Should rushing TDs be 7 points in PPR leagues? (1 Viewer)

[Buckychudd]

Can anyone tell me, quite simply, the reasoninh behind rewarding PPR receiving TDs 7 points?If you can't, then they should be rewarded 5 points.

I will as soon as you can explain to me why a zero yard reception in a PPR league gets rewarded a point....

 

[Marc Levin]

No, a receiving TD is not valued more highly than a rushing TD. You get 6 points either way. If it's a receiving TD, you also necessarily got one point for the reception, but it's not part of the TD score.

If a defensive sack forces a fumble which is picked up and returned for a TD, you get 8 points; one for the sack, one for the fumble, six for the TD. It would make no sense to ignore the sack just because it wound up resulting in a fumble or a TD--similarly, it makes no sense to ignore a reception just because it wound up resulting in a TD.

Good example

not really - I already compensated for that in this league by rewarding D TDs 4 points.Passing TDs are also reowarded 6 points - this way, all TDs end up in 6 points except for receiving TDs which are worth 7 and ST TDs which are worth 4. next year, ST TDs will be worth a bonus 2 points.

I am contemplating making receiving TDs worth 5 so that all TDs will result in the owner getting 6 points for their player scoring a TD. If it is a QB/RB/WR, you will also get your TD yardage.

Compensate? Why? Just because it ends up in a TD they shouldnt get a point for the sack? You're going to award a receiver a point for everytime he catches a ball, unless its in the endzone? (that's essentially what you would be doing by making rec TDs worth 5) Why? Why should that catch not count?I'm not following the logic here. Like I said before though, I think it's a fundamental difference in how we see points awarded.

That's correct. If a sack results in a fumble and then a TD, that play is worth 7 points to the defense.The receiving TDs are automatically worth 7 every time they happen. So, maybe RUSHING TDs should be worth 7 in a PPR league - then I am not taking away the reward for the catch, but I am compensating receiving and rusdhing TDs the same

That was actually my initial thesis - that rushing TDs should be worth 7 points since receiving TDs were worth 7 points.

Let's proceed from there - raising rushing TDs to 7 points in PPR league - maybe that will help your thought pattern on this better.

 

[ceo3west]

Don't get me started on scoring systems..

Hey Cal, I changed my avatar just for you buddy.

 

[Marc Levin]

Can anyone tell me, quite simply, the reasoninh behind rewarding PPR receiving TDs 7 points?If you can't, then they should be rewarded 5 points.

I will as soon as you can explain to me why a zero yard reception in a PPR league gets rewarded a point....

that's a good poin t- but a separate issue to what my initial thought is.I don;lt want to ditch PPR.I want to normalize rush TDs versus receiving TDs - unless someone can tell me why we reward receiving TDs an extra point.Giving rush TDs 7 points does the same thing as making receiving TDs worth 5.This is a "TD value" question. Not an indictment of any system or a complaint. If there's a good reason for rewarding receiving TDs higher than rushing TDs, fine. I just can't see why when receivers are already getting a huge number of points through non-TD receptions

 

[Biabreakable]

Its all double dipping no matter how you rationalize it.

PPR devalues TDs which I think is a important event in a football game.

 

[wdbs]

Can anyone tell me, quite simply, the reasoninh behind rewarding PPR receiving TDs 7 points?If you can't, then they should be rewarded 5 points.

I will as soon as you can explain to me why a zero yard reception in a PPR league gets rewarded a point....

that's a good poin t- but a separate issue to what my initial thought is.I don;lt want to ditch PPR.I want to normalize rush TDs versus receiving TDs - unless someone can tell me why we reward receiving TDs an extra point.Giving rush TDs 7 points does the same thing as making receiving TDs worth 5.This is a "TD value" question. Not an indictment of any system or a complaint. If there's a good reason for rewarding receiving TDs higher than rushing TDs, fine. I just can't see why when receivers are already getting a huge number of points through non-TD receptions

If you extend your logic to other plays that RBs and WRs can make to score points, you will end up ditching PPR altogether. For example, why should a 60 yard run be worth only six points, while a 60 yard catch is worth 7 points? What would be the reasoning behind normalizing a play that results in a TD vs. a play that results in just yards? What you are really doing is devaluing TD receptions against non-TD receptions.

 

[jurb26]

' date='Oct 1 2006, 07:52 PM' post='5636623']

You get the bonus point for a reception in PPR leagues.So, shouldn't the points for TDs be balanced out in PPR leagues?

No. The whole point of PPR is to make WRs closer to RBs in value. As soon as you try to balance out the TD values, then suddenly WRs are devalued again.

I can't believe this thread has gone so far when the easy answer was given in the 3rd post.

 

[Marc Levin]

' date='Oct 1 2006, 07:52 PM' post='5636623']

You get the bonus point for a reception in PPR leagues.So, shouldn't the points for TDs be balanced out in PPR leagues?

No. The whole point of PPR is to make WRs closer to RBs in value. As soon as you try to balance out the TD values, then suddenly WRs are devalued again.

I can't believe this thread has gone so far when the easy answer was given in the 3rd post.

But I WANT to devalue WR TDs in a PPR league - and this is a way to do that without reducing PPR. Noone has given me even a stab at why a receiving TD should be, in reality, worth 7 points whle a rushing TD should be, in reality, worth 6. What is so wrong with making rushing TDs worth 7 points?I see no reason why a WR should get a bonus point for catching a TD when they can already match the RBs' rushing TDs by catching 6 passes.I wish someone would help with the rationalization on why this makes sense in PPR leagues rather than trying to tell me that this is not the way it is in PPR leagues. Maybe I'll run some VBD tests and see what happens with values for players based on our preseason projections - but I really wanted some rationale here for why it makes sense for receivers to get 7 points per TD in PPR leagues.

 

[ceo3west]

' date='Oct 1 2006, 07:52 PM' post='5636623']

You get the bonus point for a reception in PPR leagues.So, shouldn't the points for TDs be balanced out in PPR leagues?

No. The whole point of PPR is to make WRs closer to RBs in value. As soon as you try to balance out the TD values, then suddenly WRs are devalued again.

I can't believe this thread has gone so far when the easy answer was given in the 3rd post.

But I WANT to devalue WR TDs in a PPR league - and this is a way to do that without reducing PPR. Noone has given me even a stab at why a receiving TD should be, in reality, worth 7 points whle a rushing TD should be, in reality, worth 6. What is so wrong with making rushing TDs worth 7 points?I see no reason why a WR should get a bonus point for catching a TD when they can already match the RBs' rushing TDs by catching 6 passes.I wish someone would help with the rationalization on why this makes sense in PPR leagues rather than trying to tell me that this is not the way it is in PPR leagues. Maybe I'll run some VBD tests and see what happens with values for players based on our preseason projections - but I really wanted some rationale here for why it makes sense for receivers to get 7 points per TD in PPR leagues.

I see your point, but I beleive PPR overvalues WR's as it is and this concept doesnt make the difference in equalizing the two positions (FYI, not basing this on any factual study). Im not a fan of PPR anyway. Something is wrong if youre getting a point for a guy that has one reception for no yards.

 

[cosmonaut]

' date='Oct 1 2006, 05:52 PM' post='5636623']

You get the bonus point for a reception in PPR leagues.So, shouldn't the points for TDs be balanced out in PPR leagues?

No. The whole point of PPR is to make WRs closer to RBs in value. As soon as you try to balance out the TD values, then suddenly WRs are devalued again.

No, the whole point of PPR in our league (and other performance scorers including our 1 pt for every 5 carries) is to reduce the overvaluing of fullback TD vultures, and/or the impact of part-time players getting their lucky TD and being more valuable during a week than a fulltime starter.

 

[cosmonaut]

Can anyone tell me, quite simply, the reasoninh behind rewarding PPR receiving TDs 7 points?If you can't, then they should be rewarded 5 points.

I will as soon as you can explain to me why a zero yard reception in a PPR league gets rewarded a point....

that's a good poin t- but a separate issue to what my initial thought is.I don;lt want to ditch PPR.I want to normalize rush TDs versus receiving TDs - unless someone can tell me why we reward receiving TDs an extra point.Giving rush TDs 7 points does the same thing as making receiving TDs worth 5.This is a "TD value" question. Not an indictment of any system or a complaint. If there's a good reason for rewarding receiving TDs higher than rushing TDs, fine. I just can't see why when receivers are already getting a huge number of points through non-TD receptions

I see eye-to-eye with the guys treating these events as independent and discrete.If you're going to think along these lines of "TD Value" and combine scoring categories, then receiving TDs are worth more than 7 points in PPR leagues. In some leagues, they're worth 11 points and in mine 13, because a QB gets passing TD points.Anyone who plays head to head and has made a hedge starting decision -- normally I start QB X, but this week my opponent has Holt, so I'm going to start Bulger instead as a hedge -- understands this.Similarly anyone who has ever fielded a double dip team (Peyton and Harrison; Warner and Faulk, Holt or Bruce) knows that you have can higher highs and/or lower lows on a weekly basis depending upon how the game goes.

 

[cobalt_27]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

 

[Marc Levin]

I see that point, cosmonaut.

But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?

If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.

In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

 

[Marc Levin]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

 

[cobalt_27]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

Yeah, and giving them 7 on a TD moves back towards the imbalance that PPR is supposed to address. I will never understand this trend in FF to make RBs so incoherently valuable as opposed to all the other positions out there.

 

[cobalt_27]

I see that point, cosmonaut.But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

Why draft any position other than RB? Serious question. Why not just have a Fantasy RB League? Seems like that's all that's happening, anyway.

 

[NoFBinLA]

Can anyone tell me, quite simply, the reasoninh behind rewarding PPR receiving TDs 7 points?If you can't, then they should be rewarded 5 points.

Because a TD is worth 6 points. A catch is worth 1. Two different actions, two different scores.As others have said, the way the TD got scored is irrelevant. Why punish a player for how they got their 6 pts?It really sounds though as if you don't WANT to have it explained to you. Several folks have done so -- and rather than, at some point (as one of them did) acknowledge that there is a fundemental difference in perception between you and others, you just keep repeating how they are wrong and challenging them to prove it.I can try to teach you math, but if at some point you refuse to acknowledge my numbers exist, well that's a problem. (mind you, I shouldn't teach ANYONE math, but I digress)If you want to decrease the value of TDs in your league, go for it. In the leagues I play in, a TD - no matter how you score it - is 6 pts. Some have 1 pt scoring for catches. Some have 1/2 point. There's no big difference to me. Now, one can argue about inflation of mediocre WRs with PPR, but that's not the topic. Insofar as TDs -- the PPR doesn't bother me. I can see what your issue is with it. I happen to disagree.But to me, how the guy got in the end zone does not enter into the equation. Not in my leagues.

 

[Marc Levin]

I see that point, cosmonaut.But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

Why draft any position other than RB? Serious question. Why not just have a Fantasy RB League? Seems like that's all that's happening, anyway.

you are not contributing to this discussion - nor are you aiding along the discussion.7/rush and pass TDs does NOT make RBs insanely more valuable - it brings them BACK towards WRs/TEs in PPR values. AND, last time I checked, ALL receiving TDs become 7 points in a PPR league - TEs and RBs included - pass-catching RBs are already INSANELY valuable in a PPR league.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

Yeah, and giving them 7 on a TD moves back towards the imbalance that PPR is supposed to address. I will never understand this trend in FF to make RBs so incoherently valuable as opposed to all the other positions out there.

My main league actually rewards 8 points for a receiving TD vs. 6 for a rushing TD in addition to being PPR, so a receiving TD is always worth at least 9 points. Even with this adjustment, RB's are still FAR more valuable than WR's (top RB's go for almost 3x the value of top WR's in the auction draft) because of their scarcity.If, like the vast majority of leagues, your league values RB's far more than WR's, the argument for having receiving TD's worth more is to try to bring things more in balance. Increasing rushing TD's to 7 points would just make things even more unbalanced -- Do you want the whole first 2 rounds (or top 20 highest value players in an auction) to be RB's?

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Was thinking about this for defenses, in my league a DST TD is 6 pts, but we also award 3 points for an INT or Fumble... which is necessary for all but punt/kick return TDs. So an INT for a TD is really 9 points.

We make all defensive TDs worth 4 points since we already gave 2 points for the turnover.We don't reward ST TDs more - which is a mistake, since there is no turnover.

I still stick with the "Defending Reality" argument about how to score defenses.Two years running, it correlates well with real defenses and gives a good score in comparison to WRs.

maybe i missed it.Where's the data on defensive/ST TDs?

Just before my conclusion:

One last additional benefit (and variance to the Realistic Team Defense formula) is that the addition of scoring points for a Team Defense scoring play (Touchdown or Safety) allows for the added point value, and also reduces the impact of that event to a lower percentage of the total Team Defense score. Previously, under the original scoring method, teams scored between 61 and 123 points for the season without defensive or special teams touchdowns added (see Table 4). Adding a single touchdown (6 points) varied the overall season score by 5-10%, a large impact. Now with the Realistic Team Defense formula, adding a touchdown reduces the impact to 3-5% (see Table 5). This valuation relative to the seasonal performance does seem to be more appropriate than the twice as large prior method.

In other words, safeties and TDs by defenses are relatively random events. Yes I know that some teams get more than others historically, but I contend that KR/PR TDs and Defensive TDs should not have such a big impact on D scoring. Using the Realistic Team Defense reduces their overall impact from 5-10% of their seasonal score to 3-5%.

 

[Marc Levin]

It really sounds though as if you don't WANT to have it explained to you. Several folks have done so -- and rather than, at some point (as one of them did) acknowledge that there is a fundemental difference in perception between you and others, you just keep repeating how they are wrong and challenging them to prove it.

I never said anyone is "wrong" nor do I challenge the explanation - I understand HOW the scoring is done - I am trying to understand WHY we value a receiving TD one more point, when a simple fix seems to exist. Incidentally, when I made receivcing TDs worth 6 and rushing and passing TDs worth 7, under our projections for this past year, we have this for the top-24:1 Larry Johnson2 LaDainian Tomlinson3 Tiki Barber4 Shaun Alexander5 Steven Jackson6 Torry Holt7 Steve Smith8 Rudi Johnson9 Chad Johnson10 Ronnie Brown11 Larry Fitzgerald12 Anquan Boldin13 Randy Moss14 LaMont Jordan15 Peyton Manning16 Brian Westbrook17 Reggie Bush18 Reggie Wayne19 Antonio Gates20 Marvin HarrisonExcept for the dearth of QBs, this looks pretty well balanced.

 

[Marc Levin]

Rest of the top-60:

21 Chris Chambers

22 Kevin Jones

23 Edgerrin James

24 Donald Driver

25 Willis McGahee

26 Cadillac Williams

27 Willie Parker

28 Clinton Portis

29 Warrick Dunn

30 Roy Williams

31 DeShaun Foster

32 Terrell Owens

33 Chester Taylor

34 Plaxico Burress

35 Hines Ward

36 Reuben Droughns

37 Derrick Mason

38 Todd Heap

39 Santana Moss

40 Darrell Jackson

41 Frank Gore

42 Donovan McNabb

43 Julius Jones

44 Tom Brady

45 Tony Gonzalez

46 T.J. Houshmandzadeh

47 Rod Smith

48 Jeremy Shockey

49 Joey Galloway

50 Jake Delhomme

51 Andre Johnson

52 Matt Hasselbeck

53 Terry Glenn

54 Laveranues Coles

55 Lee Evans

56 Jamal Lewis

57 Eddie Kennison

58 Dominic Rhodes

59 Joe Horn

60 Javon Walker

Looks pretty well balanced to me - and RBs do not suddenly become worth an insane amount. In fact, it appears that my idea balances out a bit better than straight 6 per.

 

[ceo3west]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

Yeah, and giving them 7 on a TD moves back towards the imbalance that PPR is supposed to address. I will never understand this trend in FF to make RBs so incoherently valuable as opposed to all the other positions out there.

My main league actually rewards 8 points for a receiving TD vs. 6 for a rushing TD in addition to being PPR, so a receiving TD is always worth at least 9 points. Even with this adjustment, RB's are still FAR more valuable than WR's (top RB's go for almost 3x the value of top WR's in the auction draft) because of their scarcity.If, like the vast majority of leagues, your league values RB's far more than WR's, the argument for having receiving TD's worth more is to try to bring things more in balance. Increasing rushing TD's to 7 points would just make things even more unbalanced -- Do you want the whole first 2 rounds (or top 20 highest value players in an auction) to be RB's?

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

 

[cobalt_27]

I see that point, cosmonaut.But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

Why draft any position other than RB? Serious question. Why not just have a Fantasy RB League? Seems like that's all that's happening, anyway.

you are not contributing to this discussion - nor are you aiding along the discussion.7/rush and pass TDs does NOT make RBs insanely more valuable - it brings them BACK towards WRs/TEs in PPR values. AND, last time I checked, ALL receiving TDs become 7 points in a PPR league - TEs and RBs included - pass-catching RBs are already INSANELY valuable in a PPR league.

Marc, thanks for being the arbiter of what's contributing and what's not. But, just know that, in making light of this proposition, I'm extending an important point that seems to be lost on a lot of the staff here at FBG. More specifically, the trend towards RB dominance seems rather absurd to a good many of us. The whole PURPOSE of PPR is to level the playing field of WRs, mostly. Unfortunately, there are enough good RBs who catch 50-80 passes that the effect isn't realized. As to your point that all TDs become 7 points, it doesn't matter because RBs still score the bulk of them, particularly in the top-20 rankings, which is what we're talking about, mostly.Sorry if you see this as antagonistic to your view. But, I still maintain you should prolly just arrange your league to draft RBs only. What's the point of drafting other positions? Isn't it a farce, when you really get down to it?

 

[Marc Levin]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

Yeah, and giving them 7 on a TD moves back towards the imbalance that PPR is supposed to address. I will never understand this trend in FF to make RBs so incoherently valuable as opposed to all the other positions out there.

My main league actually rewards 8 points for a receiving TD vs. 6 for a rushing TD in addition to being PPR, so a receiving TD is always worth at least 9 points. Even with this adjustment, RB's are still FAR more valuable than WR's (top RB's go for almost 3x the value of top WR's in the auction draft) because of their scarcity.If, like the vast majority of leagues, your league values RB's far more than WR's, the argument for having receiving TD's worth more is to try to bring things more in balance. Increasing rushing TD's to 7 points would just make things even more unbalanced -- Do you want the whole first 2 rounds (or top 20 highest value players in an auction) to be RB's?

as I showed above, that is perception against true value.If you want to run the VBD numbers on 9 points per rec. TD versus 6 for rush TDs, you will see what I mean.

 

[cobalt_27]

Do you want the whole first 2 rounds (or top 20 highest value players in an auction) to be RB's?

Just look at some of the drafts these leagues put out. The obvious answer is "yes."

 

[Marc Levin]

I see that point, cosmonaut.But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

Why draft any position other than RB? Serious question. Why not just have a Fantasy RB League? Seems like that's all that's happening, anyway.

you are not contributing to this discussion - nor are you aiding along the discussion.7/rush and pass TDs does NOT make RBs insanely more valuable - it brings them BACK towards WRs/TEs in PPR values. AND, last time I checked, ALL receiving TDs become 7 points in a PPR league - TEs and RBs included - pass-catching RBs are already INSANELY valuable in a PPR league.

Marc, thanks for being the arbiter of what's contributing and what's not. But, just know that, in making light of this proposition, I'm extending an important point that seems to be lost on a lot of the staff here at FBG. More specifically, the trend towards RB dominance seems rather absurd to a good many of us. The whole PURPOSE of PPR is to level the playing field of WRs, mostly. Unfortunately, there are enough good RBs who catch 50-80 passes that the effect isn't realized. As to your point that all TDs become 7 points, it doesn't matter because RBs still score the bulk of them, particularly in the top-20 rankings, which is what we're talking about, mostly.Sorry if you see this as antagonistic to your view. But, I still maintain you should prolly just arrange your league to draft RBs only. What's the point of drafting other positions? Isn't it a farce, when you really get down to it?

See my VBD calculation above.There is no way to get around the top-5 to top-7 picks being RBs, but after that, all bets are off.

 

[cobalt_27]

Yeah, just what we need...to make Running Backs more valuable than they already are in your leagues. Will you people ever stop this?

PPR already devalues RBs - go run the VBD numbers in a start-3 PPR league.

Yeah, and giving them 7 on a TD moves back towards the imbalance that PPR is supposed to address. I will never understand this trend in FF to make RBs so incoherently valuable as opposed to all the other positions out there.

My main league actually rewards 8 points for a receiving TD vs. 6 for a rushing TD in addition to being PPR, so a receiving TD is always worth at least 9 points. Even with this adjustment, RB's are still FAR more valuable than WR's (top RB's go for almost 3x the value of top WR's in the auction draft) because of their scarcity.If, like the vast majority of leagues, your league values RB's far more than WR's, the argument for having receiving TD's worth more is to try to bring things more in balance. Increasing rushing TD's to 7 points would just make things even more unbalanced -- Do you want the whole first 2 rounds (or top 20 highest value players in an auction) to be RB's?

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

Yup. And, that seems just fine to me.

 

[Marc Levin]

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

cobolt - I'd like to hear a REAL contribution from you rather than a "gee, I hate RBs in drafts" comment or a sarcastic "why not have a league of all RBs?"That is NOT contributing to this discussion in any meaningful way.

 

[cobalt_27]

I see that point, cosmonaut.But why, across the board, do receivers - not just WRs, but receiving TDs by ANY player - RB or TE included - get that extra point?If rushing TDs = 7, all non-QB players have an equal number of points for TDs.In fact, why not make passing TDs AND rushing TDs worth 7 and receiving TDs worth 6?

Why draft any position other than RB? Serious question. Why not just have a Fantasy RB League? Seems like that's all that's happening, anyway.

you are not contributing to this discussion - nor are you aiding along the discussion.7/rush and pass TDs does NOT make RBs insanely more valuable - it brings them BACK towards WRs/TEs in PPR values. AND, last time I checked, ALL receiving TDs become 7 points in a PPR league - TEs and RBs included - pass-catching RBs are already INSANELY valuable in a PPR league.

Marc, thanks for being the arbiter of what's contributing and what's not. But, just know that, in making light of this proposition, I'm extending an important point that seems to be lost on a lot of the staff here at FBG. More specifically, the trend towards RB dominance seems rather absurd to a good many of us. The whole PURPOSE of PPR is to level the playing field of WRs, mostly. Unfortunately, there are enough good RBs who catch 50-80 passes that the effect isn't realized. As to your point that all TDs become 7 points, it doesn't matter because RBs still score the bulk of them, particularly in the top-20 rankings, which is what we're talking about, mostly.Sorry if you see this as antagonistic to your view. But, I still maintain you should prolly just arrange your league to draft RBs only. What's the point of drafting other positions? Isn't it a farce, when you really get down to it?

See my VBD calculation above.There is no way to get around the top-5 to top-7 picks being RBs, but after that, all bets are off.

Yes, there is. Make a concerted effort in your rules to equilibrate the positions via scoring system changes and lineup makeup. Otherwise, you're living in an RB-only world.

 

[cobalt_27]

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

cobolt - I'd like to hear a REAL contribution from you rather than a "gee, I hate RBs in drafts" comment or a sarcastic "why not have a league of all RBs?"That is NOT contributing to this discussion in any meaningful way.

Geebus, Marc. Grow some skin. You're proposing a rules change, the premise of which I'm challenging. Sorry you're taking this so personally.

 

[Marc Levin]

another useless comment.

Even with starting only 1 RB, the top-6/top-7 in ANY league will be RBs.

Run the VBD numbers.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

p.s. - I'm not arguing against anything. I am trying to find out WHY we value receiving TDs a point more in PPR leagues.

Um, because there was a reception?Seriously Marc - if Westbrook catches the ball and gains a yard, he gets 0.1 in typical scoring, 1.1 in PPR. He gets the "bonus" of 1 point. If that yard happened to be the one in front of the goal line, add 6 for either event.They are two separate events.

 

[Marc Levin]

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

cobolt - I'd like to hear a REAL contribution from you rather than a "gee, I hate RBs in drafts" comment or a sarcastic "why not have a league of all RBs?"That is NOT contributing to this discussion in any meaningful way.

Geebus, Marc. Grow some skin. You're proposing a rules change, the premise of which I'm challenging. Sorry you're taking this so personally.

i have my thick skin - I asked for you to make a REAL contribution rather than useless one-liners without any reasoning behind them.That is not too much to ask.

 

[NoFBinLA]

I never said anyone is "wrong" nor do I challenge the explanation - I understand HOW the scoring is done - I am trying to understand WHY we value a receiving TD one more point, when a simple fix seems to exist.

See, that's the crux though -- several in this thread do not feel there is anything to fix. You seem convinced there has to be.I'm not saying it's an unworthy discussion. Far from it, I think that given the lack of fixed rules in FFB overall, there is ample room for discussion.

But some of this discussion is based on two totally different perceptions about what consitutes the scoring of recieving TD in a PPR league - some feel the catch and the Td are seperate events. Some - yourself included - do not.

Both sides of the discussion have merit, IMO.

And I guess the other question is -- is there a difference between merely catching a TD in the end zone as opposed to catching a ball at the 50, juking several safeties and dodging defenders on your way to the same end zone? And if you're monkeying with scoring, do you take that into account to?

 

[Marc Levin]

p.s. - I'm not arguing against anything. I am trying to find out WHY we value receiving TDs a point more in PPR leagues.

Um, because there was a reception?Seriously Marc - if Westbrook catches the ball and gains a yard, he gets 0.1 in typical scoring, 1.1 in PPR. He gets the "bonus" of 1 point. If that yard happened to be the one in front of the goal line, add 6 for either event.They are two separate events.

I understand the "how" I want to know the "why" as to TDs specifically - outside of TDs I get the PPR - it normalizes WRs against RBs - WRs miught touch the ball only 8 times in a game and have a GREAT game.RBs will touch the ball upwards of 20 times.I understand the PPR concept in terms of yardage. I don't understand it in terms of the TDs. And as I pointed out, making rush/pass TDs worth 7 and leaving rec. TDs worth 6 normalizes the first 60 players in the draft.

 

[cobalt_27]

another useless comment.Even with starting only 1 RB, the top-6/top-7 in ANY league will be RBs. Run the VBD numbers.

Tough day? Get over it. I don't think all would share in your opinion that it's a useless comment. Maybe you've got your fingers in your ears and don't want to listen, but a lot of FF guys complain about the reliance on the RB, and your proposal only adds to this. I'm sorry if this offends you. For whatever reason it does.

 

[Marc Levin]

But some of this discussion is based on two totally different perceptions about what consitutes the scoring of recieving TD in a PPR league - some feel the catch and the Td are seperate events. Some - yourself included - do not.

True - I do not see them as separate events when a TD occurs because, in pure value based terms, it creates an extra point for a receiving TD.The probability of "a catch" (which is worth a point plus yardage) is significantly different from the probabilty of "a catch going for a TD" (which is worth 6 plus 1 plus yardage)

 

[cobalt_27]

If you really want to de-value RB's, starting only one is the only way to go IMO. Increasing scoring for other positions to offset RB's only results in 160-138 type fantasy games.

cobolt - I'd like to hear a REAL contribution from you rather than a "gee, I hate RBs in drafts" comment or a sarcastic "why not have a league of all RBs?"That is NOT contributing to this discussion in any meaningful way.

Geebus, Marc. Grow some skin. You're proposing a rules change, the premise of which I'm challenging. Sorry you're taking this so personally.

i have my thick skin - I asked for you to make a REAL contribution rather than useless one-liners without any reasoning behind them.That is not too much to ask.

And, my real reasoning is that you're reverting back to an over-valuation of a position that already sees an advantage over the others. What's wrong this as a point other than that it runs contrary to what you'd like to see stroking your POV?

 

[Marc Levin]

another useless comment.Even with starting only 1 RB, the top-6/top-7 in ANY league will be RBs. Run the VBD numbers.

Tough day? Get over it. I don't think all would share in your opinion that it's a useless comment. Maybe you've got your fingers in your ears and don't want to listen, but a lot of FF guys complain about the reliance on the RB, and your proposal only adds to this. I'm sorry if this offends you. For whatever reason it does.

OK - how do you propose to make the top-6/top-7 NOT be RBs.Fingers are out - I'm all ears.

 

[Marc Levin]

p.s. -= that has NOTHING to do with my ?, but I would like to hear the response.

 

[Marc Levin]

And, my real reasoning is that you're reverting back to an over-valuation of a position that already sees an advantage over the others. What's wrong this as a point other than that it runs contrary to what you'd like to see stroking your POV?

because the numbers don't support your response - so, justify your position.

 

[ceo3west]

And, my real reasoning is that you're reverting back to an over-valuation of a position that already sees an advantage over the others. What's wrong this as a point other than that it runs contrary to what you'd like to see stroking your POV?

because the numbers don't support your response - so, justify your position.

 

[CalBear]

Incidentally, when I made receivcing TDs worth 6 and rushing and passing TDs worth 7, under our projections for this past year, we have this for the top-24:1 Larry Johnson2 LaDainian Tomlinson3 Tiki Barber4 Shaun Alexander5 Steven JacksonExcept for the dearth of QBs, this looks pretty well balanced.

The top 5 players being RBs looks pretty well balanced?

 

[cobalt_27]

another useless comment.Even with starting only 1 RB, the top-6/top-7 in ANY league will be RBs. Run the VBD numbers.

Tough day? Get over it. I don't think all would share in your opinion that it's a useless comment. Maybe you've got your fingers in your ears and don't want to listen, but a lot of FF guys complain about the reliance on the RB, and your proposal only adds to this. I'm sorry if this offends you. For whatever reason it does.

OK - how do you propose to make the top-6/top-7 NOT be RBs.Fingers are out - I'm all ears.

In short, score yardage differently for ea. position. In our league, we use decimal scoring, which, while tedious for some, helps equilibrate the positions. TDs are scored equally (none of this totally insane 4pt pass TD bs). We also start 1QB, 1RB, 2WR, which leans much less weight on RBs. Basically, the distribution of points scored for QBs and RBs are virtually indistinguishable. WRs lag only a bit behind, with the exception of the middle group (12-30), which I think is reflective of little variability in performance in those mid-ranges when compared to the other positions. But, again, I'd like to hear someone from the RB-league POV express some admission of some sort that they've got an imbalance to begin with. Most resort to their VBD calculations as though they're gospel and reflect the only scoring system possible (won't mention any names here). VBD works well, of course, but it's all about what's being inputted in the system, and if you keep inserting a flawed...er....imbalanced system, you're going to get that as the output. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy that keeps getting preached here on the boards, much of which propagated by the FBG staff. Just my .02.

 

[cobalt_27]

And, my real reasoning is that you're reverting back to an over-valuation of a position that already sees an advantage over the others. What's wrong this as a point other than that it runs contrary to what you'd like to see stroking your POV?

because the numbers don't support your response - so, justify your position.

Right. You enter the numbers of your system that is designed to give RBs the edge, and to no one's surprise, you keep coming up with that as the outcome. Shocking.

 

[cobalt_27]

Incidentally, when I made receivcing TDs worth 6 and rushing and passing TDs worth 7, under our projections for this past year, we have this for the top-24:1 Larry Johnson2 LaDainian Tomlinson3 Tiki Barber4 Shaun Alexander5 Steven JacksonExcept for the dearth of QBs, this looks pretty well balanced.

The top 5 players being RBs looks pretty well balanced?

Well, at least it's not the first 15.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

This is going round and round.

1 PPR.

6 for a TD.

You want to "normalize" it by giving 7 for a rush TD, adding more value to RBs (which counters the original goal of WRs getting a PPR). So that's one reason to not give 7 for a rushing TD (besides the arguments already stated to this point).

Now go the other direction - make the TDs worth 5. Now I've devalued WRs, again against the goal of PPR, so back to square 1.

Finally say I don't give a PPR for a TD reception.

If I try and do this in the preseason and try to predict stats, it will make it that much harder to predict player performances. I have to specify what kinds of TDs each player will get, rushing or receiving, which will mess with predictions.

Bottom line - a catch is a catch, and if you're lucky enough for it to be in the end zone,+1.

Then again - PPFDR.

 

[Marc Levin]

again, for those that missed it:

top-20 became 10 RBs, 8 WRs, 1 QB, 1 TE

next 40 became 14 RBs, 19 WRs, 4 QBs, and 3 TEs

Looks very well balanced to me through the first five rounds - and there are exactly 24 RBs and 27 WRs in a 1/2/3/1/1/1 league set up.

Not sure how RBs get overvalue when rushing and passing TDs are worth 7 and receiving TDs are worth 6. I am surprised there were not a couple more QBs in the top-60.

 

[Marc Levin]

Incidentally, when I made receivcing TDs worth 6 and rushing and passing TDs worth 7, under our projections for this past year, we have this for the top-24:1 Larry Johnson2 LaDainian Tomlinson3 Tiki Barber4 Shaun Alexander5 Steven JacksonExcept for the dearth of QBs, this looks pretty well balanced.

The top 5 players being RBs looks pretty well balanced?

Of course not - but without adjusting to anb insane degree,m it is impossible to prevent that.The top-20, however, is extremely well balanced.