Scoring Questions (1 Viewer)

[cohenri]

I have been having a heated discussion with someone about the effect and usefullness of a couple of rules we have in our league. I am curious for some competing arguments or views. We have designed our rule system to attempt to equalize the value of positions - not just their point output, but their "value". Since RBs are the scarcist position, we would like to increase the relative values or differential between the top QBs and the next tier as well as (though perhaps less important) the top WRs and TEs. My friend is shocked by our rules and claims we are just adding randomness to our outcomes and making the league extremely unrealistic compared to the "real" game of football. He insists on playing in a basic or traditional scoring system.

Here are a couple of our rules:

1. Minimums - You do not score points for completions/receptions/yards until you hit certain minimums (ex. 30 yards rushing/receiving, 175 yards passing, 3 receptions, 15 completions)

2. Plateaus - You get bonusses at 100 yards rushing/receiving and 300 yards passing

3. Distance scoring - you score more for longer TDs.

I acknowledge that the plateaus scoring can give odd results with 100 yards rushing worth considerably more than 99 yards rushing but it does give more excitement to our game and perhaps it increases differentials for the TOP TOP QBs and WRs (as well as maybe Gates) who get enough 100 yard/300 yard games to cause the differential.

The distance scoring is a problem to my friend because it values TDs differently. While this is true, it does add a level of excitement to longer TDs and perhaps the best WRs have more longer TDs to increase their differential.

The minimums, however, is my main argument. I believe that minimums cause a huge differential between the top QBs, the middle tier QBs and the rest of the pack. I believe this diffential means that you can't wait until after the 5th round to get a QB and it makes having a good QB essential to winning a fantasy championship.

Any thoughts?

 

[Reek]

The minimums will increase the relative value of the studs at any position, but it will make consistency even more important. The distance scoring on the other hand does introduce an elemant of randomness, since big plays are so dependent on individual play calls and game conditions.

 

[cohenri]

The minimums will increase the relative value of the studs at any position, but it will make consistency even more important. The distance scoring on the other hand does introduce an elemant of randomness, since big plays are so dependent on individual play calls and game conditions.

We set the minimums at 30 yards rushing/receiving, 3 receptions and 175 yards passing and 15 completions. I believe that the effect of these minimums is much greater on QBs than RBs or WR. Therefore, I think it brings the QB value much more in line with RBs who are much scarcer due to the league starting 2 RBs AND many teams with RBBC. I'm surprised with all the views that no one else has an opinion???