Playoff League/Contest Strategy - Assessing NFL Team Playoff Success (1 Viewer)

[Scoresman]

Since a lot of use are in playoff contests and fantasy leagues I thought I would start a thread on the topic. For playoff contests, I feel like one thing they all have in common is the need to identify the teams that will go deep into playoffs, including identifying dark horse candidates. Doing some light research, I've found some key stats to look at that historically appear to give some insight on playoff success. While the playoffs can be unpredictable, looking at a combination of these can give us our best chance at trying to predict outcomes.

- Point differential. In the Superbowl era, teams that were either #1 or 2 in point differential made the Superbowl 79% of the time. Since 1990, teams that have outscored their opponents by more than 100 have won a Superbowl 70% of the time. This shouldn't be much of a surprise as PD has historically been a good indicator of future success. Currently of the likely playoff teams, it looks like the 49ers, Ravens, Dolphins, Cowboys, and Bills fit this criteria.

- End of Season Win Streak (ESWS). Since 1990, teams that have ended the season 3-0 have won the Superbowl 76% of the time. I'm not sure how teams that rest starters and also the recent extension of the regular plays into this, but that is a fairly high rate. Of the teams that have clinched a playoff spot, the Ravens, Rams, and Browns meet this criteria. The Bills would if they make the playoffs.

- Turnover Differential. Since 1990, teams that are at least +10 in TO differential have won the Superbowl 75% of the time. Of the current teams in the playoff race, only the 49ers and Ravens meet the criteria. The Cowboys are knocking at the door at +8.

- Team QB Rating differential: This has long been regarded as a predictive indicator of success in NFL matchups. The 49ers so far lead in Team QB rating at 110.9, but it's worth noting that this has dipped over the last 3 games to 92.3. The Ravens and Dolphins have the highest in the AFC. One thing to note is Dallas' QB rating plummets from 119.4 at home to 86.8 on the road. Buffalo also has a significant decline in QBR on the road. KC and Jax, on the other hand, have a better QBR on the road than at home.

Defense: Since 1990, teams that have allowed the fewest points per game have won the Superbowl 65% of the time. This year so far, that team is The Ravens at 263 PA, followed by the 49ers at 277, and Chiefs at 282

Other things like previous playoff experience, especially for QB and head coach seem to matter.


I will update these first two posts after each weeks' games.

 

[Scoresman]

Reserved for more information/team writeups.

Current Vegas Superbowl odds

Team	Odds
San Francisco 49ers	+230
Baltimore Ravens	+300
Dallas Cowboys	+750
Kansas City Chiefs	+900
Philadelphia Eagles	+1100
Miami Dolphins	+1200
Buffalo Bills	+800
Detroit Lions	+2000
Jacksonville Jaguars	+3300
Cleveland Browns	+3300
Denver Broncos	+8000
Cincinnati Bengals	+10000
Houston Texans	+10000
LA Rams	+6000
Minnesota Vikings	+10000
Atlanta Falcons	+12500
Green Bay Packers	+12500
New Orleans Saints	+12500
Seattle Seahawks	+12500
Indianapolis Colts	+15000
Pittsburgh Steelers	+15000
Tampa Bay Buccaneers	+15000
NY Jets	+25000
Las Vegas Raiders	+30000
Chicago Bears	+50000
NY Giants	+50000
Tennessee Titans	+50000
LA Chargers	+100000
Washington Commanders	+100000
New England Patriots	+150000
Arizona Cardinals	+200000
Carolina Panthers	+300000

Team	Seed	Pt Diff	ESWS	TO Diff	QB Rating
49ers	1​	194​	1​	10​	110.9​
Ravens	1​	210​	2​	12​	103.8​
Eagles	5​	22​	-1​	-7​	89.7​
Dolphins	2​	112​	-1​	1​	102.8​
Lions	3​	56​	-1​	-2​	98.3​
Browns	5​	51​	2​	-8​	94.7​
Cowboys	2​	166​	1​	8​	102.9​
Chiefs	3​	76​	-1​	-10​	90.7​
Buccaneers	4​	14​	-1​	6​	95.8​
Jaguars	4​	14​	1​	-2​	89.8​
Rams	6​	26​	2​	-3​	89.9​
Bills	6​	133​	2​	3​	93.7​
Seahawks	7​	-39​	-1​	2​	89​
Colts	7​	-15​	-1​	3​	84.4​

 

[Scoresman]

Obviously still two weeks left, but getting ready to call the Eagle pretenders. Point differential of only 26, turnover differential of -7 (WTF happened there?), and QB Rating of 89.7 which means they will lose a lot of differential battles with other playoff teams. I know they had a hard schedule which also factors in so interested in hearing other thoughts here.

The Chiefs also fail miserably in most of the criteria. I feel like a lot of people will still be picking Chiefs players in their playoff contests though.

If the playoffs started today, I'd be loading up on Ravens, Dolphins, 49ers, and Cowboys in that order. Fading Eagles, Jacksonville, and Kansas City.

 

[rockaction]

Buccaneers have the road QBR, turnover differential, and possible ESWS with matchups against the Panthers and Titans left.

Great work on this entire thing, but I think this should be the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Always a critic in the crowd, isn't there?

No, seriously. That's very interesting to look at.

I wish FTN was freer with the DVOA data that Aaron Schatz has compiled over the years so we could get an article based on DVOA's history.

 

[Scoresman]

Buccaneers have the road QBR, turnover differential, and possible ESWS with matchups against the Panthers and Titans left.

Great work on this entire thing, but I think this should be the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Always a critic in the crowd, isn't there?

No, seriously. That's very interesting to look at.

I wish FTN was freer with the DVOA data that Aaron Schatz has compiled over the years so we could get an article based on DVOA's history.

Yeah, a lot happened in a week and I don't like the Bucs as much now.

This week, we saw the Ravens and 49ers clearly separate themselves from the pack so you'd be a fool to not load up here. The Cowboys and Dolphins remain in the next tier. If the Cowboys can lock up 2 playoff home games, it'll be worth loading up on some of their players because they would likely play 3 games. The Bills are probably the only other team I could see making noise as a dark horse at this point. Maybe the Browns since their numbers with Flacco are a lot better than their overall.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, a lot happened in a week and I don't like the Bucs as much now.

Yeah, the Bucs got wiped. I was just talking about the schedule. Jags played the Panthers and now the Titans.

Peace, man, and good work.

Dallas is still a real wild card, as is Detroit. I'd say it's Baltimore above all the others.

Baltimore über alles, if you will.

 

[Scoresman]

Looking back a few years....

2019: Top seeds coming into the playoffs were the Ravens with a 12 game win streak and 259 PD +10 on turnovers, and the 49ers with a 2 game win streak, 169 PD, and +4 on turnovers. The Ravens ended up getting knocked out while the 49ers went to the Superbowl. The Chiefs, the # 2 seed also went to the Superbowl meeting most of the criteria above. The Titans made some noise as a 6 seed in the AFC Championship without really meeting any of the criteria above.

2020: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Packers, both of which met a few of the criteria but not all and not by the margin we've seen in previous years. The Buccaneers were also highly touted and met more of the criteria than the 1 seeds. As a result they along with the Chiefs made the Superbowl. No real low seed dark horses this year.

2021: Top seeds were the Titans and Packers both of which had woeful PDs, and met only a few other criteria. Neither made the Superbowl. The Superbowl was represented by the Rams and Bengals who also did not meet criteria. The 49ers made it to the Championship as a 6 seed but did not have any notable numbers. Just a chaotic year.

2022: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Eagles, but they were not the leaders in the criteria categories. The 49ers were the leader there. It may have been a different story had Purdy not got hurt in the Championship game.

One thing I notice here is that in the chaotic playoff years, there were no clear runaway teams in terms of the playoff success criteria.

This year really stands apart from the others in that we not only have two clear cut favorites in the 49ers and Ravens, but the separation they have from the pack is astounding, particularly at point differential. The Ravens, for example have 210 PD. The next closest in the AFC are the Bills at 133. In the NFC, you've got the Niners at 194 and Cowboys at 166, then the next highest are the Lions at 56. I didnt notice such large gaps between the top teams and the rest of the pack in previous years.

Does this mean this will be a year where the favorites do not disappoint?

 

[rzrback77]

Looking back a few years....

2019: Top seeds coming into the playoffs were the Ravens with a 12 game win streak and 259 PD +10 on turnovers, and the 49ers with a 2 game win streak, 169 PD, and +4 on turnovers. The Ravens ended up getting knocked out while the 49ers went to the Superbowl. The Chiefs, the # 2 seed also went to the Superbowl meeting most of the criteria above. The Titans made some noise as a 6 seed in the AFC Championship without really meeting any of the criteria above.

2020: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Packers, both of which met a few of the criteria but not all and not by the margin we've seen in previous years. The Buccaneers were also highly touted and met more of the criteria than the 1 seeds. As a result they along with the Chiefs made the Superbowl. No real low seed dark horses this year.

2021: Top seeds were the Titans and Packers both of which had woeful PDs, and met only a few other criteria. Neither made the Superbowl. The Superbowl was represented by the Rams and Bengals who also did not meet criteria. The 49ers made it to the Championship as a 6 seed but did not have any notable numbers. Just a chaotic year.

2022: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Eagles, but they were not the leaders in the criteria categories. The 49ers were the leader there. It may have been a different story had Purdy not got hurt in the Championship game.

One thing I notice here is that in the chaotic playoff years, there were no clear runaway teams in terms of the playoff success criteria.

This year really stands apart from the others in that we not only have two clear cut favorites in the 49ers and Bengals, but the separation they have from the pack is astounding, particularly at point differential. The Ravens, for example have 210 PD. The next closest in the AFC are the Bills at 133. In the NFC, you've got the Niners at 194 and Cowboys at 166, then the next highest are the Lions at 56. I didnt notice such large gaps between the top teams and the rest of the pack in previous years.

Does this mean this will be a year where the favorites do not disappoint?

You meant to say Ravens, yes?

 

[Scoresman]

Looking back a few years....

2019: Top seeds coming into the playoffs were the Ravens with a 12 game win streak and 259 PD +10 on turnovers, and the 49ers with a 2 game win streak, 169 PD, and +4 on turnovers. The Ravens ended up getting knocked out while the 49ers went to the Superbowl. The Chiefs, the # 2 seed also went to the Superbowl meeting most of the criteria above. The Titans made some noise as a 6 seed in the AFC Championship without really meeting any of the criteria above.

2020: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Packers, both of which met a few of the criteria but not all and not by the margin we've seen in previous years. The Buccaneers were also highly touted and met more of the criteria than the 1 seeds. As a result they along with the Chiefs made the Superbowl. No real low seed dark horses this year.

2021: Top seeds were the Titans and Packers both of which had woeful PDs, and met only a few other criteria. Neither made the Superbowl. The Superbowl was represented by the Rams and Bengals who also did not meet criteria. The 49ers made it to the Championship as a 6 seed but did not have any notable numbers. Just a chaotic year.

2022: Top seeds were the Chiefs and Eagles, but they were not the leaders in the criteria categories. The 49ers were the leader there. It may have been a different story had Purdy not got hurt in the Championship game.

One thing I notice here is that in the chaotic playoff years, there were no clear runaway teams in terms of the playoff success criteria.

This year really stands apart from the others in that we not only have two clear cut favorites in the 49ers and Bengals, but the separation they have from the pack is astounding, particularly at point differential. The Ravens, for example have 210 PD. The next closest in the AFC are the Bills at 133. In the NFC, you've got the Niners at 194 and Cowboys at 166, then the next highest are the Lions at 56. I didnt notice such large gaps between the top teams and the rest of the pack in previous years.

Does this mean this will be a year where the favorites do not disappoint?

You meant to say Ravens, yes?

Sorry yes. lol

 

[Scoresman]

Buccaneers have the road QBR, turnover differential, and possible ESWS with matchups against the Panthers and Titans left.

Great work on this entire thing, but I think this should be the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Always a critic in the crowd, isn't there?

No, seriously. That's very interesting to look at.

I wish FTN was freer with the DVOA data that Aaron Schatz has compiled over the years so we could get an article based on DVOA's history.

Did a little digging on DVOA since you mentioned it.

The Ravens currently rank third in all time DVOA behind the 2007 Patriots and 1991 Redskins. The 49ers are 6th all time. That's nuts. If you're picking something other than a SF/BAL Superbowl, you're gonna need to show your work.

DVOA does not like the Rams even though they seem to be peaking at the right time. They are 18th overall.

Weighing DVOA by recent games still has the Ravens and Niners in a tier by themselves although it's really Baltimore 1st tier, 49ers 2nd. Next is Buffalo/KC/Miami. Philly is tenth behind Jacksonville, Cleveland and Detroit.

I feel like in playoff contests, a lot of people are still going to take Eagles players which may be a spot to pivot for an advantage if you see them exiting early.

 

[Scoresman]

Doing some preliminary calcs on expected number of games played and turning that into total playoff projections. This is all subject to change obviously since my expected games played will use final vegas odds and final DVOA.

- Joe Flacco is a top 3 QB
- RB is weak for the playoffs. Kyren Williams is the number 3 RB despite the Rams not expected to play more than one game.
-I want to load up on BAL players but it's going to be tough with their top WR only at WR6 and the other 2 are 16 and 17.
- Isaiah Likely, Sam LaPorta, and David Njoku are your top 3 playoff TEs this year. Surprised to see Kittle at 4. Kelce is 6th.

I'll post player projections once teams and odds are set.

 

[Scoresman]

I think for my contest I'm going to go with Vegas odds and DVOA to come up with an expected number of games played and just project total player points based on that. Things like end of season win streaks may be good to know and is fun to look at but don't really hold up as predictive stats when you start using linear regression to try and find causation.

Vegas, DVOA, and possibly Point Differential are the best things to look at IMO.

 

[kylechoffman]

Buffalo players just shot up the rankings..

 

[Scoresman]

Buffalo players just shot up the rankings..

With that point spread vs PIT, they are almost a lock to play two games and they wouldn’t see Baltimore until the championship game. Good bet they play three games.

 

[rzrback77]

I think for my contest I'm going to go with Vegas odds and DVOA to come up with an expected number of games played and just project total player points based on that. Things like end of season win streaks may be good to know and is fun to look at but don't really hold up as predictive stats when you start using linear regression to try and find causation.

Vegas, DVOA, and possibly Point Differential are the best things to look at IMO.

So will these be posted here?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Great job on this @Scoresman

One thing that might be fun is to start a thread and ask people how many games they expect each of the playoff teams to play.

That's key information.

 

[3 hour lunch]

Our draft started last night

1. Lamar
2. McCaffrey
3. Lamb

I am 5 and will take either Allen, Purdy or Prescott I assume. One (obvious) thing to remember is that the #2/3 seeds have the best chance to play 4 games. Buffalo seems to have the best chance of that right now.

 

[Scoresman]

Great job on this @Scoresman

One thing that might be fun is to start a thread and ask people how many games they expect each of the playoff teams to play.

That's key information.

Funny you should mention this! Back in 2014 or so, you guys ran an article on how to calculate this using Vegas odds and DVOA.

Updating this for this year gives us the following

	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
BAL	14.0%​	16.8%​	69.2%​	0.0%​	2.55​
SF	14.7%​	19.9%​	65.4%​	0.0%​	2.51​
BUF	18.5%​	30.4%​	36.4%​	14.7%​	2.47​
DAL	23.0%​	26.4%​	33.3%​	17.3%​	2.45​
DET	35.1%​	37.1%​	19.9%​	7.9%​	2.01​
KC	37.6%​	37.0%​	19.1%​	6.3%​	1.94​
CLE	44.4%​	43.9%​	9.1%​	2.6%​	1.70​
PHI	43.5%​	49.5%​	5.7%​	1.3%​	1.65​
TB	56.5%​	27.3%​	12.4%​	3.8%​	1.64​
HOU	56.5%​	31.3%​	9.7%​	2.5%​	1.58​
MIA	62.4%​	26.3%​	7.5%​	3.8%​	1.53​
LAR	64.9%​	25.9%​	6.7%​	2.5%​	1.47​
GB	77.0%​	18.2%​	2.9%​	1.9%​	1.30​
PIT	81.5%​	15.5%​	2.1%​	0.9%​	1.22​

The P columns represent the chance that each team will play that number of games. The last column is Expected number of games played. Looks like we have 4 teams to focus on here, SF/BAL/BUF/DAL.

I expected this to be way more skewed SF/BAL but it makes sense with Dallas and Buffalo's extra home game.

 

[Scoresman]

In terms of Point Differential, in the NFC, it's the Cowboys at 194, the Niners at 193. Next highest is Detroit at 66.

In the AFC, you've got the Ravens at 205, and the Bills at 140. The Dolphins barely make it at 105, but with the recent injuries to their defense, I'm not counting them.

The turnover differential situation has changed a lot. Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Houston, and SF now all have +10 turnovers.

 

[-jb-]

:sehorn:

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

In terms of Point Differential, in the NFC, it's the Cowboys at 194, the Niners at 193. Next highest is Detroit at 66.

Not sure how this factors in, if at all, but I wonder if you've looked at the impact of how those number are accumulated. For example, Dallas was +210 in 10 games against teams that didn't make the playoffs, but only -16 in their 7 games against teams that did. Meanwhile San Francisco was +112 in 9 games against non-playoff teams, and +81 in 8 games against playoff teams. So their end of year totals are virtually identical but the way they got there was very different. I'm not sure how predictive it is, for example, that Dallas completely blew out the Giants and Commanders twice each (Dallas won those four games by a combined score of 172 - 37).

 

[Scoresman]

In terms of Point Differential, in the NFC, it's the Cowboys at 194, the Niners at 193. Next highest is Detroit at 66.

Not sure how this factors in, if at all, but I wonder if you've looked at the impact of how those number are accumulated. For example, Dallas was +210 in 10 games against teams that didn't make the playoffs, but only -16 in their 7 games against teams that did. Meanwhile San Francisco was +112 in 9 games against non-playoff teams, and +81 in 8 games against playoff teams. So their end of year totals are virtually identical but the way they got there was very different. I'm not sure how predictive it is, for example, that Dallas completely blew out the Giants and Commanders twice each (Dallas won those four games by a combined score of 172 - 37).

All good questions. You'd have to go back and also assess all the historical teams that had high PDs and made the Superbowl at a high rate. I'd bet you'd see the same sorts of patterns but maybe not so strange as the Cowboys' situation this year.

Dallas has a lot of variance in their splits. You pointed out the splits vs level of competition and their home/road splits are just as polarizing.

DVOA does like the Cowboys, but it actually shows the Bills slightly ahead of them. So there's that.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Great job on this @Scoresman

One thing that might be fun is to start a thread and ask people how many games they expect each of the playoff teams to play.

That's key information.

Funny you should mention this! Back in 2014 or so, you guys ran an article on how to calculate this using Vegas odds and DVOA.

Updating this for this year gives us the following

	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
BAL	14.0%​	16.8%​	69.2%​	0.0%​	2.55​
SF	14.7%​	19.9%​	65.4%​	0.0%​	2.51​
BUF	18.5%​	30.4%​	36.4%​	14.7%​	2.47​
DAL	23.0%​	26.4%​	33.3%​	17.3%​	2.45​
DET	35.1%​	37.1%​	19.9%​	7.9%​	2.01​
KC	37.6%​	37.0%​	19.1%​	6.3%​	1.94​
CLE	44.4%​	43.9%​	9.1%​	2.6%​	1.70​
PHI	43.5%​	49.5%​	5.7%​	1.3%​	1.65​
TB	56.5%​	27.3%​	12.4%​	3.8%​	1.64​
HOU	56.5%​	31.3%​	9.7%​	2.5%​	1.58​
MIA	62.4%​	26.3%​	7.5%​	3.8%​	1.53​
LAR	64.9%​	25.9%​	6.7%​	2.5%​	1.47​
GB	77.0%​	18.2%​	2.9%​	1.9%​	1.30​
PIT	81.5%​	15.5%​	2.1%​	0.9%​	1.22​

The P columns represent the chance that each team will play that number of games. The last column is Expected number of games played. Looks like we have 4 teams to focus on here, SF/BAL/BUF/DAL.

I expected this to be way more skewed SF/BAL but it makes sense with Dallas and Buffalo's extra home game.

Do you have a link to the article you're referencing? Just curious what goes into this calculation, because these numbers look off. For example you have Baltimore with a ~70% chance of making it to the Super Bowl, and their odds to win the AFC right now are around +125. That would be massive value if your estimates above were accurate.

 

[Scoresman]

Great job on this @Scoresman

One thing that might be fun is to start a thread and ask people how many games they expect each of the playoff teams to play.

That's key information.

Funny you should mention this! Back in 2014 or so, you guys ran an article on how to calculate this using Vegas odds and DVOA.

Updating this for this year gives us the following

	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
BAL	14.0%​	16.8%​	69.2%​	0.0%​	2.55​
SF	14.7%​	19.9%​	65.4%​	0.0%​	2.51​
BUF	18.5%​	30.4%​	36.4%​	14.7%​	2.47​
DAL	23.0%​	26.4%​	33.3%​	17.3%​	2.45​
DET	35.1%​	37.1%​	19.9%​	7.9%​	2.01​
KC	37.6%​	37.0%​	19.1%​	6.3%​	1.94​
CLE	44.4%​	43.9%​	9.1%​	2.6%​	1.70​
PHI	43.5%​	49.5%​	5.7%​	1.3%​	1.65​
TB	56.5%​	27.3%​	12.4%​	3.8%​	1.64​
HOU	56.5%​	31.3%​	9.7%​	2.5%​	1.58​
MIA	62.4%​	26.3%​	7.5%​	3.8%​	1.53​
LAR	64.9%​	25.9%​	6.7%​	2.5%​	1.47​
GB	77.0%​	18.2%​	2.9%​	1.9%​	1.30​
PIT	81.5%​	15.5%​	2.1%​	0.9%​	1.22​

The P columns represent the chance that each team will play that number of games. The last column is Expected number of games played. Looks like we have 4 teams to focus on here, SF/BAL/BUF/DAL.

I expected this to be way more skewed SF/BAL but it makes sense with Dallas and Buffalo's extra home game.

Do you have a link to the article you're referencing? Just curious what goes into this calculation, because these numbers look off. For example you have Baltimore with a ~70% chance of making it to the Super Bowl, and their odds to win the AFC right now are around +125. That would be massive value if your estimates above were accurate.

Projecting Playoff Games Played

Projected playoff fantasy points based on expected number of games played.

www.footballguys.com

It uses Vegas odds for the wildcard games and then dvoa for the rest.

I welcome some quality control of my work. I found one small error this morning.

 

[Scoresman]

So for my playoff league, we have to choose 3 players at each position with no limits on how many players you can pick per team. You score as many points as they do throughout the entire playoffs, no bonuses for later rounds.

In looking at previous years, winners have correctly selected the Superbowl teams for chalk years, but for years where chalk didn't happen, the winners still picked chalk, but also had 1 or 2 players in the Superbowl. Most people in my league go with the chalk.

So this year is definitely looking to be the chalkiest Superbowl in years if Vegas and DVOA are to be believed. I have to go big on SF/BAL, so I have 5 players from each. I also have 4 players each on Dallas and Buffalo since they are the next most likely. To fill out my roster, I have 1 Ram, 1 Brown, 1 Lion. This is my roster so far.

Pos	Team	Player
QB	BUF	Josh Allen
QB	BAL	Lamar Jackson
QB	DAL	Dak Prescott
RB	SF	Christian McAffrey
RB	BUF	James Cook
RB	LAR	Kyren Williams
WR	DAL	Ceedee Lamb
WR	DET	Amon-Ra St. Brown
WR	SF	Deebo Samuel
TE	SF	George Kittle
TE	CLE	David Njoku
TE	BAL	Isaiah Likely
Flex	BUF	Steffon Diggs
Flex	SF	Brandon Aiyuk
Flex	BAL	Gus Edwards
K	DAL	DAL
K	BAL	BAL
K	BUF	BUF
D	SF	SF
D	BAL	BAL
D	DAL	DAL

 

[Scoresman]

I'm waffling between Njoku and Kelce, since I'm growing more inclined to pick KC to advance.

Also, not loving my Gus Edwards pick, but I want 5 players from BAL and the only other option I can think of is Flowers, but Edwards has been more consistent fantasy point-wise.

Also, not crazy how I have the RB/TE/both WRs from SF because I'm not sure if they all can produce at the same time, but I need to keep representation from SF high.

 

[Gally]

Also, not loving my Gus Edwards pick, but I want 5 players from BAL and the only other option I can think of is Flowers, but Edwards has been more consistent fantasy point-wise.

Is it PPR? That would give the nod to Flowers. I think Gus will be the TD guy from inside the 5 yd line but other than that he will be between 40-70 yds. Flowers has potential for much more but also a lot less. I think I lean Flowers with the team you show.

Also, not crazy how I have the RB/TE/both WRs from SF because I'm not sure if they all can produce at the same time, but I need to keep representation from SF high.

If I am understanding correctly I think it's fine to have that because you will get all the scoring that way. If' it's total points for the entire playoffs it doesn't matter if one game is low for a guy as long as your other guy is getting it. By having those skill positions covered you are good.

 

[Scoresman]

Also, not loving my Gus Edwards pick, but I want 5 players from BAL and the only other option I can think of is Flowers, but Edwards has been more consistent fantasy point-wise.

Is it PPR? That would give the nod to Flowers. I think Gus will be the TD guy from inside the 5 yd line but other than that he will be between 40-70 yds. Flowers has potential for much more but also a lot less. I think I lean Flowers with the team you show.

Also, not crazy how I have the RB/TE/both WRs from SF because I'm not sure if they all can produce at the same time, but I need to keep representation from SF high.

If I am understanding correctly I think it's fine to have that because you will get all the scoring that way. If' it's total points for the entire playoffs it doesn't matter if one game is low for a guy as long as your other guy is getting it. My having those skill positions covered you are good.

Thanks. It’s half PPR.

For the Niner situation, I feel like I have a correlation issue in that why would I pick the entire SF offense but not Purdy? I feel like if I think that at least 3/4 of the niners offensive studs are good enough to take, then Purdy would have to also be worth taking since he’s throwing to all of them.

So now I’m thinking drop Dak and replace with Purdy.

 

[Gally]

For the Niner situation, I feel like I have a correlation issue in that why would I pick the entire SF offense but not Purdy? I feel like if I think that at least 3/4 of the niners offensive studs are good enough to take, then Purdy would have to also be worth taking since he’s throwing to all of them.

So now I’m thinking drop Dak and replace with Purdy.

The benefit of Dak is he has a potential of four games to Purdy's three. Plus CMC has more potential to take all the TD's from Purdy where Pollard hasn't been used that way to hurt Dak. If you think Dallas is getting to the Conf Championship game I keep him over Purdy. They get the same number of games and there is an outside chance Dallas beats SF to get him that extra game.

 

[Scoresman]

Thought about revisiting this for this year, but then I look back to last year and wonder what's the point? We had two historically great teams heading into the playoffs (SF and BAL). They had every single Superbowl predicting metric in their favor, and both were taken out by a wild card team that did not have any of the metrics at all.

But they had Patrick Mahomes.

At least on the AFC side, is there any reason to not pick the Chiefs? Outside of being contrary in larger contests, I dont even think I want to look at the metrics for the other teams.

The NFC side is worth having the discussion I guess. Probably lots of Lions and Eagles in these contests.

 

[Pickle Rody]

Thought about revisiting this for this year, but then I look back to last year and wonder what's the point?

I would imagine it will be appreciated by more folks than just myself.

 

[Scoresman]

Here are this year' predictive stats going into Week 18 sorted by current seed.

Team	Seed	Pt Diff	ESWS	TO Diff	QB Rating
Lions	1​	200​	2​	11​	114.4​
Chiefs	1​	97​	6​	6​	93.6​
Eagles	2​	153​	1​	10​	103.7​
Bills	2​	164​	3​	23​	102.4​
Ravens	3​	132​	3​	4​	121.3​
Rams	3​	-14​	5​	7​	93.5​
Buccaneers	4​	109​	1​	-4​	107.6​
Texans	4​	-9​	-2​	10​	85.7​
Vikings	5​	122​	9​	10​	106.7​
Steelers	5​	35​	-3​	15​	95.9​
Commanders	6​	90​	4​	2​	102.2​
Chargers	6​	87​	2​	11​	99.6​
Packers	7​	124​	-1​	12​	100.2​
Broncos	7​	76​	-2​	6​	90.1​

We do not have any two teams this year that stand out like BAL and SF last year. It's almost the same setup in the AFC in that there are 2-3 teams with better numbers than the Chiefs, but the Chiefs beat everyone last year with worse regular season numbers, better competition, and having to play one extra game. I don't know how you can not pick the Chiefs here.

In the NFC, it's basically a toss up between the Lions and Eagles at this point. But the Vikings at a current 5 seed haveelite team level playoff success indicators as of right now.

 

[Scoresman]

Here is a way too early expected number of games played calculation using current Football Outsiders (PFT?) Playoff Odds report and some estimated vegas lines for potential WC matchups.

	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
KC	27.1%​	33.8%​	39.1%​	0.0%​	2.12​
BUF	35.0%​	22.7%​	19.8%​	22.5%​	2.30​
BAL	30.0%​	23.9%​	18.0%​	28.1%​	2.44​
HOU	50.0%​	38.9%​	8.7%​	2.4%​	1.64​
PIT	50.0%​	40.8%​	6.9%​	2.3%​	1.62​
LAC	70.0%​	19.9%​	6.9%​	3.2%​	1.43​
DEN	65.0%​	28.1%​	4.9%​	2.0%​	1.44​
DET	55.3%​	21.4%​	23.3%​	0.0%​	1.68​
PHI	33.0%​	14.9%​	19.3%​	32.8%​	2.52​
LAR	40.0%​	41.7%​	10.8%​	7.5%​	1.86​
TB	55.0%​	30.1%​	9.8%​	5.1%​	1.65​
MIN	45.0%​	24.7%​	16.9%​	13.4%​	1.99​
WAS	60.0%​	24.4%​	10.1%​	5.5%​	1.61​
GB	66.0%​	10.4%​	11.3%​	12.3%​	1.70​

PHI stands out in the NFC at 2.52 expected number of games played. This is almost a full game over top seed DET. I'm not sure if DET is currently projected to go through a tougher path than PHI or what. Rams and Vikings and Packers all have higher expected number of games played than the Lions.

In the AFC, BUF and BAL both have more expected games than KC. We know how this has turned out in years past.

 

[Scoresman]

Here's the updated expected number of games played. Reminder, the P1-4 column is the percentage chance that team will play that exact number of games.

Looks like this year you take a shot on some of the better wild card teams since many have strong expectations. I dont think you can ignore KC and playoff Mahomes though. Tough year for picking teams.

Team	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
BAL	21.0%​	27.2%​	18.7%​	33.1%​	2.64​
PHI	37.0%​	10.7%​	22.2%​	30.1%​	2.45​
BUF	21.0%​	40.0%​	18.0%​	21.0%​	2.39​
KC	28.2%​	35.4%​	36.4%​	0.0%​	2.08​
DET	34.3%​	25.9%​	39.8%​	0.0%​	2.06​
TB	41.0%​	42.3%​	11.5%​	5.2%​	1.81​
LAC	43.0%​	39.6%​	12.4%​	5.0%​	1.79​
LAR	55.0%​	22.1%​	14.9%​	8.0%​	1.76​
MIN	45.0%​	42.8%​	8.6%​	3.6%​	1.71​
GB	63.0%​	21.6%​	6.5%​	8.9%​	1.61​
WAS	59.0%​	26.1%​	10.6%​	4.3%​	1.60​
HOU	57.0%​	33.9%​	7.3%​	1.8%​	1.54​
DEN	79.0%​	13.6%​	5.6%​	1.8%​	1.30​
PIT	79.0%​	17.4%​	2.7%​	0.9%​	1.26​

 

[Scoresman]

Looking at the statistical indicators of playoff historical success, once again we are in a situation where all of the top teams in the AFC have many of these in their favor, with the exception of KC. KC has middling if not bad stats in point differential, TO differential, and Team QB Rating. This is exactly how it looked last year and KC still swept.

I use a color scaling to help visualize each team according to the statistical indicators. The only team with green in all 4 categories? LA Chargers....

The NFC is interesting.

The Rams look to be big pretenders, particularly with awful point differential. But they get the opening round home game.

Green Bay has some nice stats for a seven seed.

Ultimately I will be focusing equally on PHI and DET.

 

[Manster]

Thanks for doing this!

Agree on KC. Reid/Mahomes flat out know how to win. Reminds me of Brady/Belichik. KC's defense allows them to win ugly. The challenge with KC is they aren't great for fantasy purposes. Their defense, Kelce maybe .....I won't be reaching for Mahomes

Baker/Evans won me both playoff leagues last year. Got em late, and they outdid draft position by a ton. They will be less value this season, as my league mates will remember......I still think they will be playoff fantasy gold though.

i like the Eagles if Hurts can play.

Minny should get two, although they didn't look very good last night.

Lions may be unstoppable, at least in the NFC.

Hard to go wrong going all in on Ravens.

 

[Manster]

Here is a way too early expected number of games played calculation using current Football Outsiders (PFT?) Playoff Odds report and some estimated vegas lines for potential WC matchups.

	P1	P2	P3	P4	Exp G
KC	27.1%​	33.8%​	39.1%​	0.0%​	2.12​
BUF	35.0%​	22.7%​	19.8%​	22.5%​	2.30​
BAL	30.0%​	23.9%​	18.0%​	28.1%​	2.44​
HOU	50.0%​	38.9%​	8.7%​	2.4%​	1.64​
PIT	50.0%​	40.8%​	6.9%​	2.3%​	1.62​
LAC	70.0%​	19.9%​	6.9%​	3.2%​	1.43​
DEN	65.0%​	28.1%​	4.9%​	2.0%​	1.44​
DET	55.3%​	21.4%​	23.3%​	0.0%​	1.68​
PHI	33.0%​	14.9%​	19.3%​	32.8%​	2.52​
LAR	40.0%​	41.7%​	10.8%​	7.5%​	1.86​
TB	55.0%​	30.1%​	9.8%​	5.1%​	1.65​
MIN	45.0%​	24.7%​	16.9%​	13.4%​	1.99​
WAS	60.0%​	24.4%​	10.1%​	5.5%​	1.61​
GB	66.0%​	10.4%​	11.3%​	12.3%​	1.70​

PHI stands out in the NFC at 2.52 expected number of games played. This is almost a full game over top seed DET. I'm not sure if DET is currently projected to go through a tougher path than PHI or what. Rams and Vikings and Packers all have higher expected number of games played than the Lions.

In the AFC, BUF and BAL both have more expected games than KC. We know how this has turned out in years past.

Detroit is going to be hard to deal with for anyone. They have taken on Campbell's hard nosed persona. They have a ton of weapons on offense. The defense has been banged up, but they play with a chip on their shoulder. If they don't make the SB, I will be surprised, and it will take a monstrous effort by the team that knocks them off

 

[Scoresman]

I am struggling mightily with the Ravens/Bills matchup in the divisional round. The loser plays only 2 games which is bad in these types of contests. I dont care if either of these two beat KC because if they make it that far, they will have played 3 games which is good for value. But picking the winner of this matchup is a pretty good leg up.

But who wins in this potential divisional matchup? Buffalo is at home but BAL is playing better.

 

[IHEARTFF]

I am struggling mightily with the Ravens/Bills matchup in the divisional round. The loser plays only 2 games which is bad in these types of contests. I dont care if either of these two beat KC because if they make it that far, they will have played 3 games which is good for value. But picking the winner of this matchup is a pretty good leg up.

But who wins in this potential divisional matchup? Buffalo is at home but BAL is playing better.

Yeah this is a critical game for fantasy and reality this year. I'm struggling to decide as well. Buffalo is undefeated at home but Baltimore crushed them earlier this season. Lamar should be the MVP by far and he might want to give the voters a taste of what they messed up by putting it to Buffalo again. If you succumb to thinking KC will beat either in the AFCCG, then you can reduce your anxiety over this one.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

Looking at the statistical indicators of playoff historical success, once again we are in a situation where all of the top teams in the AFC have many of these in their favor, with the exception of KC. KC has middling if not bad stats in point differential, TO differential, and Team QB Rating. This is exactly how it looked last year and KC still swept.

I use a color scaling to help visualize each team according to the statistical indicators. The only team with green in all 4 categories? LA Chargers....

The NFC is interesting.

The Rams look to be big pretenders, particularly with awful point differential. But they get the opening round home game.

Green Bay has some nice stats for a seven seed.

Ultimately I will be focusing equally on PHI and DET.

I don't think the Rams can be evaluated on whole season metrics. They are a different team now than they were without Kupp and Nucua.

 

[Scoresman]

Looking at the statistical indicators of playoff historical success, once again we are in a situation where all of the top teams in the AFC have many of these in their favor, with the exception of KC. KC has middling if not bad stats in point differential, TO differential, and Team QB Rating. This is exactly how it looked last year and KC still swept.

I use a color scaling to help visualize each team according to the statistical indicators. The only team with green in all 4 categories? LA Chargers....

The NFC is interesting.

The Rams look to be big pretenders, particularly with awful point differential. But they get the opening round home game.

Green Bay has some nice stats for a seven seed.

Ultimately I will be focusing equally on PHI and DET.

I don't think the Rams can be evaluated on whole season metrics. They are a different team now than they were without Kupp and Nucua.

Not sure I’m seeing the same thing at least on paper. In terms of the indicators used in this thread, their last 3 week QB rating is 85.1, much lower than season average, they don’t have an end of season win streak, and their point differential in the second half looks just as bad as the first half.

I still see the matchup with the Vikings as a toss up but it’s mainly because I also don’t trust the Vikings.

 

[Scoresman]

Here are my final thoughts on how I'm picking players for these types of contests.

KC - Having some exposure but not much. Even if they make the Superbowl, they will most likely do it with defensive, lower scoring efforts.

DET - A ton of exposure. Say they lose in the Championship game, even 2 games out of DET players is almost like 3 games from other teams. Hence, lots of value here taking the studs.

BUF/BAL - Some exposure but not as much I would normally like because they will be matching up in the Divisional round. Leaning BAL to win that matchup.

PHI - Lots of exposure. This is the wild card team I feel we can get at least 3 games from, maybe 4.

The contests I'm in has you pick 21 players and I have the following distribution.

KC - 3
BUF - 3
BAL - 3
DET - 6
PHI - 6

Tempted to grow some balls and go 4/2 BAL/BUF, but not yet.