PPR vs non-PPR (1 Viewer)

[Gadfly]

Not sure which way to vote. Haven't played in a PPR league before. I'd be interested in the opinions of footballguys who have played in both before making my decision.

 

[Penguin]

Personally I like it, it levels the playing field a little bit between RB's & WR's. The top tier WR's that usually go in the second half of round two move up to late first round, early second. Now, it also makes LT even more valuable than he already is in standard leagues, that's something to take into consideration. Bottom line is that it doesn't make a huge difference at any position. WR's are generally moved up some, some pass catching RB's distance themselves a little from the likes of J.Lewis & R.Johnson. QB's drop a little compared to the other positions. It's more of a scoring "tweek" than anything else, but there are subtle advantages that you can exploit.

 

[SelenaCat]

My leagues went to a points per reception format for a while, but eventually several of the managers grew to dislike it due to the "unrealistic" reward for little 1 yard dump passes that don't actually benefit the team. We've since moved to a point per receiving first down - WR's still get a bump since about 2/3's of their receptions result in first downs, but it doesn't vastly inflate RB totals since they're closer to 1/3 receptions resulting in first downs. The only downside to this format is that very few projections include first downs (good for the sharks, bad for the guppies).

 

[BigRed]

Personally I like it, it levels the playing field a little bit between RB's & WR's. The top tier WR's that usually go in the second half of round two move up to late first round, early second. Now, it also makes LT even more valuable than he already is in standard leagues, that's something to take into consideration. Bottom line is that it doesn't make a huge difference at any position. WR's are generally moved up some, some pass catching RB's distance themselves a little from the likes of J.Lewis & R.Johnson. QB's drop a little compared to the other positions. It's more of a scoring "tweek" than anything else, but there are subtle advantages that you can exploit.

We're doing for first time this year and that's the impression I'm getting FWIW. IMO this makes strong pass-catching RBs like LT, Jackson etc gold, knocks down a few RBs who especially blow at catching (Rudi the most obvious example), and devalues QBs just slightly. IMO it changes most WRs rankings very little since their # of catches fluctuates and between the top guys isn't dramatically different. (no, I don't think And Johnson is catching 100+ again this year)

 

[Shermanator]

My leagues went to a points per reception format for a while, but eventually several of the managers grew to dislike it due to the "unrealistic" reward for little 1 yard dump passes that don't actually benefit the team. We've since moved to a point per receiving first down - WR's still get a bump since about 2/3's of their receptions result in first downs, but it doesn't vastly inflate RB totals since they're closer to 1/3 receptions resulting in first downs. The only downside to this format is that very few projections include first downs (good for the sharks, bad for the guppies).

I really like this idea. 1 pt per 1st down. My question would be though....can your league host handle this scoring format?

 

[FF 4 Life]

Personally I like it, it levels the playing field a little bit between RB's & WR's. The top tier WR's that usually go in the second half of round two move up to late first round, early second. Now, it also makes LT even more valuable than he already is in standard leagues, that's something to take into consideration. Bottom line is that it doesn't make a huge difference at any position. WR's are generally moved up some, some pass catching RB's distance themselves a little from the likes of J.Lewis & R.Johnson. QB's drop a little compared to the other positions. It's more of a scoring "tweek" than anything else, but there are subtle advantages that you can exploit.

Penguin explains it well in respect to top WR's being drafted earlier compared to 2nd and 3rd tier RB's or even RB's that don't get as many receptions. I think TE's that get a lot of receptions also get a boost ala Gates, Heap, Gonzo and Winslow. I like the inflated player scores as well. Eg. 125 to 115 in a H2H. You should perhaps download and install Projections Dominator, setup a league configuration and see how the rankings are listed in a PPR league and compare them with the rankings of a non-PPR league. Just an idea. It's a great tool. moneybag: in the bankThis is the settings in my first PPR league and it's still running after 6 yearsPassing Yards (50 yards per point) Passing Touchdowns (6) Interceptions (-2) Rushing Yards (20 yards per point)Rushing Touchdowns (6) Receptions (1) Reception Yards (20 yards per point) Reception Touchdowns (6)Return Touchdowns (6) 2-Point Conversions (2) Fumbles Lost (-2) Offensive Fumble Return TD (6)Field Goals 0-19 Yards (3) Field Goals 20-29 Yards (3) Field Goals 30-39 Yards (3) Field Goals 40-49 Yards (4)Field Goals 50+ Yards (5) Point After Attempt Made (1) Sack (1) Interception (2) Fumble Recovery (2)Touchdown (6) Safety (2) Block Kick (2)Points Allowed 0 points (10)Points Allowed 1-6 points (7)Points Allowed 7-13 points (4)Points Allowed 14-20 points (1)Points Allowed 21-27 points (0)Points Allowed 28-34 points (-1)Points Allowed 35+ points (-4)

 

[Uruk-Hai]

PPR allows WRs to become a more legit play in flex positions instead of a desperation move.

I know some are morally opposed to PPR on the grounds that WRs get points for "all" of those dump-off catches they make. Lav Coles is usually the poster child for this argument, yet even he averaged 12 yards a catch. Must have had a ton of bombs to offset all of those little one yard receptions, I guess. But if it bothers some that much, use first down catches. It's really smoke & mirrors as the % of catches for 1st downs is pretty constant - it's basically the same as giving .67-.75 PPR. But if it'll make some sleep better, I'm all for it.

 

[jagbag]

Personally I like it, it levels the playing field a little bit between RB's & WR's. The top tier WR's that usually go in the second half of round two move up to late first round, early second. Now, it also makes LT even more valuable than he already is in standard leagues, that's something to take into consideration. Bottom line is that it doesn't make a huge difference at any position. WR's are generally moved up some, some pass catching RB's distance themselves a little from the likes of J.Lewis & R.Johnson. QB's drop a little compared to the other positions. It's more of a scoring "tweek" than anything else, but there are subtle advantages that you can exploit.

We're doing for first time this year and that's the impression I'm getting FWIW. IMO this makes strong pass-catching RBs like LT, Jackson etc gold, knocks down a few RBs who especially blow at catching (Rudi the most obvious example), and devalues QBs just slightly. IMO it changes most WRs rankings very little since their # of catches fluctuates and between the top guys isn't dramatically different. (no, I don't think And Johnson is catching 100+ again this year)

This covers everything to a T.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

Adjusting lineup requirements will will affect relative value between positions. Start 2 RB and 4 WR to boost WR value, or 1 RB, 4 WR, and a flex.

If you do add ppr, do not make 1 reception = 10 yards. 5 receptions for 50 yards DOES NOT equal 100 yards rushing.

Many ppr leagues only give a point for WR and TE receptions. So this is what happens:

Rudi Johnson 1430+ yards, 12 TDs. Very solid. 215 fantasy points.

Hines Ward 1000 yards, 6 TDs, 74 rec. Pretty average. 210 fantasy points.

400 fewer yards, 6 fewer TDs, the same fantasy points. C'mon.

 

[moleculo]

we went to PPR to try to de-value RB's several years ago - we wanted WR's to score about the same as RB's. What actually happened is that RB's relative value got higher because RB's catch the ball too.

so now, we do 0.5 point per reception for WR & TE only. Seems to be a good compromise.

 

[Chaos Commish]

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

Adjusting lineup requirements will will affect relative value between positions. Start 2 RB and 4 WR to boost WR value, or 1 RB, 4 WR, and a flex.

If you do add ppr, do not make 1 reception = 10 yards. 5 receptions for 50 yards DOES NOT equal 100 yards rushing.

Many ppr leagues only give a point for WR and TE receptions. So this is what happens:

Rudi Johnson 1430+ yards, 12 TDs. Very solid. 215 fantasy points.

Hines Ward 1000 yards, 6 TDs, 74 rec. Pretty average. 210 fantasy points.

400 fewer yards, 6 fewer TDs, the same fantasy points. C'mon.

And the example in bold sinks in the point. PPR is bogus, imo.

 

[toxic]

I switched to PPR leagues a few years back and love the format. I understand that some fantasy players really want "fantasy value" to closely approximate "NFL value" and therefore object to the devaluation of RBs who don't catch the ball much (e.g. Rudi) and the increased value of possession WRs who catch a lot of shorter passes. Personally, this doesn't bother me a lick. I like fantasy football because of the strategy involved in good drafting and team management. What PPR brings to the table is more diversity in potential draft strategy.

In my experience, non-PPR drafts (especially with no flex positions) are very predictable. Everyone loads up on RBs early, then WRs, and then a smattering of QBs and TEs. The scoring format makes deviation from this strategy highly suspect. However, in a PPR league, a variety of strategies become reasonable. For example, a player drafting toward the end of the first round can conceivably go RB-RB, RB-WR, or WR-WR with their first two picks and do very well with any of those strategies (provided they draft well, of course). There are other ways of dealing with this issue--namely by increasing the number of WR starters in the lineup for example. You can also eliminate some of the RB effects by only giving PPR to WRs and TEs or by giving RBs a reduced total per reception (.5 per reception).

Bottom line is that smart, reasonable people have very different preferences on PPR vs non-PPR and the best recommendation I can give is to figure out what scoring system you enjoy most and join that type of league. I will never understand why people get their panties in a twist about the "stupidity" of some scoring rule. Every scoring system is arbitrary--if you don't like the rules, find a different league.

Getting back to your vote, if your leaguemates are NFL fans first and fantasy players second, I might suggest skipping PPR. But if your leaguemates are equal parts NFL fan and fantasy fans, I would go with PPR (or at least with increased starting requirements (3-4 WR, 2 QB) that make drafting non-RBs early reasonable.

 

[AcerFC]

The following is from a post from last year from this thread

The following was an analysis that I did for my league at the start of this year because I (commish) wanted to move more in the PPR direction. Like many have said, it is based on preference. Not all positions need to be equal but it helps all positions in the draft in case you want that WR in RD 2 or too many RBs are taken by the time it comes back to you in RD 3. Do you want to settle for a lower calibur RB or take the WR who may put up similar numbers to a 2nd tier RB.

Anyway, heres the study I did

Ok guys, I have been crunching numbers for the past 3 hours and here is what I came up with:

I took the top 25 Running backs, the top 25 Wide Receivers and the top 15 Tight Ends and calculated their total points that they would have had last year. These rankings were based on the players production last year, not rankings in a book or even more importantly my own depth charts. I evaluated what these players would have done with no ppr, and then I added .5 and 1 ppr for Running backs, 1 ppr for Wide Receivers and 1 and 1.5 ppr for Tight Ends. There was no adding in performance points (ie- 100 yard games, 40+ yard TDS, etc).

Here is what I found:

In a no ppr league there were 4 Rbs over 300+ points, 5 over 200+ points and 12 over 150+ points. That makes a total of 21/25 RBs over 150+ points with no ppr. Then I added .5 ppr for RBs and this was the result: 4 Rbs over 300+ points, 8 over 200+ points and 10 over 150+ points. Not a big difference pushing 22/25 backs over the 150+ point total. Now I added the 1 ppr equation and this was the result: 5 Rbs over 300+ points, 9 over 200+ points and 11 over 150+ points making all 25/25 backs 150+ points and over with 1 ppr.

Onto Wide Receivers: (which did not include any rushing stats but most receivers don’t have huge rushing numbers that would affect this experiment.)

In an no ppr league there were 0 Wrs over 300+ points, 3 over 200+ points and 9 over 150+ points making it 12/25 WRs that were over 150+ points with no ppr. That is less then half for those of you who have not worked with Math lately. Then I added the 1 ppr that WRs would get in our new rules and here was the conclusion: 2 WRs were over the 300+ point mark (with 2 more in the 290s), 16 WRs over 200+ points and 5 WRs over 150+ points giving us 23/25 Receivers who would have been 150+ point producers last year given the 1 ppr.

Now if you look at the numbers with the ppr added in the way we would have it this year it gives us 22/25 backs that are 150+ point producers and 23/25 WRs who are 150+ point producers. This seems a lot more equitable then with out ppr where you get this: 21/25 backs were 150+ point producers and only 12/25 WRs were 150+ point producers.

Last but not least, the Tight Ends, who benefit the most with a 1.5 ppr if the motion passes. I calculated Tight Ends with no ppr, 1 ppr and 1.5 ppr. Here was the result: With no ppr there were no TEs with 300+ or 200+ points and there was only 1 who was over 150+ points (guess who that was). Then I added 1 ppr and here is what happened: There were still 0 over the 300+ point barrier but there were 2 TEs over the 200+ point mark and 5 who were over 150+ points making it 7/15 over 150+ points. Then I added the 1.5 ppr that we would instill this year and here were the results. 1 TE over 300+ points, 6 over 200+ points and 4 TEs over 150+ points making it 11/15 TEs over 150+ points.

Again the reason for adding different points for different positions is to balance out the positions. This new system will not solve all of the problems in a fantasy league but it does give a team more options when drafting, trading and managing because there is more equality in each position.

I know that I have way too much time on my hands but thank you for reading this as it is important each owner understands the rules of the league and why I would want to change the rules a certain way.

The league voted overwhelmingly to give PPR a try. It has been working well so far

 

[BigRed]

PPR allows WRs to become a more legit play in flex positions instead of a desperation move.

Playing a WR is hardly a "desperation move" in a flex. All depends on who you have.Anyway, here are our top 20 from last year:Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB Manning, Peyton IND QB Jackson, Steven STL RB Johnson, Larry KCC RB Brees, Drew NOS QB Bulger, Marc STL QBPalmer, Carson CIN QB Westbrook, Brian PHI RB Gore, Frank SFO RB Vick, Michael ATL QB Harrison, Marvin IND WR Brady, Tom NEP QB Barber, Tiki FA RBKitna, Jon DET QB Parker, Willie PIT RB Rivers, Philip SDC QB Owens, Terrell DAL WR Wayne, Reggie IND WR Holt, Torry STL WR Driver, Donald GBP WRBasically the top/top receiving RBs inch up ahead of QBs, who don't dominate the list as much. The top WRs come into play largely in the 11-20s range, then it's a mix.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

PPR allows WRs to become a more legit play in flex positions instead of a desperation move.

Playing a WR is hardly a "desperation move" in a flex. All depends on who you have.

Well, of course it matters who you have, but look at the numbers:In a standard Zealots league last year (2RBs, 3WRs, 1 flex, non-PPR), the #25 RB scored 155 pts, the #37 WR scored 112. The RB has a pretty hefty advantage there. Add PPR to the WRs & it becomes almost a dead-heat.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I think PPR is the only way to go

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

I think PPR is the only way to go

Why?

 

[BigRed]

PPR allows WRs to become a more legit play in flex positions instead of a desperation move.

Playing a WR is hardly a "desperation move" in a flex. All depends on who you have.

Well, of course it matters who you have, but look at the numbers:In a standard Zealots league last year (2RBs, 3WRs, 1 flex, non-PPR), the #25 RB scored 155 pts, the #37 WR scored 112. The RB has a pretty hefty advantage there. Add PPR to the WRs & it becomes almost a dead-heat.

All I can tell you is that we have 1 RB/1WR and two flex. People have tried the 3 RB/1 WR strat thinking they had it made. The results have been VERY mixed ie "RB stud" people have not dominated like you'd expect.

 

[SelenaCat]

My question would be though....can your league host handle this scoring format?

We use the CBS site, and it allows you to set this stat.Using PPR/PPRFD does tend to inflate the value of WR's somewhat, which is a good thing IMHO. Once upon a time, our first two rounds in our redraft league went something like 22 RB, 2 QB. Now there's a couple of WR's that sneak in there and occasionally the top TE as well. It creates a little more viability for a not-just-stud-RB type of team.

 

[lastcall4oh]

If all players were awarded x points per reception and all players were awarded x/4 points per rush, what effect would this have on scoring? I am looking at stats/game from last year and looks like the average number of rushes and receptions for the top 20ish RBs is about 4 times the number of receptions for the top 20is WRs. Wouldn't this end up being a wash for RB and WR and end up devaluing QBs?

 

[GregR_2]

If all players were awarded x points per reception and all players were awarded x/4 points per rush, what effect would this have on scoring? I am looking at stats/game from last year and looks like the average number of rushes and receptions for the top 20ish RBs is about 4 times the number of receptions for the top 20is WRs. Wouldn't this end up being a wash for RB and WR and end up devaluing QBs?

Since most people are looking to devalue RB vs the other positions, it doesn't make much sense to add points to them. If the top guys get more points added then the bottom, you make the RB over-valuing worse.

 

[lastcall4oh]

Using points per reception/rush and bonuses, I am looking at ways to add value to the other positions, specifically QB and WR without necessarily taking away value from the RB position. Any suggestions?

 

[Reagan]

Personally I like it, it levels the playing field a little bit between RB's & WR's. The top tier WR's that usually go in the second half of round two move up to late first round, early second. Now, it also makes LT even more valuable than he already is in standard leagues, that's something to take into consideration. Bottom line is that it doesn't make a huge difference at any position. WR's are generally moved up some, some pass catching RB's distance themselves a little from the likes of J.Lewis & R.Johnson. QB's drop a little compared to the other positions. It's more of a scoring "tweek" than anything else, but there are subtle advantages that you can exploit.

We're doing for first time this year and that's the impression I'm getting FWIW. IMO this makes strong pass-catching RBs like LT, Jackson etc gold, knocks down a few RBs who especially blow at catching (Rudi the most obvious example), and devalues QBs just slightly. IMO it changes most WRs rankings very little since their # of catches fluctuates and between the top guys isn't dramatically different. (no, I don't think And Johnson is catching 100+ again this year)

WR Rankings won't change much, but WR production compared to RBs is much closer. Top tier WRs in PPR will score 280 to 300 pts, which is where the top RBs score in PPR, with the exception of LT. We switched to PPR last year and liked it. Maybe an idea for the original poster is to give .5 pt per catch to answer the objections about the 1 yard reception. I know that when we switched last year, some in our league didn't get the idea that the top WRs will score as much high as top RBs and I was able to get the first WR off the board at pick 19 in a 10 team league. Our league likes the change and it does deflate the value of QBs relative to the other positons.

 

[packersfan]

I just talked my league into going with PPR for the first time. I'm looking forward to seeing how it works out. Given how I'm drafting at the end of the round it certainly opens the door for a RB-WR possibility which is not something I would normally consider in our league.

 

[flying8balls]

Just give the wr ant te position .5 pts for receptions.

This really brings the values of the positions closer together.

Makes it more fun IMO.

 

[BigRed]

WR Rankings won't change much, but WR production compared to RBs is much closer. Top tier WRs in PPR will score 280 to 300 pts, which is where the top RBs score in PPR, with the exception of LT.

No, the WRs are still not on par w/the top RBs (even excluding LT last year), but it does close the gap a little.PPR just does not make the huge diff you might think it would, generally.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

IMHO:

PPR is an overfix of the situation.

Its the pendulum overswinging.

Much better to have .5 per reception for WR and TE only.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

IMHOPR is an overfix of the situation.Its the pendulum overswinging.Much better to have .5 per reception for WR and TE only.

For the first year in our league history (16 teams) we are going 1PPR for WR and TE only. We start 2 Rb, 2 WR/TE, and added a flex RB/WR/TE. What about this setup?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

IMHO:

PPR is an overfix of the situation.

Its the pendulum overswinging.

Much better to have .5 per reception for WR and TE only.

For the first year in our league history (16 teams) we are going 1PPR for WR and TE only. We start 2 Rb, 2 WR/TE, and added a flex RB/WR/TE. What about this setup?

Its okay. As is no reception scoring. In my estimation it is still on overcorrection, based on my experiences.One concern that remains is the Rudi/Ward scenario presented above. You guys can always tweak it down the road.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I'm in one league with a 1/2 PPR so at least you aren't getting 1 pt for a dump pass of a half yard.

I llike PPRs but I can go either way - they bot hwork.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

IMHO:

PPR is an overfix of the situation.

Its the pendulum overswinging.

Much better to have .5 per reception for WR and TE only.

For the first year in our league history (16 teams) we are going 1PPR for WR and TE only. We start 2 Rb, 2 WR/TE, and added a flex RB/WR/TE. What about this setup?

Its okay. As is no reception scoring. In my estimation it is still on overcorrection, based on my experiences.One concern that remains is the Rudi/Ward scenario presented above. You guys can always tweak it down the road.

It may overvalue the WR, but I think the FLEX spot will make the RBBC RB more valuable than a WR.

 

[Biabreakable]

My opposition to PPR is that a reception is, by itself, a non-productive stat. Yards matter, TDs matter.... receptions are no more, or less, important than a RB carry or a pass completion. PPR artificially inflate fantasy production.

Adjusting lineup requirements will will affect relative value between positions. Start 2 RB and 4 WR to boost WR value, or 1 RB, 4 WR, and a flex.

If you do add ppr, do not make 1 reception = 10 yards. 5 receptions for 50 yards DOES NOT equal 100 yards rushing.

Many ppr leagues only give a point for WR and TE receptions. So this is what happens:

Rudi Johnson 1430+ yards, 12 TDs. Very solid. 215 fantasy points.

Hines Ward 1000 yards, 6 TDs, 74 rec. Pretty average. 210 fantasy points.

400 fewer yards, 6 fewer TDs, the same fantasy points. C'mon.

And the example in bold sinks in the point. PPR is bogus, imo.

Agreed I hate PPR.The whole concept of "fair" and then skewing a scoring system to achieve that purpose seems counter-intuitive to me. I prefer all players to get the same awards for the same action/event.

If you don't like seeing RB dominated drafts then change the position scarcity/starting requirements. That is the real way to change the dynamic of drafts instead of skewing scoring systems.

That being said the Anarchy scoring system of 0PPR for RB 1PPR for WR and 2PPR for TE is an interesting dynamic. But this is a total points league so more based off of projections. I would not like this scoring format for head to head play.

 

[smackdaddies]

In leagues with 8 or less players - don't need it. More than enough talent.

The bigger the league, the more you like ppr. It greatly expands the pool of players that are worth having on your roster.

I would not consider playing in a 12 or greater team league without ppr

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

My leagues went to a points per reception format for a while, but eventually several of the managers grew to dislike it due to the "unrealistic" reward for little 1 yard dump passes that don't actually benefit the team. We've since moved to a point per receiving first down - WR's still get a bump since about 2/3's of their receptions result in first downs, but it doesn't vastly inflate RB totals since they're closer to 1/3 receptions resulting in first downs. The only downside to this format is that very few projections include first downs (good for the sharks, bad for the guppies).

I really like this idea. 1 pt per 1st down. My question would be though....can your league host handle this scoring format?

So close.....Try this article explaining 1 point for a 1st down reception.....

Points Per Deception

I am currently working on the 2007 version of it now.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I think PPR is the only way to go

Why?

You won't get it, so why as why?People want WRs' value to be inflated. Who cares if it's artificial? It's fantasy football.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I think PPR is the only way to go

Why?

You won't get it, so why as why?People want WRs' value to be inflated. Who cares if it's artificial? It's fantasy football.

Easy guys.What people want more often than not is a consistent scoring system across all players, AND also some decent reflection of actual NFL performance.

How else can you explain that QBs' TDs are often worth less and also that the yardage is worth less?

For a nice common ground consider this - 1 Point Per First Down Reception.

It does both and favors WRs and TEs over RBs, but not as drastically as pure PPR.

Check out this from last year:

Points Per Deception

I'm working on the '07 version now.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

My question would be though....can your league host handle this scoring format?

We use the CBS site, and it allows you to set this stat.Using PPR/PPRFD does tend to inflate the value of WR's somewhat, which is a good thing IMHO. Once upon a time, our first two rounds in our redraft league went something like 22 RB, 2 QB. Now there's a couple of WR's that sneak in there and occasionally the top TE as well. It creates a little more viability for a not-just-stud-RB type of team.

Bump due to release of the article and to point out a site that employs this scoring feature.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Anybody here play in (or even hear of) a basic td heavy league (i.e. 5 pts per td < 50 yards & 7 pts per td 50+ yards, rush/rec 4 pts starting at 100 yards, passing 3 pts starting at 250 yards, etc.) that does ppr?

I know how to adjust my rankings in your basic ppr league, but my head is about to explode trying to factor in ppr in a td heavy league, and develop an optimal draft strategy. Oh, and this league uses IDP's too.