Matt, but I want to go against your grain a bit and take a different viewpoint.

Bloom and I have gone back and forth on this a few times as well.

I'm more of an "opportunity" guy than a "talent" guy, whereas Bloom (to sort of put words in his mouth) is more of a "talent" guy.

I get the talent argument, believe me. The part of the outlook that I take issue with is that "talent will always rise to the top". In general this is true, but opportunity must exist for that talent to present itself. Sure you'll find a Michael Turner rising to the top - after waiting for his 4th year in the league. Matt Cassel? Only after Tom Brady gets hurt. Same for Kurt Warner and Trent Green.

I'm not a purist on either end of this spectrum. Just like not all Republicans like Pat Buchanan nor are all Democrats aligned with every candidate that takes on that party label. There's shades of gray in between.

So what is my point?

Some of the evaluation has to look at what the environment that a player performed in on his rise to the path to the NFL. Matt Forte? He was the Tulane offense. He can handle being keyed on by a defense - that's what every team he faced did as well. He also wasn't surrounded by lots of other talented players.

Matt Leinart was surrounded by lots of talent at USC - does that mean he's not as good as advertised? Possibly.

Not all small school guys are going to be studs, just as the opposite is also true.

Just something else to consider.

 

[offdee]

Without giving it too much thought these are what I personally look for..

QB:

- Moxy/leadership

- Accuracy

- Field Awareness

- Smarts/Knowledge of the game

- Shows calmness under pressure (not only in big moments of a game, but even during a simple blitz or audible)

- Doesn't need to have a cannon, but a arm that's "good enough" (this is why accuracy is so important)

RB:

- Vision

- Speed

- Elusiveness

- Fluidity (able to start and stop quickly and smoothly)

WR/TE:

- Natural hands catcher

- run after the catch ability

- has "the ball is mine" mentality (catches at it's highest point, etc.)

- technical route running

- Fluidity (able to start and stop quickly and smoothly in and out of breaks)

 

[awesomeness]

Without giving it too much thought these are what I personally look for..QB:- Moxy/leadership- Accuracy- Field Awareness- Smarts/Knowledge of the game- Shows calmness under pressure (not only in big moments of a game, but even during a jailbreak blitz)- Doesn't need to have a cannon, but a arm that's "good enough" (this is why accuracy is so important)RB:- Vision- Speed- Elusiveness- Fluidity (able to start and stop quickly and smoothly)WR/TE:- Natural hands catcher- run after the catch ability- has "the ball is mine" mentality (catches at it's highest point, etc.)- technical route running- Fluidity (able to start and stop quickly and smoothly in and out of breaks)

nice list. For RBs i would add burst/quickness. And for RB's especially i would include some criteria for the ability to break tackles, most importantly arm tackles. Though i also like this characteristic a lot out of my WRs .

 

[Matt Waldman]

I'm not sure I communicated what I'm trying to do clearly. I'm not taking a talent v. opportunity angle here. Maybe I should give an example of what I'm thinking about...

Instead of the conventional approach of using projected stats for every player and considering ADP to formulate a draft list, I'm interested in experimenting with taking one extra step before I look at stats and ADP.

In a conventional draft approach, you'll list every RB starter, backups, and some third team guys depending on the size of your league.

In this approach, I would decide what kind of predominant skill set that I am going to draft at each position. Here's an example strategy:

1) I'm only going to draft very powerful backs who weigh at least 220 lbs.

2) I'm only going to draft QBs who are at least 28 years old.

3) I'm only going to draft WRs who are at least 6-2 and 210lbs.

Once I make my list based on these guidelines, I then rank them based on stats and opportunity. It's not about talent vs. opportunity. It's about selecting the type of players I want on my team in the way a GM values certain skill sets. A person could employ this approach for a specific number of rounds.

I understand this seems very risky, if not foolish on the surface. But I believe that you aren't likely to create anything of value if you aren't willing to take the risk to be wrong. What I think might be interesting to explore with this approach is that as potentially nuts as it seems to eliminate so many good players from your draft plan because they don't meet the requirements you've placed at each position, the potential upside is that you alter the unspoken rules going on with a draft to your advantage.

What may look like reaching for certain players would actually be a deliberate strategy that gains me the opportunity to maximize getting the players I value.

Do I think this will work? Not sure, but I think it's an interesting track because even if it doesn't make sense as I develop it, I believe the ability to track players by predominant skill sets (not ranking them by those skill sets, just tracking what they are) is valuable if compiled carefully. Because once it is compiled, then you can examine production by certain skill sets or conditions.

Admittedly, it's a strange idea but I like to explore different ideas to see if something comes out of the process of investigation - even if it is not what I originally hoped to see.

Does that make more sense or was I misunderstanding your response?

 

[offdee]

In this approach, I would decide what kind of predominant skill set that I am going to draft at each position. Here's an example strategy: 1) I'm only going to draft very powerful backs who weigh at least 220 lbs. 2) I'm only going to draft QBs who are at least 28 years old. 3) I'm only going to draft WRs who are at least 6-2 and 210lbs.

I think your use of the term "skill sets" and this example are confusing.Your examples you have there aren't skill sets, they are specific measurables.Skill sets are specific talents that a player has in their game....has nothing to do with their weight, age and height.

 

[EBF]

I've noticed that many elite WRs fit into two broad groups based on body type and playing style:

Power

Physical, thick WRs who excel at creating yards after the catch.

Examples: Dwayne Bowe, Anquan Boldin, Brandon Marshall, Hines Ward, Terrell Owens

Finesse

Thin WRs who make their living with speed, burst, hands, and crisp routes.

Examples: Marvin Harrison, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, Reggie Wayne, Greg Jennings

You could probably add a "Possession" category for big catch-and-fall WRs like Keyshawn Johnson, Marques Colston, Plaxico Burress, Larry Fitzgerald, and Calvin Johnson. The problem is that some of those guys have pretty good speed and some of them are pretty dangerous after the catch.

Sometimes I look at a draft prospect and think he fits snugly into one of the two obvious categories. For example, I think Michael Crabtree is basically a power WR and Jeremy Maclin is basically a finesse WR. It's not always that neat though. Sometimes there's a lot of overlap. What's Steve Smith? What's Roddy White? What's Randy Moss? White and Smith have elements of both types. They can run crisp routes and get open downfield, but they can also play physical and take a short catch to the house. Moss is sort of a unique animal. I don't think of him as a crisp route runner, but in his prime he was so tall, fast, and coordinated that he was a huge downfield threat.

When I look at a draft prospect, I think it's helpful to consider if players with his skill set have excelled in the NFL, but it's not a perfect science because every player is unique and there are always going to be some guys who don't have a precedent in their generation. That said, the general rule seems to be that small guys need to be exceptionally fast and quick, but that big guys can get away with mediocre speed if they have good hands, toughness, and quickness.

 

[Matt Waldman]

In this approach, I would decide what kind of predominant skill set that I am going to draft at each position. Here's an example strategy: 1) I'm only going to draft very powerful backs who weigh at least 220 lbs. 2) I'm only going to draft QBs who are at least 28 years old. 3) I'm only going to draft WRs who are at least 6-2 and 210lbs.

I think your use of the term "skill sets" and this example are confusing.Your examples you have there aren't skill sets, they are specific measurables.Skill sets are specific talents that a player has in their game....has nothing to do with their weight, age and height.

You're right. I should have said skill sets and measurements using both this way if you want. I just jumped a step ahead in what I'm looking for

 

[EBF]

As far as the original topic is concerned, I don't see how this would help your team. Points are points. It doesn't matter if they come from a big RB like Steven Jackson or a little RB like Chris Johnson. You want to pick the player who will score the most points. End of story.

 

[offdee]

In this approach, I would decide what kind of predominant skill set that I am going to draft at each position. Here's an example strategy: 1) I'm only going to draft very powerful backs who weigh at least 220 lbs. 2) I'm only going to draft QBs who are at least 28 years old. 3) I'm only going to draft WRs who are at least 6-2 and 210lbs.

I think your use of the term "skill sets" and this example are confusing.Your examples you have there aren't skill sets, they are specific measurables.Skill sets are specific talents that a player has in their game....has nothing to do with their weight, age and height.

You're right. I should have said skill sets and measurements using both this way if you want. I just jumped a step ahead in what I'm looking for

I guess I'm not completely sure of what kind of information you're after or what you hope to eventually accomplish.Are you saying that you want a TOP 2-3 skill set for a position along with a measurables criteria and than cross reference those two lists to find the players that have both all the skills and all the measurables?So, for example RB...Top 3 Skills you're looking for:1) Vision2) Speed3) BurstTop 3 measureables you're looking for:1) height between 5'10" and 6'0"2) Weight between 215lbs and 225lbs3) Age 25 and belowThan if "RB X" doesn't have one of these six criteria you just cross them off your list and they become undraftable?

 

[Matt Waldman]

I've noticed that many elite WRs fit into two broad groups based on body type and playing style:

Power

Physical, thick WRs who excel at creating yards after the catch.

Examples: Dwayne Bowe, Anquan Boldin, Brandon Marshall, Hines Ward, Terrell Owens

Finesse

Thin WRs who make their living with speed, burst, hands, and quick routes.

Examples: Marvin Harrison, Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, Reggie Wayne, Greg Jennings

You could probably add a "Possession" category for big catch-and-fall WRs like Keyshawn Johnson, Marques Colston, Plaxico Burress, Larry Fitzgerald, and Calvin Johnson. The problem is that some of those guys have pretty good speed and some of them are pretty dangerous after the catch.

Sometimes I look at a draft prospect and think he fits snugly into one of the two obvious categories. For example, I think Michael Crabtree is basically a power WR and Jeremy Maclin is basically a finesse WR. It's not always that neat though. Sometimes there's a lot of overlap. What's Steve Smith? What's Roddy White? What's Randy Moss? White and Smith have elements of both types. They can run crisp routes and get open downfield, but they can also play physical and take a short catch to the house. Moss is sort of a unique animal. I don't think of him as a crisp route runner, but in his prime he was so tall, fast, and coordinated that he was a huge downfield threat.

When I look at a draft prospect, I think it's helpful to consider if players with his skill set have excelled in the NFL, but it's not a perfect science because every player is unique and there are always going to be some guys who don't have a precedent in their generation. That said, the general rule seems to be that small guys need to be exceptionally fast and quick, but that big guys can get away with mediocre speed if they have good hands, toughness, and quickness.

Thanks EBF - both you, Offdee, and Awesomeness see what I'm thinking. I like the examples EBF used and the players he listed, showing that it really is a spectrum where some players fit more neatly than others on the extreme of one side or another.

I'm thinking out loud as I do this - kind of like a brainstorming session - but I can imagine creating a database that lists all the various skill sets for each position, then defining these skills so we can then measure how predominant they exist in each player. How we measure them, I'm not sure. Do we measure on a numeric scale? Something else?

But if we do find a way to measure them, we could then input all these players, measure them, and have their height, weight, age, etc. in the database and then see where these players fall along a certain spectrum of qualities.

Am I sure this is going to lead anywhere? No, but this forum seems like a great place to think about it.

 

[Matt Waldman]

You want to pick the player who will score the most points. End of story.

And I agree. But I think it could be interesting to experiment in a draft by limiting your list to certain prototypes in skill/measurements. I believe the outcome will likely be you're just limiting your opportunities for success by a large margin. But what if you're actually eliminating poor choices and refining your list to the point that you get the pick of the litter more times than not because you're using a strategy that ignores the conventional ADP and value and pinpoints desired talent...Like I said, probably very high risk, low reward but I'm intrigued with exploring a system that incorporates stats, but is more primarily based on grouping players by something different. It probably won't happen, but I'm interested enough with the path to see if there's something worth discovering at the end of it.

 

[Matt Waldman]

In this approach, I would decide what kind of predominant skill set that I am going to draft at each position. Here's an example strategy: 1) I'm only going to draft very powerful backs who weigh at least 220 lbs. 2) I'm only going to draft QBs who are at least 28 years old. 3) I'm only going to draft WRs who are at least 6-2 and 210lbs.

I think your use of the term "skill sets" and this example are confusing.Your examples you have there aren't skill sets, they are specific measurables.Skill sets are specific talents that a player has in their game....has nothing to do with their weight, age and height.

You're right. I should have said skill sets and measurements using both this way if you want. I just jumped a step ahead in what I'm looking for

I guess I'm not completely sure of what kind of information you're after or what you hope to eventually accomplish.Are you saying that you want a TOP 2-3 skill set for a position along with a measurables criteria and than cross reference those two lists to find the players that have both all the skills and all the measurables?So, for example RB...Top 3 Skills you're looking for:1) Vision2) Speed3) BurstTop 3 measureables you're looking for:1) height between 5'10" and 6'0"2) Weight between 215lbs and 225lbs3) Age 25 and belowThan if "RB X" doesn't have one of these six criteria you just cross them off your list and they become undraftable?

Yeah, but I'd probably widen the criteria enough so I'm not just looking at 5 RBs on my draft board Certain skill sets may be better to use as the primary and others as the secondary to cross reference. I have a hunch power is a good primary skill set but to refine the list I'd add receiving. That this might do is eliminate guys like Jamal Lewis and Brandon Jacobs, but Maurice Jones Drew and Marion Barber stick around. Drew may not be the most powerful back on the list, but he would qualify as having power if I have the skill defined correctly. I'd also get Addai and Forte on that list. Maybe I only want guys who are under 5-10 at RB and over 6-2 at WR. Sure it limits the list, but maybe the upside is that I'm not picking players from my list that I'm not that enthusiastic about taking but I added them to that ranking because it makes sense for him to be there according to another person's criteria that I've accepted. Could this be going overboard and make your draft board less objective - probably, but I'm interested to see how far I can go before it breaks down. Have you ever just thought about drafting a team by saying to yourself. "I'm targeting big receivers who can run after the catch and smaller, agile, backs who have break away speed and receiving skills." Then you project those guys and rank them according to your projections. You might wind up picking a lot of guys much earlier than the average fantasy owner would do so, but the pay off could really be huge if you're not afraid of bombing.

 

[awesomeness]

I try to use the sort of things that Waldman is talking about in this thread primarily for rookies.

For example, for RB's i will eliminate (i.e. not draft) RB's who i think for below burst, and also lack the ability to break tackles. So if a RB has good burst but his ability to break tackles is poor, i will still consider drafting that player. But if the RB has poor burst and his ability to break tackles is also poor, than i essentially won't draft him whatsoever.