PPR scoring - what do you do and why? (1 Viewer)

[puckalicious]

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but 'PPR' can't be searched.

A somewhat "standard" dynasty league I commish has decided to add PPR but I don't think any of us really have effectively communicated exactly WHY we want to do this.

What is the reason your league uses PPR? Is it primarily to increase the WR/TE scoring relative to RB? Or is it to increase all non-QB scoring relative to the QB? (assuming 6pt TDs) Or none of the above?

I think once that question is answered then I'll have a good idea how to implement it. Basically should we go with all positions get 1 PPR, or WR/TE only, or .5RB/1WR/1.5TE etc etc etc.

In this league, the top player at each position currently will typically score the following through week 16 (championship week):

QB: 300-350

RB: 250-300

WR: 200-250

TE: 150

 

[Winning IS Everything]

The one keeper league I am in that uses PPR has done so since it's inception. I think it was done to just create more high scoring games.

I am also in a dynasty non-PPR that for three years has had a couple of owners want to go to PPR. We have not done this (it has been voted down) as most owners have drafted and set thier teams up to account for the current scoring rules.

I think the fair way to do it would be to either go .5 ppr for all or 1 ppr for all. That way it is less disruptive to current team setups.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but 'PPR' can't be searched.A somewhat "standard" dynasty league I commish has decided to add PPR but I don't think any of us really have effectively communicated exactly WHY we want to do this. What is the reason your league uses PPR? Is it primarily to increase the WR/TE scoring relative to RB? Or is it to increase all non-QB scoring relative to the QB? (assuming 6pt TDs) Or none of the above?I think once that question is answered then I'll have a good idea how to implement it. Basically should we go with all positions get 1 PPR, or WR/TE only, or .5RB/1WR/1.5TE etc etc etc.In this league, the top player at each position currently will typically score the following through week 16 (championship week):QB: 300-350RB: 250-300WR: 200-250TE: 150

You will hear many reasons why people are in favor it, but it is a bad idea IMO. PPR rewards an activity that by itself has no value; you might as well reward a handoff. That being said, if you are gung ho about moving forward with it; give 1/2 a point to a TE and 1/4 point to the WR (usually people are trying to equal out the positions), but under no circumstance should you give any point to a RB as starting two already makes them scarce.

 

[Jeremy]

I don't like PPR. It reduces my enjoyment to get a point or have one scored against me when someone catches a dumpoff pass for no gain. There are other reasons I don't like it too, but to each their own.

But unless this is going to be the first year of the dynasty league, I don't see how you can change it now. Teams that weren't built for PPR are going to be kind of annoyed I would think. Once scoring rules are established, it's pretty hard to change them in a dynasty league.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

The main reason for PPR is to help equilibrate the value among the major positions of QB, RB and WR.

PPR by itself does not accomplish this goal, but it does help. If you are looking to really make the positions a lot more similar in value, then you need to go to a 2 QB league, or 1 QB & 1 Flex. You should search the forum, as there is a paper floating around explaining it. A big factor in equalizing value is to equalize the scarcity as well.

In our dynasty league our starting lineup is 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE and 1 Flex (which is usually a QB because they are the highest scoring but the flex allows you to start another position in the event of injuries or byes)

Passing Tds - 4 points

All other Touchdowns (including Passing, Rushing, Receiving, interceptions, fumble recovery, special teams - blocked FG, punt): 6 pts 2-pt Conversion (Passing, Rushing, Receiving): 2 pts

Each Rushing or Receiving Yard: 0.1 pts

Each Passing Yard: 0.05 pts

Each Interception: -2 pts

WR/TE Receptions: 1 pt

RB Receptions: 0.5 pts

Fumbles: -2 pts

Everyone in the league loves this set up because you can build your team in so many different ways and it is not imperative to adhere to the stud RB theory.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

But unless this is going to be the first year of the dynasty league, I don't see how you can change it now. Teams that weren't built for PPR are going to be kind of annoyed I would think. Once scoring rules are established, it's pretty hard to change them in a dynasty league.

If the league is behind the change, then I don't see the issue.

 

[puckalicious]

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before but 'PPR' can't be searched.A somewhat "standard" dynasty league I commish has decided to add PPR but I don't think any of us really have effectively communicated exactly WHY we want to do this. What is the reason your league uses PPR? Is it primarily to increase the WR/TE scoring relative to RB? Or is it to increase all non-QB scoring relative to the QB? (assuming 6pt TDs) Or none of the above?I think once that question is answered then I'll have a good idea how to implement it. Basically should we go with all positions get 1 PPR, or WR/TE only, or .5RB/1WR/1.5TE etc etc etc.In this league, the top player at each position currently will typically score the following through week 16 (championship week):QB: 300-350RB: 250-300WR: 200-250TE: 150

You will hear many reasons why people are in favor it, but it is a bad idea IMO. PPR rewards an activity that by itself has no value; you might as well reward a handoff. That being said, if you are gung ho about moving forward with it; give 1/2 a point to a TE and 1/4 point to the WR (usually people are trying to equal out the positions), but under no circumstance should you give any point to a RB as starting two already makes them scarce.

FYI thanks for your concern but I don't want this to devolve into a "PPR vs non-PPR" argument. I really would only like to hear from PPR supporters and what the perceived benefit is for them and their league. I personally am not very high on adding it, but the majority of the league wants it so as commish I am compelled to act.I should add that we start 1QB/2RB/2WR/1TE/1RB-WR-TE flex. I think the main reason most of the league wants to add PPR is the preception that several teams are "stacked" at RB (I'm not one of them) and can really take advantage of the flex spot. Boosting WR scoring would make it easier for teams rich in WR's to keep up.Winning-is-everything - Good point on the dynasty-specific issue of roster disruption this scoring change may add.

 

[Jeremy]

But unless this is going to be the first year of the dynasty league, I don't see how you can change it now. Teams that weren't built for PPR are going to be kind of annoyed I would think. Once scoring rules are established, it's pretty hard to change them in a dynasty league.

If the league is behind the change, then I don't see the issue.

How much of the league has to be behind it? I'm sure the Wes Welker and Reggie Bush owners would love the opportunity to see their team improve without them having to do anything other than sign off on a rule change. If I'm an ADP or Ryan Grant owner, I'd be pretty pissed to see the value of those guys plummet. I would think you'd need near unanimous consent. But if you can get everyone to agree, then you're right. No issue. I think that would be hard, though. If my dynasty league made that change, I'd consider leaving the league.

 

[valhallan]

I think the main reason most of the league wants to add PPR is the preception that several teams are "stacked" at RB (I'm not one of them) and can really take advantage of the flex spot. Boosting WR scoring would make it easier for teams rich in WR's to keep up.

Yeah, I enjoy using PPR in my dynasty leagues because it gives teams other ways to compete beside loading up on RBs. I've won a championship with absolute dreck at RB2 because my WRs could put up big games. That just doesn't happen without PPR.

 

[renesauz]

If this is an established league, you might consider a stepped approach.

0.5 ppr for Te's only this coming year.

0.5 ppr for Te's and WR's the following year.

1 ppr TE/WR, 0.5 ppr for Rb's thereafter.

In my league, WR's and TE's get 0.5 ppr, and RB's get nada. Our lineups require 1 TE, 2 RB, 2 WR's and a flex. I find this setup pretty balanced. Most use WR as the flex, but not always.

 

[puckalicious]

The main reason for PPR is to help equilibrate the value among the major positions of QB, RB and WR.

PPR by itself does not accomplish this goal, but it does help. If you are looking to really make the positions a lot more similar in value, then you need to go to a 2 QB league, or 1 QB & 1 Flex. You should search the forum, as there is a paper floatnig around explaining it. A big factor in equilizing value is to equalize the scarcity as well.

In our dynasty league our starting lineup is 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE and 1 Flex (which is usually a QB because they are the highest scoring but the flex allows you to start another position in the event of injuries or byes)

Passing Tds - 4 points

All other Touchdowns (including Passing, Rushing, Receiving, interceptions, fumble recovery, special teams - blocked FG, punt): 6 pts 2-pt Conversion (Passing, Rushing, Receiving): 2 pts

Each Rushing or Receiving Yard: 0.1 pts

Each Passing Yard: 0.05 pts

Each Interception: -2 pts

WR/TE Receptions: 1 pt

RB Receptions: 0.5 pts

Fumbles: -2 pts

Everyone in the league loves this set up because you can build your team in so many different ways and it is not imperative to adhere to the stud RB theory.

I initially thought of going the .5RB/1WR PPR too, but now that I think about it what's the point of .5 on the RB? Might as well be 0? With .5, at most guys like Westy will see a 25 pt bump with the "typical" RB getting about a 10pt bump over a whole season. I guess I'm leaning towards everybody gets 1PPR at this point. Thanks for posting.

 

[puckalicious]

If this is an established league, you might consider a stepped approach.0.5 ppr for Te's only this coming year.0.5 ppr for Te's and WR's the following year.1 ppr TE/WR, 0.5 ppr for Rb's thereafter.In my league, WR's and TE's get 0.5 ppr, and RB's get nada. Our lineups require 1 TE, 2 RB, 2 WR's and a flex. I find this setup pretty balanced. Most use WR as the flex, but not always.

I like the idea of a stepped approach, I will definitely bring this up to the league.

 

[Black]

You will hear many reasons why people are in favor it, but it is a bad idea IMO. PPR rewards an activity that by itself has no value; you might as well reward a handoff. That being said, if you are gung ho about moving forward with it; give 1/2 a point to a TE and 1/4 point to the WR (usually people are trying to equal out the positions), but under no circumstance should you give any point to a RB as starting two already makes them scarce.

This is the exact reason why you put in PPR. You have more options for valuaable players. WR are more valueable. Leon Washington, DSproles, MMoore, etc become viable backs. I started my PPR league the year after Bettis had like 100 yards and 10 TDs on the season. Non PPR leagues, esp with 20 yards/point reward TDs only and not the players that move the chains. I didn't like the TD vultures. I also felt that 10 catches for 100 yards was valuable...and wanted to have those players be valuable. I do think that most of the time catches often mean that a team is moving the chains and not equitable to a handoff.Moving to 10 yards/point helps to increase the value of players who help move the ball.

Additionally, PPR will help bump WR, TE (and some RBs) up.

Using your top scorers as examples, factor in 50 catches for the top RB, 60 catches for the top TE (altho Gonzo had near 100 this year), and 100 catches for the top WR:

0.5 PPR

QB: 300-350

RB: 250-300 --> 275-325

WR: 200-250 --> 250-300

TE: 150 --> 180

1.0 PPR

QB: 300-350

RB: 250-300 --> 300-350

WR: 200-250 --> 300-350

TE: 150 --> 210

So now you have more parity. There are more players who are valuable; and to me, makes the game more interesting.

But, you will all have to rethink your rosters: WR will go higher, 'different' RBs will move into the top 10. Guys who score no TDs will have alot more value (guys like Breaston, with 7 catches for 120 yards).

The arguments against are usually because people have their value systems set already on work horses, or they feel that the yards should dictate the points. Personally, I think if you just look at the numbers, it means WR will have more value and I like having the points spread more equally among positions.

I have to draft differently for my PPR league and non-PPR league, and that took me a year or two to really figure out.

Also, arguments against RBs getting the same points as WR (since their catches are often dumpoffs) are probably valid, but I have not used a sliding scale.

I'd recommend 'easing' into it with 0.5 PPR for all positions and possibly sending a list of top 50 scorers factoring in the 0.5 PPR so people can 'see' how the value changes.

 

[Black]

Everyone in the league loves this set up because you can build your team in so many different ways and it is not imperative to adhere to the stud RB theory.

In my league, we have 1.0 PPR and also 20 points/return yards. It actually makes a few 'scrub' players really valuable. We also have 25 yards passing /1 point and 6 points/passing TD, making QBs pretty darn valuable.I have discussed rule changes, but in the 4th year of the league (and it's only a 2 person keeper league), people prefer to stick with the current scoring, even though I think that we should go down to 0.5 PPR and 4 points for a passing TD (and up to 40 return yards for a point).

It's hard to 'shift' your value system for that league.

 

[rick6668]

I think factoring in only 50 rec for the top RB is way too low.

This year was an anomoly with Forte and Drew having only 63.

2007:

Westbrook 90

Bush 73

Tomlinson 60

2006:

Jackson 90

Bush 88

Westbrook 77

2005:

Jordan 70

Westbrook 61

2004:

Westbrook 73

Dom. Williams 68

2003:

Tomlinson 100

Pittman 75

Holmes 74

Barber 69

2002:

Garner 91

Faulk 80

Tomlinson 79

Holmes 70

Barber 69

Your Stud RB's who catch passes will be even more valuable.

 

[H.K.]

A somewhat "standard" dynasty league I commish has decided to add PPR but I don't think any of us really have effectively communicated exactly WHY we want to do this.

PPR formats require a much deeper understanding of the game. Knowledge of schemes and match-ups from week to week have greater impact in this format. People with true football acumen prefer this method.

What is the reason your league uses PPR? Is it primarily to increase the WR/TE scoring relative to RB? Or is it to increase all non-QB scoring relative to the QB? (assuming 6pt TDs) Or none of the above?

See the above.

 

[nittanylion]

I play a lot of Dynasty, both PPR and non, and have been through the process of converting a scoring system from non-PPR to PPR. I think it's critical, when phasing in changes like this, to find ways to do so gradually, so as not to upset either the competitive balance of the League, nor disrupt the long-term planning that Owners may have engaged in under the parameters of the current ruleset.

Having been through the process more than a few times, it's my opinion that one of the best ways to introduce PPR is to establish in Year One of the change that you'll use 'tiers' at which the different positions begin accrue-ing their PPR. It's very effective in feeding folks PPR with a small introductory dose, and after Year One, you can tweak things as much or as little as you want.

For example:

RB: 1PPR after 5 Receptions (so with Reception #6, your RB starts accrue-ing 1PPR with each subsequent catch)

WR: 1PPR after 4 Receptions (so with Reception #5, your WR starts accrue-ing 1PPR with each subsequent catch)

TE: 1PPR after 3 Receptions (so with Reception #4, your TE starts accrue-ing 1PPR with each subsequent catch)

This puts the change into Scoring System in play without having too much effect - it only awards the true 'PPR Hogs' at each position, which, in the majority of cases, are already at the top of their individual positions, but they still have to do something of significance to start seeing points accrue, so there's not as much outcome on Final Scores. Your Owners will be able to start seeing which players within their positions have more value, without if having an extraordinary effect on the weekly H2H matchups in Year One, so it's not like some lucky bottom feeders will reverse their fortunes at the expense of Teams currently dominating your League.

From there, the sky is the limit, but I think this is a solid way to introduce the change so all can see it happen without it dramatically affecting League History, which, for us hard-core Dynasty players, is a pretty big deal.

Good Luck!