VBD Analysis (1 Viewer)

[tytyty]

Ok, first I am Kijana Carter when it comes to comuter skills. What I wanted to do was take my year ending 2005 fantasy points from my league and make a VBD sheet. This was to see if I would of had the Perfect Draft last year, what should i have done....

So I used worst starter method-- 10 QB, 20 RB, 30WR, 10 TE,K,DT. 10 Team league. Scoring pretty simple with rewards when RB catches, QB runs and so on.

The question I have is would it be a prudent move to use this list to draft positions for this year. Meaning, my 1st four picks should have been RB which is normal. The 5th pick should have been Steve Smith. Now I am not saying I would draft him in particular but should I use that as a guideline to take a WR there? I know that this year and last will be different but it shows that 3 WR should have been taken in the top 10 last year and kind of blows up the RB at all costs method. I am just thinking I should take the list in position order that came out and then plug the players in from there

Here is how the VBD came out using actual 2005 FP for my league.

Alexander, Shaun RB SEA 366 220 1 RB

Tomlinson, LaDainian RB SD 354 208 2 RB

Johnson, Larry RB KC 335 189 3 RB

Barber, Tiki RB NYG 311 165 4 RB

Smith, Steve WR CAR 246 126 5 WR

James, Edgerrin RB ARI 270 124 6 RB

Portis, Clinton RB WAS 243 97 7 RB

Moss, Santana WR WAS 211 91 8 WR

Gates, Antonio TE SD 172 87 9 TE

Harrison, Marvin WR IND 206 86 10 WR

Jordan, LaMont RB OAK 231 85 11 RB

Palmer, Carson QB CIN 334 84 12 QB

Galloway, Joey WR TB 204 84 13 WR

Fitzgerald, Larry WR ARI 204 84 14 WR

Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 224 78 15 RB

Johnson, Chad WR CIN 196 76 16 WR

Holt, Torry WR STL 195 75 17 WR

Boldin, Anquan WR ARI 185 65 18 WR

Jackson, Steven RB STL 205 59 19 RB

Ward, Hines WR PIT 179 59 20 WR

Chambers, Chris WR MIA 178 58 21 WR

Glenn, Terry WR DAL 177 57 22 WR

Anderson, Mike RB BAL 199 53 23 RB

Shockey, Jeremy TE NYG 138 53 24 TE

Brady, Tom QB NE 300 50 25 QB

Heap, Todd TE BAL 135 50 26 TE

Manning, Peyton QB IND 297 47 27 QB

Burress, Plaxico WR NYG 167 47 28 WR

Jones, Thomas RB CHI 188 42 29 RB

Moss, Randy WR OAK 158 38 30 WR

Davis, Domanick RB HOU 181 35 31 RB

Crumpler, Alge TE ATL 119 34 32 TE

Driver, Donald WR GB 150 30 34 WR

McCardell, Keenan WR SD 148 28 35 WR

Manning, Eli QB NYG 275 25 36 QB

Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 275 25 37 QB

Witten, Jason TE DAL 110 25 38 TE

Dunn, Warrick RB ATL 170 24 39 RB

Houshmandzadeh, T.J. WR CIN 144 24 40 WR

...and so on

 

[tytyty]

try the week day crowd here

 

[CalBear]

You're missing a few important pieces to draw any conclusions from your analysis. First, you need to look at more than one year. Second, you need to look at not only where the players ended up, but where they started; Steve Smith was not taken as the #1 WR, so the fact that he finished as #5 overall by VBD doesn't mean the #1 WR should be taken as #5 overall. (It also doesn't mean that the #12 WR, or whatever Smith was last year, should be taken as #5 overall).

There is probably a stronger correlation at RB and QB than WR of the top projections and top finishes.

 

[tomarken]

Some thoughts...

I don't know if you feel like putting in this much effort, but you should probably do the same exact thing for the past 3, 4, 5 seasons to see if this is always the case. Maybe last year was just an anomaly. However, if 3 of the top 10 are WR's every year, then you may be on to something.

The other problem is deciding which player to take. Looking at past seasons might show that the 5th highest scoring player each year is a WR, so you may be tempted to take a WR at #5. But which one? I mean, did anyone think going into last season that Steve Smith was going to be the top scoring WR in the entire league? You may have the right idea, but get the wrong player and it blows up in your face.

I think it's a well-intentioned effort, but you may lead yourself down some crazy paths if you try to rely too much on the past. That being said, there does seem to be a glut of serviceable RB's available in rounds 3 and 4 this year (especially in a 10-team league) so if you want to roll the dice with some WR's in the first one or two rounds nobody could fault you for that. A lot depends on what pick you get. In general though it takes a little of that gambling spirit to win a FF championship, I think.

 

[Bri]

drafts are very very similar from year to year

For example-

Years ago Warner was an early pick not so unlike Peyton Manning now. First round seems to always be 11 or 12 RBs.

Things evolve a little but not much:

Last year I felt I did real well in the draft by trading up into the 2nd to get some top WRs while people were grabbing RBs. I wasn't alone and noticed several folks here doing the same. This year there's a bunch of WRs going in the second, little more than normal. I do remember back when Cris Carter and Moss were on the Vikes there was a handful of WRs going in the 2nd so that's happenned before too. I've been playing long enough to remember Herman Moore as a 2nd round pick and Bruce too.

Gates love has replaced Tony G love ummm QBs always seem to have value later in the draft but some will be taken early.

There's guys that are kinda amusing like Marvin Harrison and Trent Green that I'd swear get picked in the same spot no matter how old or young they are or how well they do.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The 5th pick should have been Steve Smith. Now I am not saying I would draft him in particular but should I use that as a guideline to take a WR there? I know that this year and last will be different but it shows that 3 WR should have been taken in the top 10 last year and kind of blows up the RB at all costs method.

If I could draft WR1 for 2006, I'd certainly take him with the 6th pick this year. I'd also take WR2 and WR3 in the first round.Unfortunately, since we can't draft "the top fantasy wide receiver for 2006" and have to draft people like "Torry Holt" or "Steve Smith", there's not much utility in your exercise. My next article is tangentially related to this, so you might find it interesting.

 

[GregR_2]

Two things. First to echo what Chase said, you need to take into account that you aren't drafting the WR1, you're drafting a guy who has a chance of being the WR1. Same with any other position. You need to take that chance part into account.

Second, it is good to see where the value actually did exist last year. But that doesn't mean you should be drafting according to last year's VBD cheatsheet (or this year's for that matter).

You have to remember your goal is to come out of the draft with the best team possible. That means maximizing your value at each of your picks, and getting guys who are more likely to perform ahead of where they are taken.

The VBD cheatsheet does a good job of reflecting the value IN THE SUPPLY of players available and the demand of your starting lineup. But that isn't the only component of value when we talk about maximizing the value of your team. There is also another component of value for your team based on the demand of other teams in the draft for that position. To put it succinctly, even apart from starting lineup requirements the more that a position is in demand in the draft the more value that position has to your team at that time in the draft.

A simple example formed to make it very obvious would be the following... no one in your league takes a WR until round 5. There is no demand for them until then. Taking your WR1 in round 1 would be a low value move to you since you could have gotten that same WR in the 4th round and used your 1st round pick on a player at a position that is getting depleted.

So in addition to what Chase said, you also need to realize that a VBD cheatsheet is not something you should draft straight off of. It's worthwhile to know that WRs can be as valuable as 1st round RBs, but you aren't necessarily maximizing your team if you take them there.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I think Chase & Greg have pretty much covered it. It's somewhat counterintuitive, but you'll probably be drafting players "out of order"; that is, you may be taking guys earlier with lower values than some you take later because of the actions of your fellow drafters.

Appropos of nothing really, but has anyone else notice KFFL calling value based drafting "the loser's strategy"? I saw it in an e-mail alert I just got on Portis advertising their drafting tool.

 

[tytyty]

The 5th pick should have been Steve Smith. Now I am not saying I would draft him in particular but should I use that as a guideline to take a WR there? I know that this year and last will be different but it shows that 3 WR should have been taken in the top 10 last year and kind of blows up the RB at all costs method.

If I could draft WR1 for 2006, I'd certainly take him with the 6th pick this year. I'd also take WR2 and WR3 in the first round.Unfortunately, since we can't draft "the top fantasy wide receiver for 2006" and have to draft people like "Torry Holt" or "Steve Smith", there's not much utility in your exercise. My next article is tangentially related to this, so you might find it interesting.

Cool, look forward to it!