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)
- Thread starter moleculo
- Start date
No Way Jose
Footballguy
Sorry for the delay....Jeremy Maclin
Last edited by a moderator:
Aww, man! My whole strategy was centered around waiting for a QB (McNabb), and I can't believe more than one backup QB went. Guess I'm not in touch with everyone's drafting strategies. Looks like my NFL QB situation will resemble the Raiders.
8.12 Fred Davis, TE (the back-half for Daniels)
9.01 Kyle Orton, QB (because that's where the guppies will go next).
8.12 Fred Davis, TE (the back-half for Daniels)
9.01 Kyle Orton, QB (because that's where the guppies will go next).
gonzobill5
Footballguy
I'll trade you Cutler for Fred Fred Davis!
moleculo
Footballguy
at the end of round 8 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) 88
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) 85
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) 84
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) 83
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) 83
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) 98
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) 77
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) 79
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) 101
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) 95
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) 89
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) 94
guppies continue their domination. Gheemoney is the top live drafter so far, w/ Orton @ QB (his jump in wins is due to having a QB finally - no QB really ####### scoring...also for purposes of comparison here, I switched Fred Davis & Orton so gheemoney would be credited w/ a scoring QB this round).
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) 88
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) 85
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) 84
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) 83
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) 83
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) 98
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) 77
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) 79
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) 101
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) 95
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) 89
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) 94
guppies continue their domination. Gheemoney is the top live drafter so far, w/ Orton @ QB (his jump in wins is due to having a QB finally - no QB really ####### scoring...also for purposes of comparison here, I switched Fred Davis & Orton so gheemoney would be credited w/ a scoring QB this round).
No Way Jose
Footballguy
Matt Hasselback......second qb, even though I have Rogers, Hassel gets 39.5 points during Rogers bye week. He also out scores Rogers 3 other weeks. Might of taken him a bit early but I wanted to make sure I got him. If nothing else, I should have the highest scoring qb tandom fwiw.
I think that's a good strategy.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Somehow Mario Manningham got placed on two teams...
GONZO takes Ahmad Bradshaw (assuming he's still available??)
ETA: ah crap, gimme a minute
ETA2: GONZO takes Jerricho Cotchery
Can't believe 16 TEs are off the board. The Boss/Heap or Davis/Heap pair looked like a safe bet to me to sit around until the end.
GONZO takes Ahmad Bradshaw (assuming he's still available??)
ETA: ah crap, gimme a minute
ETA2: GONZO takes Jerricho Cotchery
Can't believe 16 TEs are off the board. The Boss/Heap or Davis/Heap pair looked like a safe bet to me to sit around until the end.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I got caught off guard by QBs going fast so I tool two TEs.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
GONZO takes Jason Snelling
moleculo
Footballguy
at the end of round 9 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) 78
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) 89
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) 83
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) 87
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) 82
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) 99
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) 70
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) 86
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) 98
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) 108
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) 90
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) 86
gheemoney really pulling away now...hard to believe Fred Davis made that much of a difference. Just for sport, I replaced Fred Davis w/ Greg Olsen in the line-up to see if that really is what made the diff for him, and w/ Olsen, Gheemoney has 98 all-play wins. so, yeah...Fred Davis was worth 10 all play wins on his own. Pretty amazing.
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) 78
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) 89
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) 83
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) 87
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) 82
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) 99
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) 70
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) 86
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) 98
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) 108
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) 90
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) 86
gheemoney really pulling away now...hard to believe Fred Davis made that much of a difference. Just for sport, I replaced Fred Davis w/ Greg Olsen in the line-up to see if that really is what made the diff for him, and w/ Olsen, Gheemoney has 98 all-play wins. so, yeah...Fred Davis was worth 10 all play wins on his own. Pretty amazing.
No Way Jose
Footballguy
Correll Buckhalter......
moleculo
Footballguy
at the end of round 10 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) (78) 70
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) (89) 87
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) (83) 78
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) (87) 88
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) (82) 91
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) (99) 93
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) (70) 76
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) (86) 84
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) (98) 84
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) (108) 115
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) (90) 100
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) (86) 90
man, I've really taken a nose dive here...I think it's not having a second QB or TE that's doing me in. Gheemoney increases his lead, but interestingly, not once does he have weekly high score (but he does have overall high score, by a pretty wide margin).
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) (78) 70
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) (89) 87
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) (83) 78
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) (87) 88
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) (82) 91
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) (99) 93
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) (70) 76
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) (86) 84
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) (98) 84
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) (108) 115
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) (90) 100
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) (86) 90
man, I've really taken a nose dive here...I think it's not having a second QB or TE that's doing me in. Gheemoney increases his lead, but interestingly, not once does he have weekly high score (but he does have overall high score, by a pretty wide margin).
Last edited by a moderator:
moleculo
Footballguy
Guys, do you want to call it good at the end of the next two rounds - i.e. no weekly free-agency, no head to head, and just do all-play and call it done? I'm starting to grow weary with this experiment (short attention span, maybe). There's still some analysis that I can do to look at what types of players led to wins (which I think is interesting and might be useful), but in order to be realistic with this, everyone needs to have a back-up QB and a back-up TE. There's only a few teams that have to worry about that moving forward.
If you guys aren't cool with that, no problem because it sucks to change rules mid-way through, but if you guys are interested in just ending this, I'm all for it.
If you guys aren't cool with that, no problem because it sucks to change rules mid-way through, but if you guys are interested in just ending this, I'm all for it.
I'm okay with this. I'm sure it's a ton of work for Moleculo. I'd rather focus on "what we learned" and some analysis along the lines of the "value over replacement" I mentioned above. But I'll play it out if every wants.**Tip for Footballguys: you should incorporate all play stats into Draft Dominator. That would be incredibly valuable for judging team strength.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
I'm also anxious to take a look at the end result and discuss it, so that is fine with me.
moleculo
Footballguy
What I'm planning on doing for "value over replacement" is simply going down the list and removing player X from a roster - my spreadsheet will automatically recalculate starting line-ups and all-play wins, so I can then compare all play wins with and without player X. With that, you can see the impact that a given player has. For example, looking at the data right now, (partway through round 11), gheemoney has 124 wins. If he did not have Chris Johnson, he would have 68 all play wins - CJohnson therefore was good for 56 wins. If I removed Dwayne Bowe, on the other hand, Gheemoney had 114 wins, so Bowe contributed to 10 wins. Likewise, Orton contributed to 35 wins, and so on. Basically, it's value over replacement where the replacement is someone all ready on your roster...That's why it's important that everyone have a back-up QB and TE.gheemony said:
No Way Jose
Footballguy
Kevin Walter.....I'm cool with whatever you want to do Moleculo, you are the one that has to do the work. I'm already a little confused on who is winning, so makeing it more complicated would not be good...thanks.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Moleculo, why are you saying everyone needs a backup QB and backup TE?
Those Chris Johnson numbers just show how silly the "you can't win your league in the first round" adage really is.Anyway, Moleculo, a better way to go about it, instead of just removing the player entirely, might be to add another player (or, even better, a baseline- say just give someone the 18th best QB score in any given week). For instance, if you want to know how much value Aaron Rodgers added, instead of just removing Rodgers (which leaves the team without a QB on that team's backup's bye week), remove Rodgers and replace him with "QB18", a baseline that automatically ties the 18th best QB in any given week. Or set the baseline to whatever you want, but I do think it's important to add something back when you're taking something away.
moleculo
Footballguy
because I'm going to look at "player value over replacement" by simply deleting a player from a roster and seeing the impact in terms of H2H wins that player had...if I drop someone's QB (and they don't have a back-up), I can't get an accurate gauge as to what that QB is worth because the QB spot wouldn't have a replacement.We can continue to simulate the season and declare a winner in this whole exercise, but there is real value in identifying what types of players contribute to actual wins - i.e. is it better to have someone consistently mediocre, or someone with a few big games and a few goose-eggs. When all is said and done, we will compare drafting styles, what we were trying to do and evaluate what seemed to work out the best, but it's also about looking at the players drafted and measuring impact. I'm not sure if I'm being clear or not - do you understand what I'm trying to get at?
moleculo
Footballguy
yeah, you are probably right. I suppose I'm trying to do it this way because it's easy to get quick results with - I don't have to think about who the appropriate replacement should be. I can simply go down the drafted list, find the playeer on the right roster, hit 'delete', record results, hit 'undo', and move on to the next one. I should be able to zoom through the entire list pretty quickly that way. Adding a player off of the WW, while maybe more accurate, would be pretty tedious, and frankly, I kind of like the idea of people being able to select their own "baseline player" from their own bench - I think that actually might be more realistic.
I think we can do both Moleculo's approach and SSOG's approach relatively easily. For SSOG's approach, there are two relatively easy options: (1) just take the points that week for the next guy on the waiver wire (we're assuming that the team would have taken the top waiver guy and not tried to get the matchup right) or (2) just look at the last waiver player's FP/G and use that number as a static baseline instead of using variable week-to-week FPs. I think 2 may be easier.
BTW, SSOG, is nice to know you're lurking in this thread. I think this is going to produce some reall interesting information and the more observers we have, the better.
BTW, SSOG, is nice to know you're lurking in this thread. I think this is going to produce some reall interesting information and the more observers we have, the better.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
That's fine. GONZO takes Crabtree
I don't think we can draw firm conclusions about the Chris Johnson numbers until we see the results for other players. It may be that the other first round picks have comparable all-play VOR numbers. If the relative difference is small, it may be that the key to winning is the later picks where the your relative VOR is greater. For example, Dwayne Bowe's 10 VOR wins might be amazing for the 11th round if the other picks in the round are only contributing 1 VOR wins.It'll be interesting to see the VOR #s along side the pick #s. We can see how efficient different strategies were.
moleculo
Footballguy
at the end of round 11 (earlier round all-play results in parenthesis):
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) (78) (70) 75
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) (89) (87) 89
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) (83) (78) 79
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) (87) (88) 90
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) (82) (91) 96
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) (99) (93) 87
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) (70) (76) 76
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) (86) (84) 82
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) (98) (84) 89
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) (108) (115) 115
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) (90) (100) 92
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) (86) (90) 84
moleculo (78) (72) (90) (91) (87) (83) (88) (78) (70) 75
fubar (72) (79) (93) (92) (86) (94) (85) (89) (87) 89
guppy D (109) (99) (90) (90) (85) (90) (84) (83) (78) 79
gonzobill5 (83) (89) (101) (96) (86) (79) (83) (87) (88) 90
No Way Jose (109) (101) (96) (97) (93) (90) (83) (82) (91) 96
guppy E (111) (114) (87) (93) (95) (102) (98) (99) (93) 87
Football Critic (104) (97) (92) (75) (74) (77) (77) (70) (76) 76
Truman (75) (76) (66) (63) (81) (74) (79) (86) (84) 82
guppy F (76) (79) (97) (97) (81) (100) (101) (98) (84) 89
gheemoney (96) (97) (90) (96) (79) (72) (95) (108) (115) 115
guppy C (64) (73) (76) (96) (95) (96) (89) (90) (100) 92
guppy G (76) (79) (77) (70) (99) (98) (94) (86) (90) 84
If I'm placing bets, I would put money on the difference between Chris Johnson and the worst 1st rounder being at least twice as big as the difference between the best and the worst picks in any other round.
That's possible, which is why I'm very interested in seeing the results.
gonzobill5
Footballguy
Gonzo takes Pettigrew
