What is the SINGLE most important fantasy mistake? (1 Viewer)

[datonn]

Maximus,Yep, that's why we have places like the FBGs.com forums, since none of our spouses or co-workers could or should give a rip about the fact that we landed Chad Johnson in the fourth round of some guppy league....although I will venture a guess that nobody here really wants (or cares) to hear any of us regail about FFL titles in guppy-leagues or what type of rosters we respectively have in our anonymous sea of leagues. Nope, all I personally care about on this board (and I'm guessing most other guys feel the same) is what people who seriously care about FFL think about the latest player news, rookies and up-and-comers, draft strategies, dynasty vs. re-draft philosophies, etc. The more I play FFL though, the more bored I am getting with family/friend leagues where a guy who knows what he is doing can build a ridiculously-talented roster of all-pros. If you win, you think "big deal, I beat up on little leaguers". If you lose, it's embarrassing! It's like you're a Great White swimming in a gold fish pond. Get me out in the open sea, yo! I need some tuna or other sharks to feed on.......

 

[Burning Sensation]

i sure would take a kicker higher

some guys just don't get it

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept.

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.

Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

 

[LHUCKS]

Call it arrogance, but it's not as if these people know anything significant that I don't.

And it's not like you know anything significant that they don't.

Sure I do. This will sound bad, but I'm smarter than most people and thus have an easier time solving life's puzzles. Fantasy football is one of those puzzles. It's up to you to find the answers, but they're out there. Reasonable people can determine who is a good value in a draft and who is not by looking at a number of factors.

I look forward to the results of the EBF invitational. May the "smarter" man win

 

[Burning Sensation]

i sure would take a kicker higher

some guys just don't get it

you are certainly right about that.

 

[Repressed Dennis]

i sure would take a kicker higher

some guys just don't get it

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept.

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.

Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

But we're NOT talking about increasing passing TDs to 100 points each. We're talking about increasing the value of a passing TD by 2 (two) (2.00) points. The point I was trying to make, and Ivan and a couple of other folks were supporting, was that this is not enough to make the QB position inherently more valuable than it was before. The average # of passing TDs by a top-3 QB is not that much higher than the number of passing TDs by a QB ranking around 9-10. If a top-3 QB averages around 28 TDs per year, and a 9-10 QB averages around 23, then the rule change increases the QB scoring spread by 10 points, or about 0.625 points per game. This is NOT enough of a change, IMHO, to make one want to suddenly draft a QB in the second or third round, if you did not want to do so before.I suspect this won't be accepted as a good eoungh argument either, so I promise not to say anything more on this subject.

 

[Burning Sensation]

i sure would take a kicker higher

some guys just don't get it

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept.

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.

Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

But we're NOT talking about increasing passing TDs to 100 points each. We're talking about increasing the value of a passing TD by 2 (two) (2.00) points. The point I was trying to make, and Ivan and a couple of other folks were supporting, was that this is not enough to make the QB position inherently more valuable than it was before. The average # of passing TDs by a top-3 QB is not that much higher than the number of passing TDs by a QB ranking around 9-10. If a top-3 QB averages around 28 TDs per year, and a 9-10 QB averages around 23, then the rule change increases the QB scoring spread by 10 points, or about 0.625 points per game. This is NOT enough of a change, IMHO, to make one want to suddenly draft a QB in the second or third round, if you did not want to do so before.I suspect this won't be accepted as a good eoungh argument either, so I promise not to say anything more on this subject.

I do agree with you, i never said it was a big difference(check my original post, and each one after that ), and as a guy who drafts QB's late as well, a 1 or 2 point change in TD passes wouldnt change that fact much, if at all. What i did say in my original post was it DOES indeed make a difference though, no matter how small. Also, my original point was not how increasing points for TD passes seperates the Mannings from the Vicks, but how it inreases the value of QB's compared to other postions, no matter how small the increase.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Call it arrogance, but it's not as if these people know anything significant that I don't.

And it's not like you know anything significant that they don't.

Sure I do. This will sound bad, but I'm smarter than most people and thus have an easier time solving life's puzzles. Fantasy football is one of those puzzles. It's up to you to find the answers, but they're out there. Reasonable people can determine who is a good value in a draft and who is not by looking at a number of factors.

Okay obviously I disagree with your philosophy here, but I will give you major props for being honest about where you're coming from.

 

[EastBayFunk]

You basically said that people shouldn't trust their own rankings or instincts because there's no way they could know more than a consensus of "experts" (which will always be homogenized and made worthless by the high number of contributors). I disagree with that. The consensus is something to consider, but when it comes to difficult problems the most popular opinion is often incorrect. Sure, we all know that LaDainian Tomlinson will be a stud next year if healthy. He's an easy problem in the puzzle that is fantasy football. But what about the Denver RB's? Their situation is a difficult problem. You're not going to solve it simply by looking at the FBG rankings or by asking around here.

 

[Frank Black]

I think the biggest mistake is having a rigid refusal to pick up a 1 week wonder off waivers, if you can make a reasonable sacrifice to your roster. Maybe people don't want their ego brusied if the 1 week wonder flops, but the upside is incredible when guys like Boldin and D. Davis can be had for free and turn an above average team into a championship team.Athough FF can be lost in the draft, it is not WON in the draft. Be willing to pull the trigger on somebody on WWs. Almost everybody reaches for someone in the draft, what is the unwillingness to gamble on WW pickups?

 

[Porkchop]

1) Using Consensus Rankings as cheatsheets

2) Thinking your idiosyncratic judgement is superior to the collective judgement of thousands of other experts.

A person is smart. People are stupid.

 

[ninerfan]

Not utilizing Our Lords...

Our Lords, Our Lads, whatever. :rotflmao: I'd say drafting a QB too early.

 

[BigRed]

Sure I do. This will sound bad, but I'm smarter than most people and thus have an easier time solving life's puzzles.

You're right. It sounded bad. Might want to clarify.The average person who has the leisure time to spend all day on these boards is not lazy, they're generally fairly intelligent and have earned that leisure time. By the way, the average dude in the FFA can do amazing things. Just ask him.

Once again, shick is right. I can burp at will, and am pretty close to being able to do the same with farts.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The number 1 fantasy mistake is starting a player and he's one bye week. Can't think of anything more ignorant.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

1) Using Consensus Rankings as cheatsheets

2) Thinking your idiosyncratic judgement is superior to the collective judgement of thousands of other experts.

A person is smart. People are stupid.

Again, I can't help but disagree. To me, this seems very similar to the question of whether to invest in individual stocks or just buy an index fund. People who think they can outsmart the market (including thousands of people whose job it is to analyze stocks) buy individual stocks. People who realize that their valuation isn't any better than the similarly-educated masses go with index funds. In the financial realm, this is no contest, as most actively managed funds fail to beat their respective indexes; that's very strong evidence that one person's idiosyncratic judgement is NOT systematically better than the collective judgement of many.I've pretty much made up my mind that I'm going to try an experiment on this topic this year. At the end of the preseason I'll take the "expert" position rankings for all the FBGs staff and the MB, and use late August ADPs to calculate a "market" valuation of each player within his respective position. At the end of the year I'll compare the mean error for each expert (where the expert predicted a player would finish within his position vs. where the player actually finished) and the ADP. My hypothesis is that the number of "experts" who do better than the ADP will be about what one would expect from chance variation.

 

[ravnzfan]

i sure would take a kicker higher

some guys just don't get it

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept.

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.

Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

But we're NOT talking about increasing passing TDs to 100 points each. We're talking about increasing the value of a passing TD by 2 (two) (2.00) points. The point I was trying to make, and Ivan and a couple of other folks were supporting, was that this is not enough to make the QB position inherently more valuable than it was before. The average # of passing TDs by a top-3 QB is not that much higher than the number of passing TDs by a QB ranking around 9-10. If a top-3 QB averages around 28 TDs per year, and a 9-10 QB averages around 23, then the rule change increases the QB scoring spread by 10 points, or about 0.625 points per game. This is NOT enough of a change, IMHO, to make one want to suddenly draft a QB in the second or third round, if you did not want to do so before.I suspect this won't be accepted as a good eoungh argument either, so I promise not to say anything more on this subject.

I do agree with you, i never said it was a big difference(check my original post, and each one after that ), and as a guy who drafts QB's late as well, a 1 or 2 point change in TD passes wouldnt change that fact much, if at all. What i did say in my original post was it DOES indeed make a difference though, no matter how small. Also, my original point was not how increasing points for TD passes seperates the Mannings from the Vicks, but how it inreases the value of QB's compared to other postions, no matter how small the increase.

Burning one, et al...there is no question that changing one positions' scoring WILL have an effect on overall VBD rankings of players...most people sleep on the 1pt/reception rule, which changes the WR values A BUNCH--I would argue this point before the QB pointthe reason is that top WR's can grab as many as 110-120 per year, adding up to 120 points to their FF point total...the change from 4-6 in QB scoring would have MORE of an effect than a 1 point change, but not as much as the point for the receptions---as it would pertain the the overall rankings of playersCulpeppers' VBD value is HIGHER when TD's are 6---there is no argueing this...but it is for ALL QB's...maybe I wasn't clear on this beforewhat I've seen is guys go crazy when a scoring change is instituted like this---in my $$$ redraft 3 yrs ago, we increased QB TD's from 3 to 4 points....how about 4 QB's drafted in the 1st round and 7 thru 2?This, gentlemen, is the 'overvaluing' I've been eluding to...there is no question, if passing TD's suddenly were changed to 6 in my league, that I'd run the numbers and draft accordingly---but I GUARANTEE you that the QB's would be long gone before their VBD value dictates their being choosen......meaning I'd take the TGreen's of the world in the 6th and be VERY happy...again

 

[SteveWynne]

1) Using Consensus Rankings as cheatsheets

2) Thinking your idiosyncratic judgement is superior to the collective judgement of thousands of other experts.

A person is smart. People are stupid.

Again, I can't help but disagree. To me, this seems very similar to the question of whether to invest in individual stocks or just buy an index fund. People who think they can outsmart the market (including thousands of people whose job it is to analyze stocks) buy individual stocks. People who realize that their valuation isn't any better than the similarly-educated masses go with index funds. In the financial realm, this is no contest, as most actively managed funds fail to beat their respective indexes; that's very strong evidence that one person's idiosyncratic judgement is NOT systematically better than the collective judgement of many.I've pretty much made up my mind that I'm going to try an experiment on this topic this year. At the end of the preseason I'll take the "expert" position rankings for all the FBGs staff and the MB, and use late August ADPs to calculate a "market" valuation of each player within his respective position. At the end of the year I'll compare the mean error for each expert (where the expert predicted a player would finish within his position vs. where the player actually finished) and the ADP. My hypothesis is that the number of "experts" who do better than the ADP will be about what one would expect from chance variation.

I've been a VBD drafter for five years. I compile projections from a number of "expert" sources and weight them, but I barely modify the weighted projections (I am a statistician, not a scout). My approach is similar to an index fund, though I never would have made the analogy before I read your post, Ivan.I have the best overall record over those five years in both of my money leagues. Meanwhile, my index funds have made me solid but unspectacular money over the last 10 years.Because I have been using the "index approach," and I am pretty good at applying it, I have seen above average success. However, I have not won a Championship in five years across two meaningful leagues since I began following this approach. You'll never be filthy rich investing in index funds. And based on my own experience, you need to go outside the box, make your own gut (but informed) projections, and take risks to win FFL championships.

 

[-OZ-]

1) Using Consensus Rankings as cheatsheets

2) Thinking your idiosyncratic judgement is superior to the collective judgement of thousands of other experts.

A person is smart. People are stupid.

Again, I can't help but disagree. To me, this seems very similar to the question of whether to invest in individual stocks or just buy an index fund. People who think they can outsmart the market (including thousands of people whose job it is to analyze stocks) buy individual stocks. People who realize that their valuation isn't any better than the similarly-educated masses go with index funds. In the financial realm, this is no contest, as most actively managed funds fail to beat their respective indexes; that's very strong evidence that one person's idiosyncratic judgement is NOT systematically better than the collective judgement of many.I've pretty much made up my mind that I'm going to try an experiment on this topic this year. At the end of the preseason I'll take the "expert" position rankings for all the FBGs staff and the MB, and use late August ADPs to calculate a "market" valuation of each player within his respective position. At the end of the year I'll compare the mean error for each expert (where the expert predicted a player would finish within his position vs. where the player actually finished) and the ADP. My hypothesis is that the number of "experts" who do better than the ADP will be about what one would expect from chance variation.

I've been a VBD drafter for five years. I compile projections from a number of "expert" sources and weight them, but I barely modify the weighted projections (I am a statistician, not a scout). My approach is similar to an index fund, though I never would have made the analogy before I read your post, Ivan.I have the best overall record over those five years in both of my money leagues. Meanwhile, my index funds have made me solid but unspectacular money over the last 10 years.Because I have been using the "index approach," and I am pretty good at applying it, I have seen above average success. However, I have not won a Championship in five years across two meaningful leagues since I began following this approach. You'll never be filthy rich investing in index funds. And based on my own experience, you need to go outside the box, make your own gut (but informed) projections, and take risks to win FFL championships.

Very good points. It's pretty simple in the end. If you're content being average, think along with everyone else. If you want to be great, you have to think outside the box. Of course, you open yourelf up to the possibility of failure as well, which you can only limit by being as prepared as possible. As true in investing and FF as it is in life. See, FF is life.

 

[Bloom]

i havent read the thread - sure this has been said alreadyutting too much stock in last year's stats.

 

[Harv72b]

Two words: stud kicker.

Nah, seriously though...the single biggest fantasy mistake is chasing last week's points. We've all done it--every single statistic & historical nugget you find tells you that (random example) Jimmy Smith is going to go off against Houston, but darnit, Ike Hilliard had that huge game last week while sitting on your bench...

You do the research/subscribe to the websites for a reason. Trust what they tell you.

 

[Crazy8s]

i sure would take a kicker higher 

some guys just don't get it 

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept. 

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.  Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

Wow -Some people can't see the lightYoure making the biggest mistake there is....your comparing points from different positions. It doesnt matter how many points you put towards passing tds...you still only start 1 QB....ALL qbs rise in points but NOT invalue to RBs or WRs or Kickers or Defenses.I know you guys don't get it and probably won't today.....but if you do, you will increase your ff knowledge a little.

 

[joffer]

A lot of people on this thread complaining about others not getting "it".....don't get "it".

 

[RAIDERNATION.]

Single biggest mistake? Please learn from the pain of my personal experience.

NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO PLAYOFF MATCHUPS!!!

Some people will tell you that you cannot go into a draft with playoff matchups in mind. They will tell you that "you have to make the playoffs first." HOGWASH! Of the twelve teams in my serious local league, six make the playoffs. I'm confident that I will make the playoffs even if I was drafting in my sleep. But I don't just want to make the playoffs... I want to dominate the playoffs!

There is nothing more sobering than leading the league in points scored, then getting bounced in the first round of the playoffs because my players had TERRIBLE matchups in the postseason. That exact scenario happened to me in 1998, 1999 and 2001 until I smartened up a couple of years ago. The results? Back-to-back titles the past two years, and not one person on this planet will convince me that it was just a coincidence.

A few notes: If Player A is much better than Player B, I will never draft Player B simply because he has a more favorable playoff schedule. Rather, I use the playoff scenario as more of a tiebreaker. If I have two or more players who are on the same tier as far as projections go, I will draft the player with the best matchups in weeks 14-16 one hundred times out of 100.

Some people will tell you that it's impossible to predict how strong a team's defense will be from one year to the next, thus rendering potential playoff matchups meaningless. HOGWASH! Yes, defenses can make giant strides or regress dramatically from last season, but generally speaking, you know which defenses you want to avoid.

For instance, let's say that you have two RBs who are fairly equal on your board.

Here are the playoff matchups for Player A:

Week 14: @ Miami

Week 15: vs. New England

Week 16: @ Baltimore

Here are the playoff matchups for Player B:

Week 14: @ Cincinnati

Week 15: vs. San Diego

Week 16: vs. Cleveland

Now which RB would you rather have in that crucial three week stretch???

You do not have to draft STRICTLY based on playoff matchups, but you would be absolutely foolish not to take it into account if two or more players of perceived equal value are staring you in the face when it's your turn to draft.

 

[Burning Sensation]

It doesnt matter how many points you put towards passing tds...you still only start 1 QB....ALL qbs rise in points but NOT invalue to RBs or WRs or Kickers or Defenses.

Um, yes they would.

 

[morehouse_slim]

Becoming complacent during the season. After your draft the work has just begun. Completely reviewing the waiver wire, watching other teams needs, and always keeping an eye out for the next guy who may assist your team in heading to the championship.So many owners don't watch out for a certain position because it may be a "strength" of their team. Well you are always one injury away from a strength becoming a weakness. I feel that a lot of owners don't make moves till sometimes its too late and it costs them wins throughout the season.

 

[Franknbeans]

putting too much stock in PRE-SEASON

 

[jcjets]

Having a draft strategy and not changing it during the draft. If you are at #12 and 11 RBs get drafted in front of you go WR dang it!!!! adapt to the draft.As far as the QB point theory, it doesn't matter how many points you give QBs for a TD pass. Whether they get 3,4,5 or 10 points a TD pass they still vary the same between themselves. Since you only start 1 its irrelevant, you still will get a starting QB after round 6 while you wont get a starting RB or a teams #1 WR after round 6.The only reason to draft QBs earlier would be if other positions values decreased. If you give WRs and RBs 4 points for receiving TDs, then you'll see QBs move up the charts.

 

[Tillmanisahero]

Doesn't apply to anyone here, but the biggest mistake I see people make is not studying the internet before you draft. Every year I see a guy come in with his FF mag and start ready 15 minutes before the draft; which is his research for the year. He then is pissed half the season because his team sucks and he can't understand why.

 

[Tillmanisahero]

i sure would take a kicker higher 

some guys just don't get it 

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept. 

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.  Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

Wow -Some people can't see the lightYoure making the biggest mistake there is....your comparing points from different positions. It doesnt matter how many points you put towards passing tds...you still only start 1 QB....ALL qbs rise in points but NOT invalue to RBs or WRs or Kickers or Defenses.I know you guys don't get it and probably won't today.....but if you do, you will increase your ff knowledge a little.

Crazy8 ---You are EXACTLY right! Every year after the draft I try to explain that to my league mates and every year over half of them forget what I tell them. Oh well!

 

[Repressed Dennis]

i sure would take a kicker higher 

some guys just don't get it 

LOL. Hard to believe so many on a generally well informed board like this one can't get this concept. 

Funny I was thinking that very same thing.The point about people not getting the basic concept of VBD is a good one too. In fact I think looks over shoulder the ONLY thing worthwhile about VBD is the basic concept, ie not just drafting for value but drafting to get the biggest overall gap between your players and your opponents (in fact that is the "value"). Ivan is right that going from 4 to 6 doesn't suddenly make QBs a zillion times more valuable, but it does matter, ie increasing their TD pts makes getting a better one more valuable because there is now more separation between QBs throwing more and less TD passes. If you made passing yards 1 pt/5 yds you'd see the same thing for high-yardage QBs. If you can't see this, take the QB TDs = 100 pts example. If that is true, you're a complete fool if you don't put a very high priority on QBs. PKs would be similar (but as someone said, they're more volatile, so it's not exactly the same). And if WR TDs = 100 pts, you better believe I'm aiming for Moss #1. duh.  Here is someone who gets it. IF kickers got 100 points, the difference between him and the 12th ranked kicker by years end would be somewhere around 1000 points. Now i dont care how good a season Holmes or Tomlinson have, they wont score 1000 more points than the12th(or even 2nd) highest RB.

Wow -Some people can't see the lightYoure making the biggest mistake there is....your comparing points from different positions. It doesnt matter how many points you put towards passing tds...you still only start 1 QB....ALL qbs rise in points but NOT invalue to RBs or WRs or Kickers or Defenses.I know you guys don't get it and probably won't today.....but if you do, you will increase your ff knowledge a little.

Crazy8 ---You are EXACTLY right! Every year after the draft I try to explain that to my league mates and every year over half of them forget what I tell them. Oh well!

You try to explain it to them?!? Man, you are nicer than most...I just sit back, smile, and count the money at the end of the season...

 

[On The Rocks]

i don't know if this is a mistake but what i do that i don't think that other players do....is keep a running history from year to year of the draft. it helps to see tendencies of the other teams and how they draft. Of course this only helps if you are drafting with the same guys year after year, which i do. A number of times i have let a player i want very badly slide for one round because i know the few guys picking after me will be looking to fill certain "habitual" needs in another area; allowing me to take a player with a high ranking and still get the other guy i want.

 

[chocolate bomber]

Haven't read the entire thread, so I apologize if this has been mentioned. So many people on this board preach the "Defense by Committee" and I think a lot of owners are fooling themselves waiting until the final 2-3 rounds to grab two high-upside, mediocre DTs. I don't understand the logic of padding your depth chart with a 5-6th RB or WR when you could be grabbing Baltimore, TB, NE, Philly or Carolina's defense(or whomever you project and secure a position that you will DEFINITELY need week to week. I will def. be grabbing one of these DTs early(in the leagues that emphasize them). If you're good enough at finding value late, you can afford to relinquish a 6th or 7th round pick and get an elite D.

 

[UrlacherIsGod]

Wow -Some people can't see the lightYoure making the biggest mistake there is....your comparing points from different positions. It doesnt matter how many points you put towards passing tds...you still only start 1 QB....ALL qbs rise in points but NOT invalue to RBs or WRs or Kickers or Defenses.I know you guys don't get it and probably won't today.....but if you do, you will increase your ff knowledge a little.

Other than maybe using 1 or 2 more , this is pretty much perfectly done.

 

[Evilgrin72]

Weighing in on the "If passing TDs are worth 6 points instead of 4, it does/doesn't make QBs more valuable"...The answer is - it definitely does.No disrespect to anyone who has the opposite take, but you're looking at it the wrong way, in my opinion. The value lies not in how that player is going to be assessed as compared to other QBs on your sheet. If TD passes are worth 6 points, the difference is that you almost HAVE to have a solid QB if you hope to win games. Last year, I mistakenly drafted Gannon as my starter in Rd. 4 only to watch him s--t the bed. Now I have Jay Fiedler and Jake Delhomme as my QB options. Either way, I'm pretty much getting 187 yds and a TD on that game = 9 points in my league (1 pt/50 yds 6 pt/TD) Now, I play a team with Manning as the QB and he throws for his customary 287 yds and 3 TDs (23 pts)I'm facing a 14 point deficit before I even begin tallying numbers at the other positions. Were TD passes worth only 4 pts, it would only be a 10 point difference. What that basically means is based solely on the scoring difference, I am going to need an additional TD or 80 yds rushing/receiving to make up that gap (10 pt vs. 14 pt deficit). And God forbid, you catch Manning on his 338 yd 5 TD day. If you're starting Fielder against that in a 6 pt/TD league, you can shut the TV off right then. Unless you have Portis and he goes for 5 scores, you've lost. Unless you want to be constantly trying to overcome your QB deficiency, you NEED to have a steady, productive QB who is going to give you points every week. In a 4 pt/TD league, this is not nearly as important.

 

[CalBear]

Since so much has been said already about the draft, I'll talk about the #1 mistake during the season--overmanaging. Benching proven performers for the flavor-of-the-week WR, or trading away your solid RB or WR because they performed poorly for the first couple of weeks.

 

[glumpy]

As far as the QB point theory, it doesn't matter how many points you give QBs for a TD pass. Whether they get 3,4,5 or 10 points a TD pass they still vary the same between themselves. Since you only start 1 its irrelevant, you still will get a starting QB after round 6 while you wont get a starting RB or a teams #1 WR after round 6.

The only reason to draft QBs earlier would be if other positions values decreased. If you give WRs and RBs 4 points for receiving TDs, then you'll see QBs move up the charts.

I'm not going to weigh in on the QB points theory since y'all seem to be having too much fun! but this sounds contradictory--if you say that it doesn't matter how you raise the QB points compared to the other positions--then how can you say that it does matter if you lower the other positions' points compared to the QB's?

 

[Bangahaha]

Paying too much atention to preseason games.People put WAY too much stock in preseason performances. In my opinion, other than injury, there is VERY little that can be gleaned from Preseason games. Especially in the area of 'sleepers'.. we've all seen some hotshot kicking butt in the fourth quarter of a few preseason games, and thought,, wow,, there's a kid to watch for, and he never catches a regular season pass.~Bang

 

[Bartguy]

I think all the people arguing about taking QBs early should be able to split the difference a little here.It is not a mistake to draft a QB early, it is a mistake to draft a QB earlier than his VBD value indicates. But it is a mistake to even take a QB where his value indicates he should go if you think (from ADP or knowing your league's tendencies) you can get him later than his VBD value.In a one QB league, VBD generally indicates that only a few superstar QBs belong in the first three rounds. If that's what VBD says, then as long as they match their projections they should be worth that draft position.If you think that Trent Green in 7 is a better deal than Manning in 3, I presume your VBD cheetsheet says so. Otherwise, you're not using VBD.The argument that changing the scoring system at a position changes that position's value relative to the others is true, but as many have pointed out, in practice it usually doesn't change it dramatically.EvilGrin72, I think you have a real point. But the fact is that there probably was a much bigger difference in value between Manning and Fiedler than between Manning and the baseline QB. Fiedler was more like the 18th ranked QB last year, wasn't he?That's probably what accounts for that big spread you were trying to overcome.

 

[trennr]

Either hopping on that hot player's band wagon in week 1...then find out they actually suck in week 2.ORNot hopping on the hot player's bandwagon in week 1 and find out he's actually great week 2-17!

 

[Isotopes]

Not taking your league's scoring system into account before drafting.

 

[Evilgrin72]

I think all the people arguing about taking QBs early should be able to split the difference a little here.It is not a mistake to draft a QB early, it is a mistake to draft a QB earlier than his VBD value indicates. But it is a mistake to even take a QB where his value indicates he should go if you think (from ADP or knowing your league's tendencies) you can get him later than his VBD value.In a one QB league, VBD generally indicates that only a few superstar QBs belong in the first three rounds. If that's what VBD says, then as long as they match their projections they should be worth that draft position.If you think that Trent Green in 7 is a better deal than Manning in 3, I presume your VBD cheetsheet says so. Otherwise, you're not using VBD.The argument that changing the scoring system at a position changes that position's value relative to the others is true, but as many have pointed out, in practice it usually doesn't change it dramatically.EvilGrin72, I think you have a real point. But the fact is that there probably was a much bigger difference in value between Manning and Fiedler than between Manning and the baseline QB. Fiedler was more like the 18th ranked QB last year, wasn't he?That's probably what accounts for that big spread you were trying to overcome.

Yes, that's about right. It was simply an illustration of the point that in a 6 pt/passing TD league - since QBs typically score a lot more TDs than other positions, the range of points a QB may score in a given week is much bigger than at other positions. If you don't have a reliable QB like a Manning, Favre, Culpepper, Green - you're going to be playing catch up constantly. It puts a lot of pressure on you to make the right calls at other positions, or to take a backup earlier to compensate if your #1 falters. If you grab a Manning in Rd.2- you're set at QB until round 9-10 and can draft RB and WR for the next 6 rounds. Then you have a really good chance of putting together a roster that's going to keep you in games every week. While this plan is only one strategy and may hold water in any league, it becomes more viable in a 6 pt/passing TD league. That is why I feel that upping the points per passing TD makes QBs more valuable. In a 4 pt/TD league, it's a lot easier to wait on a QB, more people will do it, thus based on the principles of supply and demand, the value drops. I understand the logic behind the argument that raising the value of a passing TD does not raise the value of a QB, because all QBs projected points will increase proportionately. However, economic theory will dictate otherwise. The more points a TD is worth, the greater disparity between the top QBs and the lesser lights, because the difference between them in fantasy points increases. Thus, more folks will go for a QB earlier, making them more valuable in your draft.

 

[Buckychudd]

Just to add one more concise point to the passing 3 vs 6 points/TD debate.

Position value consists of three things.

1. Positional Scarcity - Essentially how many good NFL players there are at that position.....compared to the number you start in your league.

2. Degree of Outscoring Peers - The value of the scoring difference on a position-by-position basis.

3. Consistency of Scoring - How consistent the scoring is from week to week.

Changing the value of a passing TD from 3 to 6 does nothing for 1&3, but it does effect 2.....just not much. To really understand this try cranking the value of a TD pass to 100 and run it through a VBD calculation.......the QBs will come out on top. When you change the value from 3 to 6, it does change the value.....again, just not much.

To change 1, you add starters to that position....for instance starting 2 QBs vs 1 QB, which makes a large difference in VBD.

Really not much you can do to effect 3......

 

[JBaldachino]

The biggest problem I've seen is sitting on your draft during the season and not aggressively pursueing FAs. Sure I reached on a couple 1 week wonders, but it paid off when I got D. Davis and M. Williams to sub in for my injured starting RBs (Faulk and Garner). The champion of the league is often the player who can not only draft well, but also picks up the right FAs. I've seen great drafters lose because they ignored FAs, figuring they're great draft was all they needed. I mean in a two QB redraft last year having Pennington and Vick looked great right? Couldn't ask for much more as your starting QBs?

 

[chinawildman]

If Player A hasn't "proven" himself, Player A has no "talent".

 

[BGP]

1. Placing too much importance on drafting for value.2. Not paying attention to potential waiver wire pickups.

 

[Interception Irwin]

Drafting players early who vastly exceeded expectations the previous year. (ie: Torry Holt)Also, passing up on players who had a down year, but have an overall track record of excellence. (ie: Donovan McNabb)

 

[Viva Tequila]

Don't have time to read them all, but here's mine.Not doing your own projections. Doing your own projections allows you to understand how your scoring system effects all players at their respective positons and how that relates to your starting lineup/roster, giving you a better chance to win on a week-to-week basis, as well as, overall total points.This includes game by game analysis and predetermining the time that you think playerX will begin his ascent up the ranks during season, putting you in position to grab playerX off the wire before someone else or hold onto him longer than usually should you draft him.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Haven't read them all, so this has probably been mentioned. Taking chances with your first two picks. You can't win the draft in the first two rounds, but you can definitely lose it.

 

[dickey moe]

As posted by a few earlier, I agree that failing to know your league scoring rules to a T is the most important mistake. Another VERY important mistake is failing to realize value in the mid to later rounds in your draft. Good choices here can literally make or break your season.

 

[fsufan]

Drafting a QB too early. Even seemingly smart players fall down on this one. A corollary - increasing Points per TD thrown from 3 to 4 or 5 - does this make a QB more valuable? No, but people think it does.

Yes it does, maybe not as much as some people think, but it does.

i agree. if a league like mine gives 1 PT for 20 yards passing and 6 PTs for all TD, then a QB like culpepper is gold.

 

[toonarmy]

Taking a defense in the first round.Swear to God, first year of my works league (2000) a guy took the Titans with his first pick. The Titans! Not even the TOP defense! And he wasn't even a homer!He didn't win.