What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

retrospective mock draft using 2009 data (1 Viewer)

Football Critic said:
FUBAR said:
gheemony said:
FUBAR said:
Jamal Charles
Click to expand...
Already drafted: 3.06 Football Critic Jamal Charles
Click to expand...
I clearly need help.Robert Meachem
Click to expand...
It was part of my plan, Charles tore it up at the end of the season, now for someone who tore it up at the beginning of the season....5.6 Ronnie Brown
Click to expand...
Nice strategy, FC. I was thinking of a Brown/Charles combo as well, but you foiled me with the Charles pick in round 3. Will be interesting to see how it plays out, especially you've locked up one bench slot until Brown is hurt.I think this exercise is a good way to test out whether traditional VBD works. I'm beginning to think that VBD has to be updated/modified. I've had a custom auction system for a while, but I think I'll tinker it further depending on how this plays out.
 
gheemony said:
I think this exercise is a good way to test out whether traditional VBD works. I'm beginning to think that VBD has to be updated/modified. I've had a custom auction system for a while, but I think I'll tinker it further depending on how this plays out.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that VBD isn't perfect but I'm not sure how much we can draw from this draft and translate it directly to a normal draft. Concepts like QBBC or TEBC will work here because we have hindsight. VBD seems more likely to work in this draft too.
 
FUBAR said:
gheemony said:
I think this exercise is a good way to test out whether traditional VBD works. I'm beginning to think that VBD has to be updated/modified. I've had a custom auction system for a while, but I think I'll tinker it further depending on how this plays out.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that VBD isn't perfect but I'm not sure how much we can draw from this draft and translate it directly to a normal draft. Concepts like QBBC or TEBC will work here because we have hindsight. VBD seems more likely to work in this draft too.
Click to expand...
one thing that I'm playing around with is variability - is it better to have someone who is consistently mediocre, or someone who is more hit and miss. Their end of year stats might be similar, but IMO it's not clear which one will help win games. Out of the "guppy" teams, one is ranking players on average score + stdev (i.e. accentuate guys who are more hit and miss), one ranks players on average score - stdev (i.e. accentuate guys who are consistent), and one ranks guys on a statistic I just invented called "games over baseline". For "games over baseline", I borrowed the baseline concept from VBD to say what a "baseline"player will average (i.e. VBD=0). Divide that by 16 = average score per game. Then, I used the stdev and the average score to calculate a probability that the player will score more than the baseline score. Multiply that by 16, and you have an estimate for how many games over the baseline you anticipate that player will score. it's kind of a neat stat, and I'm curious if it will end up having any utility at all.Of course, all of this depends on having a halfway decent estimate for stdev...at the end of all of this, if I think it's useful, maybe we can enlist Drinen or some other good stats guys to help think about forecasting stdevs.
 
at the end of round 5 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):

moleculo (78) (72) (90) 91

fubar (72) (79) (93) 92

guppy D (109) (99) (90) 90

gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) 96

No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) 97

guppy E (111) (114) (87) 93

Football Critic (104) (97) (92) 75

Truman (75) (76) (66) 63

guppy F (76) (79) (97) 97

gheemoney (96) (97) (90) 96

guppy C (64) (73) (76) 96

guppy G (76) (79) (77) 70

Truman and guppy G are the bottom two, and these teams have no QB, all though gheemoney also has no QB, and he is one of the top teams (so far).

 
moleculo said:
FUBAR said:
gheemony said:
I think this exercise is a good way to test out whether traditional VBD works. I'm beginning to think that VBD has to be updated/modified. I've had a custom auction system for a while, but I think I'll tinker it further depending on how this plays out.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that VBD isn't perfect but I'm not sure how much we can draw from this draft and translate it directly to a normal draft. Concepts like QBBC or TEBC will work here because we have hindsight. VBD seems more likely to work in this draft too.
Click to expand...
one thing that I'm playing around with is variability - is it better to have someone who is consistently mediocre, or someone who is more hit and miss. Their end of year stats might be similar, but IMO it's not clear which one will help win games. Out of the "guppy" teams, one is ranking players on average score + stdev (i.e. accentuate guys who are more hit and miss), one ranks players on average score - stdev (i.e. accentuate guys who are consistent), and one ranks guys on a statistic I just invented called "games over baseline". For "games over baseline", I borrowed the baseline concept from VBD to say what a "baseline"player will average (i.e. VBD=0). Divide that by 16 = average score per game. Then, I used the stdev and the average score to calculate a probability that the player will score more than the baseline score. Multiply that by 16, and you have an estimate for how many games over the baseline you anticipate that player will score. it's kind of a neat stat, and I'm curious if it will end up having any utility at all.Of course, all of this depends on having a halfway decent estimate for stdev...at the end of all of this, if I think it's useful, maybe we can enlist Drinen or some other good stats guys to help think about forecasting stdevs.
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to all the discussion that will come from this. I recall that Chase Stuart posted something about variance being completely unpredictable from year to year. While I haven't had any success in predicting consistent/inconsistent player, I can't accept that as being true. Maybe this experiment will lead to some people looking deeper into that area.
 
Moleculo, looking forward to seeing the numbers you used for the guppy teams when all is done. The "games over baseline" concept sounds a lot like what I am heading toward when I said that we could learn to tweak VBD based on this experience. My preliminary takeaways:

1. Baseline: best starter or average starter seems to be the best way to gauge contribution to fantasy team success. Otherwise, you over-value bench players.

2. It is really helpful to know "fantasy games started". easy in this scenario, but hard without hindsight, but I think we can get a close approximation. Now this involves some statistical assumptions about variance based on predictions about fantasy points per game. Which means...

3. People should be predicting points per game and games played, not season totals. I know this is not easy, but projections are not helpful without it. If a projector thinks a player has a 10% chance of season-ending injury, docking total projected stats by 10% doesn't paint the whole picture. It's more realistic to predict that the player will play 10% less games. This makes a huge difference in figuring out how many games this player is likely to be starter worthy because he has a higher points per game, which leads to higher likelihood of fantasy games started. If you don't believe this, look at the Ronnie Brown pick. His season totals are much lower, but his fantasy values is higher because you could start him while healthy.

4. I think Tremblay's auction method is the closest to simulating this. I disagree with some of his assumptions, but the general idea is very similar.

Excited to see the guppy statistics and see what we come up with together.

Moleculo: something for you to noodle on: are fantasy points per game normally distributed? And since they are components of FPS, what aboutbyards and TDS? Drinen has already shown that TDs are poisson-distributed, so we just need to solve yards.

 
at the end of round 6 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):

moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) 87

fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) 86

guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) 85

gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) 86

No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) 93

guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) 95

Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) 74

Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) 81

guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) 81

gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) 79

guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) 95

guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) 99

 
Jermichael Finley.......Moleculo, could you repost the player stats again every once in a while, so they are easier to find. I keep losing them on my blackberry. Thanks.

 
Wish we were doing Ks and Ds. Would be interesting to see where they'd get drafted. Earlier than traditional drafts since the unpredictable nature of the positions is completely eliminated.

 
Gonzo takes Jay Cutler.

A "backup" QB in the 7th round. I'm not sure if my method is screwy or that what we are doing here doesn't apply to a real fantasy draft as much as we initially thought. Either way, can't wait to see how this plays out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
7.11 moleculo Knowshon Moreno (finally)

7.12 guppy F Santana Moss

8.01 guppy F Cadillac Williams

8.02 moleculo Terrell Owens

 
at the end of round 7 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):

moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) 83

fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) 94

guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) 90

gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) 79

No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) 90

guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) 102

Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) 77

Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) 74

guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) 100

gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) 72

guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) 96

guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) 98

guppies are doing well here.

 
moleculo said:
at the end of round 7 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) 83fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) 94guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) 90gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) 79No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) 90guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) 102Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) 77Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) 74guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) 100gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) 72guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) 96guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) 98guppies are doing well here.
Click to expand...
Doh! I forgot we were at the other turn. It did seem a little fast to make it all the way back to me.If the guppies are doing well, are the humans over-thinking this? Or maybe the brilliance of our strategies won't play out until the very end. It's nice to see how this changes round-to-round.I think a really good test of a player's value will be to, after the draft the draft is over, replace the player from a team with the best waiver-available player and see the effect on all-play points. Do this for every player and we should have a "value over replacement" score for each player. It's obviously situation dependent, but I bet we'll learn a lot. Then let's try drafting with the "value over replacement" score. Or at least use it to derive what correlates to a good "value over replacement" score.
 
moleculo said:
at the end of round 7 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) 83fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) 94guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) 90gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) 79No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) 90guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) 102Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) 77Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) 74guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) 100gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) 72guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) 96guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) 98guppies are doing well here.
Click to expand...
So far almost all of the guppies are beating all of the humans. But I'll capture this moment as the top human ;)
 
BTW: if anyone wants the source data that I'm using to track this and compile the all-play records, feel free to PM me your e-mail address and I'll send it to you.

 
8.06 Truman Kevin Boss *

8.07 Football Critic Justin Forsett *

* picks made by me - inactive owners?

Guys, we're almost done here. Let's finish this out.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
1st year of Superflex. Draft suggestions. (Auction/10 team/2 Keeper)
Replies
1
Views
359
teach42
T
Terpman22
Free Agent Draft Shenanigans
Replies
11
Views
1K
Jppaul
J
Scoresman
Auction drafters: Figure out your draft plan using Excel Solver to create "optimal" lineups
Replies
16
Views
2K
BroncoFreak_2K3
BroncoFreak_2K3

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top