Why does Rotoworld have articles on VBD? (1 Viewer)

[southeastjerome]

Seems like I've read an article similar to this one before, I can't remember where though.

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40660/71/value-based-drafting-part-i

No mention or credit to Dodds in the article. If I were David and this guy didn't give me any credit or a head's up, I'd be pissed.

 

[GroveDiesel]

The guy gave credit to Joe. Close anyway. That's more than most sites that talk about it do. Most just act like it's a well known thing that's always been around and don't give FBG any credit at all.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Seems like I've read an article similar to this one before, I can't remember where though.http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40660/71/value-based-drafting-part-iNo mention or credit to Dodds in the article. If I were David and this guy didn't give me any credit or a head's up, I'd be pissed.

"The idea of VBD is credited to Joe Bryant."

 

[We Tigers]

I think one of the ESPN guys--Christopher Harris, maybe?--has also written about VBD and attributed it to FBG. I've only seen it non-attributed on personal blogs or some Bleacher Report articles, which are essentially just blog articles anyway.

 

[Riffraff]

Time blurs the memory a bit.

VBD was before FBG wasn't it? It was during Cheatsheets (Bryant). Or was it originally posted on Usenet?

Dodds was still MrFootball, right?

 

[Sweet Love]

Time blurs the memory a bit. VBD was before FBG wasn't it? It was during Cheatsheets (Bryant). Or was it originally posted on Usenet?Dodds was still MrFootball, right?

Exactly. Plus VBD has become such a woven fabric in FF, that I am actually surprised that Rotoworld took the time to credit Joe (and kudos to them for doing it). I doubt Don Coryell ever said, "hey thanks...we like how we throw the ball, but lets take a moment to credit the Notre Dame program for installing into their game versus just a trick play". Eventually, it will just be "the way you do it", and I really think we are there right now. The fact that someone actually gives credit to it, is just a cherry on top.

 

[Christo]

The guy gave credit to Joe. Close anyway. That's more than most sites that talk about it do. Most just act like it's a well known thing that's always been around and don't give FBG any credit at all.

And wasn't it used in fantasy baseball before JB adapted it for football?

 

[zed2283]

Don't know when Joe "invented" it, but I read about value-based drafting when I picked up my first fantasy football book in 1994.

 

[GregR]

Don't know when Joe "invented" it, but I read about value-based drafting when I picked up my first fantasy football book in 1994.

Joe's articles don't claim he invented the concept. The opposite, he specifically credits John Benson, Bill James, Alex Patton and Pete Palmer as people he learned the concepts from in rotisserie baseball.I believe it would be accurate to say he was at the least a very key figure in its early adoption in fantasy football, and it's probably accurate enough to credit him as the person who originated its widespread uptake.

 

[zed2283]

Don't know when Joe "invented" it, but I read about value-based drafting when I picked up my first fantasy football book in 1994.

Joe's articles don't claim he invented the concept. The opposite, he specifically credits John Benson, Bill James, Alex Patton and Pete Palmer as people he learned the concepts from in rotisserie baseball.I believe it would be accurate to say he was at the least a very key figure in its early adoption in fantasy football, and it's probably accurate enough to credit him as the person who originated its widespread uptake.

Well la dee da.

 

[GregR]

The idea that seems to have become the dominant one is that in setting the baseline you should look at how many players from each position will be drafted in the top 100 players of your fantasy draft and then use that number to set the baseline. I'll refer to this idea as the Top 100 Method. As of this writing, here are how many players are going at each position in the top 100 of ADP.

Huh. Don't think I've ever even heard of that method for setting a baseline, let alone heard of it as a dominant method. It would definitely fall apart for very big and very small leagues in terms of teams * roster space.

 

[Shutout]

I don't know the timeline but it seems like, regardless of what its called, this idea of VBD has been around since the first time I played FF.

I am probably in a minority but I really think its overrated. And I'm probably dead wrong but when I draft, I don't think there is a system to point me where to go.

 

[Christo]

I don't know the timeline but it seems like, regardless of what its called, this idea of VBD has been around since the first time I played FF.I am probably in a minority but I really think its overrated. And I'm probably dead wrong but when I draft, I don't think there is a system to point me where to go.

The bottom line is that VBD isn't worth squat if your projections suck. I think the "value" lies in just understanding the concept rather than following it religiously on draft day.

 

[GregR]

I don't know the timeline but it seems like, regardless of what its called, this idea of VBD has been around since the first time I played FF.

I am probably in a minority but I really think its overrated. And I'm probably dead wrong but when I draft, I don't think there is a system to point me where to go.

The bottom line is that VBD your draft isn't worth squat if your projections suck. I think the "value" lies in just understanding the concept rather than following it religiously on draft day.

Fixed.The best anyone can do is work off their beliefs about the future. Doesn't matter what method you use to decide on a player to pick if you're dead wrong on all the players.

There are things that VBD does well and things that VBD doesn't do well. People who are opposed to the very thought of VBD probably base a lot of their decisions off a concept of value that is exactly what VBD calculates. They just do it unconsciously and don't necessarily do it consistently since it is unconscious.

To flesh out what I'm saying, see my post here on differences between VBD and Dynamic VBD, and what their strengths and weaknesses are.

 

[footballnerd]

agree VBD can't be depended on its own, SOS, playoff SOS, ____ by committee, etc, all need to be combined to win championships

 

[Gamma1210]

The idea that seems to have become the dominant one is that in setting the baseline you should look at how many players from each position will be drafted in the top 100 players of your fantasy draft and then use that number to set the baseline. I'll refer to this idea as the Top 100 Method. As of this writing, here are how many players are going at each position in the top 100 of ADP.

Huh. Don't think I've ever even heard of that method for setting a baseline, let alone heard of it as a dominant method. It would definitely fall apart for very big and very small leagues in terms of teams * roster space.

This is pretty close to what I do for my baseline setup in DD for my home league. I have years of draft results and I can see the average number of players drafted at each position after X rounds (usually set X from 7-10). I'll mess with X to see what I like. I think this is the best way to set the baseline if you know the league's tendencies.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

That VBD article was by a guest writer that has his own website, fantasydouche.com.

Not related to this discussion, but I found it interesting that this is the 2nd gueat artice he has written for Rotoworld, and neither time does Rotoworld include a mention of his website. They mention his twitter and email, I think, but no web addy.

This writer has guest written on several other fantasy football sites, and they all linked back to his website... but Rotoworld did not (twice).

 

[Joe Bryant]

Don't know when Joe "invented" it, but I read about value-based drafting when I picked up my first fantasy football book in 1994.

Joe's articles don't claim he invented the concept. The opposite, he specifically credits John Benson, Bill James, Alex Patton and Pete Palmer as people he learned the concepts from in rotisserie baseball.I believe it would be accurate to say he was at the least a very key figure in its early adoption in fantasy football, and it's probably accurate enough to credit him as the person who originated its widespread uptake.

Thanks Greg. J

 

[whatadai]

I've been doing VBD for years on my own. Just cause someone's the first to write about it on the interwebz doesn't mean it's their idea, even if it was original by them.

 

[ram1814]

That VBD article was by a guest writer that has his own website, fantasydouche.com.

Not related to this discussion, but I found it interesting that this is the 2nd gueat artice he has written for Rotoworld, and neither time does Rotoworld include a mention of his website. They mention his twitter and email, I think, but no web addy.

This writer has guest written on several other fantasy football sites, and they all linked back to his website... but Rotoworld did not (twice).

I actually just emailed fantasydouche.com to let him know that I appreciated his article but thought that VBD should try to reflect the higher inherent risk in drafting top RBs (and to a lesser extent WRs). See Matthew Berry's draft day manifesto for stats on how often top players drafted at each position actually finish near their draft spot. Top QBs are gold, top TEs are solid, top WRs and especially RBs are a crapshoot. Everyone knows that RB depth is important because of injuries, RBBC, etc. I don't need VBD to tell me to draft a lot of RBs but for years people have been finding ways of inflating the VBD baselines so that RBs look even more valuable, hence you should draft more AND do it early. Who really uses VBD after the 5th round or so anyway? To pick the best players during those initial rounds I feel that VBD should be based on the number of starting players, which for a 10 team league might be RB 20 - 30 (probably closer to 20 if PPR in these days of RBBC). This would penalize the RBs a bit which is good because they historically don't have a good chance of reaching their predictions.He responded that his article was the first VBD article that did address the fact that RBs get injured more often. But I feel that increasing the RB baseline "because you need more of them" is moving VBD in the wrong direction. It inflates RB value more even though he (and Matt Berry) shows they are less reliable. I think the top 100 method is good for people that need to be reminded to take extra RBs in the mid rounds but since I am only using VBD in the early rounds I am going to use a smaller baseline number for each position. He also commented that Matthew Berry is not a "very strong analyst" and recommended Mike Clay as a better "number cruncher". There just so happened to be a brand new Mike Clay article on Rotoworld and I got absolutely nothing from his article on "Average Depth of Target". So Malcom Floyd is great and Percy Harvin is a loser? I'm sorry, but any stat that doesn't incorporate volume (i.e. targets) in some way is meaningless to fantasy football. Number crunching ain't nothing with some brains / conclusions behind it. I noted Mike Clay's article offers no conclusions whatsoever. I respect Matt Berry for going out on a limb (too far at times)and making bold projections based on both numbers and hunches.

Let me know what you guys think, I'm looking forward to using the FBG VBD app with custom baseline.

Ron