Tiers/Buckets (1 Viewer)

[Thoriniii]

In trying to tier players, I find myself wondering if I have placed the line in the right spot. I have been using points to tier the players, but in many cases the difference in points is not all that large. I realize that this tells me tha tthe players are all about the same, but there must be some logical way to do this.

As an example, one player pool goes 1 - 20:

249

210

206

205

195

193

192

191

188

187

187

185

182

179

178

168

167

164

162

161

I see the 249 guy all by himself. I would tend to put a break between 205 and 195, but then I second guess myself because this is less than 1 pt/gm. After that, it is difficult for me because there are so few points difference between one player and the next, and the next thing I know, I have 16-guys in the third tier.

Is anyone interested in trying to straighten me out?

 

[MLBrandow]

your problem here is analyzing numberes without guys next to them.

 

[Tom Servo]

your problem here is analyzing numberes without guys next to them.

 

[thecardiackid]

your problem here is analyzing numberes without guys next to them.

Not sure why that's but Agreed. While attempting to tier w/ just the basic stat projection #s may be considered a more arbitrary way to group players (trying to take the potential bias out), you HAVE to use non-numerical factors for cut-offs.

i.e. new system/coach, new qb, potential competition/RBBC, and even past injury history.

I typically take my basic stat projections (based more on past performance vs. new expectations) and then use a consistent +/- "add-on" system to help further define the process. (-10 for most new coaching *not DET this year*, +10 for improved talent/O line around them, +5 for great SOS, etc.) This part should help to more easily distinguish your tiers, and is purely opinion based. But in reality, so is guestimating original 06 stat production.

Nothing's perfect, but this seems to work for me.

 

[Chaos Commish]

249

210

206

205

195

193

192

191

188

187

187

185

182

179

178

168

167

164

162

161

 

[Armando]

Is anyone interested in trying to straighten me out?

Yes, most people have different scoring systems. Instead of us trying to straighten you out, how about you just look at the million of '06 player ranking threads and go from there? Hope that helps.

 

[Thoriniii]

Is anyone interested in trying to straighten me out?

Yes, most people have different scoring systems. Instead of us trying to straighten you out, how about you just look at the million of '06 player ranking threads and go from there? Hope that helps.

Because there are a million ranking threads out there. I am trying to figure out which players are roughly equivalent. I find that so many rankings tend to confuse the issue, rather than clarify it.

 

[Thoriniii]

your problem here is analyzing numberes without guys next to them.

I gave only the numbers for a couple of reasons. The first is that i did not want this to appear as an assistant coaches thread. The second is that it is the numbers that lead me to doubt my teiring. Say I have decided, based on names, that one player belongs in group A, and the other in group B, but Dodds lists them 3-points apart, over the ENTIRE SEASON, I doubt what my preconceived notions tell me.

 

[MLBrandow]

FYI: I presume that is the Yahoo! standard redraft public league scoring sheet for the top-20 RBs of 2005. I was looking at that last week or so and it looked familiar. If not, this information is probably useless to you.

Using the same antsports.com 12-team TEreq/flex No-PPR redraft rankings and not injecting my own bias:

IMO = belongs at least one tier up / down

First Name Last Name Pos Team ADP High Low Standard

Deviation Drafts

Stand-alone beast

1. Larry Johnson RB KCC 1.01.47 1.01 1.03 00.76 32

studs

2. LaDainian Tomlinson RB SDC 1.02.06 1.01 1.03 00.67 32

3. Shaun Alexander RB SEA 1.02.48 1.01 1.03 00.72 31

4. Clinton Portis RB WAS 1.04.42 1.04 1.07 00.72 31

RB1s

5. Tiki Barber RB NYG 1.04.87 1.04 1.06 00.72 31

6. Steven Jackson RB STL 1.07.03 1.05 1.09 01.28 32

7. Edgerrin James RB ARI 1.07.06 1.05 1.09 01.12 31

8. LaMont Jordan RB OAK 1.07.90 1.05 2.02 01.60 31

9. Ronnie Brown RB MIA 1.09.47 1.05 2.01 01.96 30

10. Rudi Johnson RB CIN 1.10.79 1.05 2.03 02.25 28

11. Carnell Williams RB TBB 1.11.60 1.08 2.07 02.37 30

12. Domanick Davis RB HOU 2.02.59 1.10 2.10 03.12 29

13. Brian Westbrook RB PHI 2.02.97 1.10 2.09 02.66 30

14. Willis McGahee RB BUF 2.04.71 1.11 2.10 03.16 28

RB2s

15. Julius Jones RB DAL 2.07.90 2.01 3.04 03.84 30

16. Kevin Jones RB DET 2.11.93 2.03 3.08 04.02 29

17. Jamal Lewis RB BAL 3.05.97 2.04 4.11 07.49 30

18. Willie Parker RB PIT 3.07.31 2.11 4.06 04.63 32

19. Chester Taylor RB MIN 3.07.84 2.07 4.06 05.60 31

RB2 caliber

20. Reggie Bush RB FA 3.08.21 2.06 4.10 06.73 29

21. Reuben Droughns RB CLE 3.11.16 2.12 4.11 05.94 32

22. Warrick Dunn RB ATL 4.02.32 3.02 5.02 05.69 31

23. Corey Dillon RB NEP 4.03.42 2.07 5.10 10.00 31

24. DeShaun Foster RB CAR 4.08.55 3.02 5.12 07.51 31

25. Tatum Bell RB DEN 4.08.94 2.07 5.06 07.13 31

26. Deuce McAllister RB NOS 5.04.04 3.07 6.12 09.10 28

27. Joseph Addai RB FA 5.07.03 3.09 9.01 11.40 31

28. Thomas Jones RB CHI 5.07.04 3.09 7.09 10.53 27

RB3

29. Cedric Benson RB CHI 5.09.19 4.03 7.01 09.29 31

30. Ahman Green RB GBP 5.12.70 4.05 7.11 10.58 30

31. Dominic Rhodes RB IND 6.05.30 4.12 7.11 09.53 27

32. Curtis Martin RB NYJ 6.08.31 5.08 7.12 08.13 26

33. Fred Taylor RB JAC 6.10.90 4.12 9.02 10.76 29

34. Ron Dayne RB DEN 7.02.10 5.02 9.03 11.99 30

High risk RB2 caliber

35. Chris Brown RB TEN 7.03.58 5.01 9.12 13.27 24

36. Frank Gore RB SFO 7.08.72 6.04 9.05 09.00 25

37. DeAngelo Williams RB FA 7.09.25 4.04 10.08 17.09 32

38. Laurence Maroney RB FA 8.06.81 6.03 12.05 15.84 32

39. Lendale White RB FA 9.02.00 5.06 11.12 18.18 31

RB4 Backups/Bye-Week plug-ins

40. Marion III Barber RB DAL 9.05.84 7.01 12.09 13.53 25

41. Sam Gado RB GBP 9.07.14 6.11 11.12 14.25 22

42. Kevan Barlow RB SFO 9.07.95 8.05 11.04 09.30 20

43. Chris Perry RB CIN 10.01.11 8.01 14.04 16.05 18

44. Greg Jones RB JAC 10.07.31 7.12 14.07 17.35 29

45. T.J. Duckett RB ATL 10.07.53 8.12 12.12 12.79 19

46. Mike Anderson RB BAL 11.04.11 8.08 14.08 16.78 27

47. Priest Holmes RB KCC 12.04.72 10.10 14.05 14.44 18

48. Mewelde Moore RB MIN 12.04.89 10.01 16.03 16.94 27

49. Ryan Moats RB PHI 12.05.09 9.12 16.08 20.79 23

50. Najeh Davenport RB GBP 12.12.11 10.05 15.08 20.09 19

51. Duce Staley RB PIT 13.02.12 6.12 16.01 24.73 26

52. Travis Henry RB TEN 13.03.73 11.08 15.01 13.01 15

53. Jerious Norwood RB FA 13.07.18 11.09 16.03 16.78 11

54. Cedric Houston RB NYJ 14.07.22 11.06 16.07 18.35 18

55. Michael Pittman RB TBB 14.07.39 12.04 16.10 15.62 18

56. Michael Turner RB SDC 14.09.35 12.01 16.10 14.61 23

57. Brandon Jacobs RB NYG 15.01.29 12.12 16.12 15.34 14

58. Ladell Betts RB WAS 15.04.43 12.06 16.12 18.03 7

59. Maurice Drew RB FA 15.05.20 12.11 16.04 17.14 5

60. Maurice Morris RB SEA 15.05.33 13.09 16.11 13.16 6

Maybe this is more what you are looking for? Hope this helps in any case. Better than just being at.

Say I have decided, based on names, that one player belongs in group A, and the other in group B, but Dodds lists them 3-points apart, over the ENTIRE SEASON, I doubt what my preconceived notions tell me.

*edited for clarity.This is where your "sleepers" and general draft value comes from.

IMO, you use that chart above and see CMart and LenDale White way the hell down there. But I see them putting up better numbers than Julius Jones, Chester Taylor and Willie Parker.

While their projected pt value is less than 1 PPG difference, their ADP is tiered exactly like you said, which is why you are confusing yourself.

You're basically looking at an answer sheet and going "how the hell can this be the right question."

Also, you have to remember that that subtleness spread across QB, RB, RB, WR, WR, WR, TE, K, DEF plus a potential flex is 8 or 9 guys.

So while each player only gives you that 1 PPG difference or so, you're end result is the 8-10 pt victory margins week in and week out.

Hope this helps

 

[nerangers]

161 + 16 = 177

177 + 16 = 193

193 + 16 = 209

209 + 16 = 225

225 + 16 = 241 (245)

I use 16 based on a 16 week fantasy season, where the player will get you an additional point a week. I have also used 32 pts as my cutoff point.

 

[Tick]

249

210

206

205

195

193

192

191

188

187

187

185

182

179

178

168

167

164

162

161

Take the top player in a tier, subtract 16 points, look for a reasonable break.

 

[Tom Servo]

your problem here is analyzing numberes without guys next to them.

I gave only the numbers for a couple of reasons. The first is that i did not want this to appear as an assistant coaches thread. The second is that it is the numbers that lead me to doubt my teiring. Say I have decided, based on names, that one player belongs in group A, and the other in group B, but Dodds lists them 3-points apart, over the ENTIRE SEASON, I doubt what my preconceived notions tell me.

No attempt at laughing at you or anyone else ; I saw humor in the remark because we've all read countless threads where people are blindly favor a player or players and that would drive their tiering. I struggle with tiering as well, so I'm just as interested as you are.

 

[Bri]

sorry if too simple but break the tiers up into 3s. If a player "has to" be part of the 3, and would make 4...well then do it. Just try real hard to start with 3 each tier. In my experience, it all seems to come clearer after that.

 

[nerangers]

I thought your tiers should be broken down based on performance. You are estimating that the people the fall into the same tier will get you about the same amount of production. Comes in handy when you are looking at bye week issues based on someone you already drafted. You should be able to grab one of the other players and get relatively close production out of them. Like I said, this is why I break it at 16 pts, 1 pt for each week played. (I put some notes off the net below)

Tiering, sometimes called bucketing or drop-offs, is a concept of grouping players together on a cheatsheet who have similar projected performance (projected fantasy points) for the upcoming season. This is not a new concept but still one that does not get as much notoriety as it should.

Grouping of players converts an otherwise typical cheatsheet in which players are ranked 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. to one that shows where the significant drop-offs in performance are expected at each position. It also highlights that there are X number of players at a position in group 1 (the top tier), Y players in group 2 (next tier), etc.

Pick a number like 16 and push the calcs. This is the science part. Then review the tiers and see if they provide a reasonable distribution of players. Not too small, but not too big either. Can you reasonably make a case that the bottom guy in a tier has the same ball park potential for the season as the top guy in the tier? Is there a noticeable drop in talent from players in one tier to the next? There could be some finessing required

The important thing about tiering is to not only look at it on a position-by-position basis, but rather the groups are going to help us decide which position to draft now, and which to wait on until later. It gives us an easy way to quickly assess supply and demand of players at each position. This is where the best benefit of tiering comes into play.