Yeah, either 1.03-1.05 or 1.08.10I really like the 1.04 or 1.05 spot this year and will try to trade down if I get 1.01 to 1.03.
Personally I would wager on Peterson not finishing as RB1. I'd put my money on 'the field'. Sure, if I had the number 1 pick, I'd take Peterson. But I have no problem with Charles or Martin or Foster three picks later, and then going three picks earlier in round 2.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
While I agree with you, it's all about personal rankings. I personally put the top 4 within 1 point of each other by weekly average. I think Peterson is the top dog, but I think the RB depth that gets to you at the 2/3 turn has far less upside this year since so few RB are falling. There's just a higher chance at a Chris Johnson type at the 4 which is a perfect compliment to a top 4 RB IMO.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
Because I don't think that AP is in a tier by himself.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
Exactly.While I agree with you, it's all about personal rankings. I personally put the top 4 within 1 point of each other by weekly average. I think Peterson is the top dog, but I think the RB depth that gets to you at the 2/3 turn has far less upside this year since so few RB are falling. There's just a higher chance at a Chris Johnson type at the 4 which is a perfect compliment to a top 4 RB IMO.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
That's not the point. Of course it's more likely the field finishes ahead of him, but he's by far the MOST likely to finish #1, in both PPR and non-PPR. I think he's more the favorite for the #1 spot this year than any other RB in the past 5 years was to finish #1. That's really significant.Personally I would wager on Peterson not finishing as RB1. I'd put my money on 'the field'. Sure, if I had the number 1 pick, I'd take Peterson. But I have no problem with Charles or Martin or Foster three picks later, and then going three picks earlier in round 2.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
I'm not so sure of that. But let's say that he is the most likely...I'm not so sure it's enough more likely, or that he would be #1 by enough, to justify going 3 picks later in round 2.That's not the point. Of course it's more likely the field finishes ahead of him, but he's by far the MOST likely to finish #1, in both PPR and non-PPR. I think he's more the favorite for the #1 spot this year than any other RB in the past 5 years was to finish #1. That's really significant.Personally I would wager on Peterson not finishing as RB1. I'd put my money on 'the field'. Sure, if I had the number 1 pick, I'd take Peterson. But I have no problem with Charles or Martin or Foster three picks later, and then going three picks earlier in round 2.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
Also want to note that the 1.11-1.12 is a wasteland this year in many formats (less so in non-PPR because guys like Morris/Ridley get a nice boost). You're either reaching on VBD to get a couple of non-elite RBs or having to take WR/TE correctly according to VBD but getting shafted later on your starting RBs. There really aren't good options - either leave value on the table or have no RB depth
Really? I can't find a projection site where he's not at least 8% of the points ahead of whomever is listed #2. I think it's pretty consensus he's in a tier by himself. Both him and Calvin.Because I don't think that AP is in a tier by himself.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
He may well finish as RB1 overall, but I believe that the other players in my top tier (Charles, Martin, McCoy & Foster) are just as likely to finish there as well, and picking one of them at the 3rd/4th/5th spots means that the RBs making it back are better options than what you're left with at the 2/3 turn.
No, the #2 slot is second best. My point is the #1 slot is MUCH better than the #2, since it's virtually consensus he will be the highest scoring RB.It sounds like your argument is one for the #2 draft slot being bad.
But you can't look at it in a vacuum. Yes AP will likely score more than the guy you get at 1.04, but will how much better will the guy I get at 2.08 by than the one you get at 2.12? That range is where I view the drop off happens in RB2 with RB1 upside to the standard RB2, or RB2 with injury worries.Really? I can't find a projection site where he's not at least 8% of the points ahead of whomever is listed #2. I think it's pretty consensus he's in a tier by himself. Both him and Calvin.Because I don't think that AP is in a tier by himself.I don't know how anyone can say anything but the 1.01 in a 2-RB required league. Every projection site has AP in a tier by himself as far as total points expected.... so that makes him incredibly valuable according to VBD. Drafting strictly by VBD there's almost a 7% swing in expected points scored in positional advantage from the 1st to the 12th pick. The expected point total drops to a few percentage points for the remainder of the positions. My analysis on many different league formats all come back to the same thing - if AP finishes #1 RB again the 1.01 has a massive advantage.
He may well finish as RB1 overall, but I believe that the other players in my top tier (Charles, Martin, McCoy & Foster) are just as likely to finish there as well, and picking one of them at the 3rd/4th/5th spots means that the RBs making it back are better options than what you're left with at the 2/3 turn.
What is your top tier? I find it a little crazy that you have so many guys in the same tier as Peterson.The latest I can go and still get a player in what I perceive as my top tier. This year, I anticipate I can get one of my top tier guys at the turn. Possibly two, since my top tier seems to differ from the consensus, which makes me happy.
I don't. The guys I do regard similarly, however, don't tend to be the guys everyone is drafting 2,3,4.What is your top tier? I find it a little crazy that you have so many guys in the same tier as Peterson.The latest I can go and still get a player in what I perceive as my top tier. This year, I anticipate I can get one of my top tier guys at the turn. Possibly two, since my top tier seems to differ from the consensus, which makes me happy.
I don't have ADP at #1 because he ran for 2000 yards last year. I have him #1 because 5 of his 6 years in the league he has finished in the top 3 of RBs. The one exception was a season he only played 12 games due to injury. Even with just 12 games, he was the 8th RB. He has the lowest floor and an incredibly high ceiling. It's that consistency and reliability that I like.I don't. The guys I do regard similarly, however, don't tend to be the guys everyone is drafting 2,3,4.I'd be perfectly content with any one of Peterson, Richardson, Charles, Spiller, Forte, or Morris, in that order of preference. I haven't seen any sources that ranked (especially) Forte as high as I have him, so I'm pretty content drafting later rather than earlier and knowing I can get what I perceive to be a huge bargain. Especially true since I rate Lynch, McCoy, and Chris Johnson only a hair below. Obviously won't see Lynch there, but if I get to the turn with a Forte/McCoy or Forte/Chris Johnson, or God help me, any two of my top tier guys, I will be quite thrilled.What is your top tier? I find it a little crazy that you have so many guys in the same tier as Peterson.The latest I can go and still get a player in what I perceive as my top tier. This year, I anticipate I can get one of my top tier guys at the turn. Possibly two, since my top tier seems to differ from the consensus, which makes me happy.
I do still rank Peterson #1, but I think he's got enough years behind them that I'm safe calling last year's performance a bit of an outlier, and a return to normalcy should place him right in the ranks of those other guys, IMO. I know it's not a popular opinion, but it's mine, what can I say?
That is a very small sample size.This is our 12 team non-ppr leagues 13th year, and the #1 pick has never won it all.
Pretty meaningless, overall the top 2 or 3 slots win only like 5 or 6% more often. Fantasy football is mostly about being safe up top and drafting breakout players low. I've won with some horrible looking drafts in the past. Drafting higher just gives a slightly higher probability of winning mostly based off ADP and player projections which are never spot onThis is our 12 team non-ppr leagues 13th year, and the #1 pick has never won it all.
Completely agree.Personally I think the best spot is 4, since I also believe there are 4 really elite backs (AP, Foster, Charles, Martin) and you get one of them, and you have a shot at an elite receiver or a nice RB2 in the 2nd.
Then 3, then 2, then 1.
After the top 4, I like 10, and going down to 5. 5 is tough due to it's the first spot where you have to make a decision.....do you take Calvin or a RB? And if it's a RB, is it Rice, McCoy, Spiller, Richardson? Any of those 4 RBs could be worthy of the 5th pick. At 10, you know you're getting a good RB or Calvin.....likely one of the RBs in the 2nd tier.
11 and 12 are just brutal this year. I think you have to take a RB in those spots, and Morris, Forte and S Jackson will be decent, but they are below the top 9.
So my order is 4,3,2,1,10,9,8,7,6,5,11,12
I'd love to see real data on this that excludes your typical religious ADP drafters. Is there data for FFPC teams?Historically the higher positions in the draft win leagues at a higher percentage. This is because fantasy football is top heavy on RB talent. To me, ideally you look at how many RB you believe to be top tier (for me it's 4. Peterson, Foster, Charles, Martin) and that's the pick you want. I'm decently confident, outside of injury, these guys are within 15 points of each other as top 5 guys.
I want later because those guys are so close on my board that I don't care which I get. The later you go, the higher chance at an elite WR or high upside RB2 (Chris Johnson) in the second round. Plus I hate the turn on either end
It sounds like you have a very screwed up, very one-of-a-kind league with rules that don't have anything to do with, well, probably anybody else on this site.I guess it all depends on scoring system. In ours, the smart move is to take one of the top qbs - but most people still go after rbs. If I had 1 or 2 I would go qb. I think 3-5 is better because then I have more options and have and advantage on the turnaround in round 8 when we can pick ANY position. Our first seven rounds require a pick from each of the 7 positions - so you can't start doubling up on rbs until round 8.
If I got 1 or 2 I might swing a deal with the 4 or 5 if they sweetened the pot a little.
I've seen this mentioned here a couple times. Is there a big data set out there that people are using to get this 5 or 6% higher number? If so, could someone steer me toward it? Also, is that across all kinds of leagues, or some specific site's? Wondering if there's any correlation between even and odd numbered rounds, where in the one instance, a player drafting early starts first, and finishes first, whereas in the other, he starts first, but picks (his kicker or defense or mr. irrelevant) last...Pretty meaningless, overall the top 2 or 3 slots win only like 5 or 6% more often. Fantasy football is mostly about being safe up top and drafting breakout players low. I've won with some horrible looking drafts in the past. Drafting higher just gives a slightly higher probability of winning mostly based off ADP and player projections which are never spot on...This is our 12 team non-ppr leagues 13th year, and the #1 pick has never won it all.
Wait...that is based on PROJECTIONS, not actual performance outcomes?http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/publish/Lab_Test_Snake_Draft.htm
That's the one that sticks out to me, it's based off ADP and yearly projections. I can't remember where the 5% comes from, I can do more digging but I remember something about it somewhere.
Someone at WCOFF did a report at one time (spanning several years and thousands of leagues) and concluded that 75% of all the league champions came from 33% of the draft slots 1-2-3-4. With higher being better.Wait...that is based on PROJECTIONS, not actual performance outcomes?http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/publish/Lab_Test_Snake_Draft.htm
That's the one that sticks out to me, it's based off ADP and yearly projections. I can't remember where the 5% comes from, I can do more digging but I remember something about it somewhere.
And it's based on simulated drafts, not actual drafts or leagues?
Points for based on draft position...Taken from one of the guys at wcoff... 4 years of Data...
the numbers of 2004-2007:
DP-----PF-----% >1500
1-----1453-----0.38
2-----1427-----0.27
3-----1409-----0.26
4-----1374-----0.14
5-----1383-----0.18
6-----1385-----0.17
7-----1371-----0.17
8-----1354-----0.10
9-----1353-----0.13
10-----1354-----0.11
11-----1343-----0.10
12-----1347-----0.10
So as to understand the above data... 1500 was determined as the "make the playoffs" break mark.
Thus a % of teams from each spot that make the playoffs is correlated. Top 3 picks ea made the playoffs 30%; which is double the rate of any of the other positions.
Also note the league WINNERS racked up a 75% winning percentage from the top 4 selections, despite being just 33% of the field.
The 5-6% comes from elsewhere. I'll try to find it when I'm home not on my phone.Wait...that is based on PROJECTIONS, not actual performance outcomes?And it's based on simulated drafts, not actual drafts or leagues?http://www.fantasysharks.com/artman2/publish/Lab_Test_Snake_Draft.htm
That's the one that sticks out to me, it's based off ADP and yearly projections. I can't remember where the 5% comes from, I can do more digging but I remember something about it somewhere.