Vector
Footballguy
Why not just come out and say what you want.... you don't like PPR.I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?
Then don't play in PPR leagues, simple as that.
Why not just come out and say what you want.... you don't like PPR.I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?
People are answering what was asked in the OP. Why should he get 4 pts? Because he had 4 receptions and in a PPR scoring system, thats the rule.Well put, and I appreciate that perspective. I for one just would like to understand the reasoning behind why some people have decided that a reception is something that should be rewarded on top of whatever yardage is gained. The question asked is "why PPR"? The question most here prefer to answer is "what is PPR"? We all know what PPR is. Tell me what it is about catching a football that deserves fantasy points.Fantasy Football is driven by statistics. You choose the statistical categories you wish to reward and the basis upon which you award them, you create a league based upon that criteria, league owners agree to the scoring, and that is how you assign the points. I am open to varying rules. You value and draft players based upon that particular scoring criteria. In this instance, Sproles' value is increased by the virtue of this being a PPR league. If you prefer a different statistical criteria to reward, or another method of computing such, that is fine. PPR is not the only criteria for assessing a player's value, but why complain about the value of PPR if that is the agreed-upon set of rules?
Good luck in your quest.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
It's more fun that way.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
the why is to deepen the pool of valuable RBs.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Actually it does answer the why question, you just refuse to acknowledge the answer as valid.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Because he caught the ball instead of dropping it.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Actually it's the opposite... to shrink the pool of dominant RBs. Decades ago folks got the idea that RBs were scoring too many points in FF, relative to WR and TE. So, an arbitrary means to boost up WR and TE points was sought. "Hey, let's just award a point per reception, that'll help." And the rest is history.the why is to deepen the pool of valuable RBs.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Sometimes we just slavishly follow tradition, like cutting the ends off of a roast for two generations, thinking that was the secret to grandma's recipe, only to later discover her roasting pan had simply been too small. I scored games this way from newspaper statistics because statistical categories which could be easily tracked were limited to what was provided in the local newspapers. Statistical categories such as Yards, receptions and TDs can be easily ascertained and tracked, and it provides some gauge to a player's performance. Most importantly, however, if the league agrees that Receptions is a statistical category to reward, then you draft players such as Sproles with the expectation that his value is increased. I agree that there are many scoring variations available, and league scoring software has opened up endless possibilities for scoring options. However, most league formats seem to follow traditional scoring formats. Perhaps it is familiarity. Perhaps it is due to the volume of information which is tailored to those time-honored formats. I certainly would have no problem with a more creative scoring format, provided every owner agreed to such in advance of the draft. Keep it fun. Keep it interesting.Well put, and I appreciate that perspective. I for one just would like to understand the reasoning behind why some people have decided that a reception is something that should be rewarded on top of whatever yardage is gained. The question asked is "why PPR"? The question most here prefer to answer is "what is PPR"? We all know what PPR is. Tell me what it is about catching a football that deserves fantasy points.Fantasy Football is driven by statistics. You choose the statistical categories you wish to reward and the basis upon which you award them, you create a league based upon that criteria, league owners agree to the scoring, and that is how you assign the points. I am open to varying rules. You value and draft players based upon that particular scoring criteria. In this instance, Sproles' value is increased by the virtue of this being a PPR league. If you prefer a different statistical criteria to reward, or another method of computing such, that is fine. PPR is not the only criteria for assessing a player's value, but why complain about the value of PPR if that is the agreed-upon set of rules?
According to the post above yours, the actual NFL team he plays for would have been better served if he had dropped it on two of those plays.Because he caught the ball instead of dropping it.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Disagree. It deepens the pool of RBs who have FF value. It does not, and never really did, shrink the pool of dominant RBs as most of the top RBs in FF also get a lot of value for the passing game.Actually it's the opposite... to shrink the pool of dominant RBs. Decades ago folks got the idea that RBs were scoring too many points in FF, relative to WR and TE. So, an arbitrary means to boost up WR and TE points was sought. "Hey, let's just award a point per reception, that'll help." And the rest is history.the why is to deepen the pool of valuable RBs.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
PPR scoring lives on, even as its reason for existence has faded into irrelevance -- RBs don't dominate WRs and TEs in standard scoring anymore, so there's no need for a "more balanced" scoring system.
Read the thread.Sounds to me like someone just lost their game by a couple points, and likely played against Sproles.
Asking the question he asked is pretty stoopid.
And not all 4 catches were for neg yardage. That was just the total yards he ended up with.
Stupid post of the day.It's a fluke. Deal with it. I know it stinks when you lose.
And yet, a challenger appears!Just wondering if there's a chance OP lost by 3 points this week![]()
-QG
He was channeling his inner Brett Favre.This is almost as bad as the guy that called sirius NFL network this morning complaining that Stafford shouldn't be allowed to "fake a spike" for player safety reasons.Just wondering if there's a chance OP lost by 3 points this week![]()
-QG
Assuming that NO wasn't badly wanting to run the clock, yes.According to the post above yours, the actual NFL team he plays for would have been better served if he had dropped it on two of those plays.Because he caught the ball instead of dropping it.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
Some leagues, maybe.Since the previous scoring gap between RB's and WR's was in the other direction (RB's got way overvalued in terms of their game importance), demand drove the rise of PPR leagues.I'm not doing anything other than observe that the scoring gap between RBs and WRs/TEs that gave rise to PPR no longer exists.
Given this, it stands to reason that PPR should also no longer exist.
If that skew has disappeared, demand for PPR leagues will diminish.
It'll take care of itself, wouldn't you say?
I don't think everyone thinks this way. I can agree to a point, but I agree more with socrates' earlier post concerning the evolution of scoring FF starting with newspaper box scores. If we were truly trying to gauge production, we would involve line play. We may credit hurries to some extent (not just sacks), we may devalue tackles made by cornerbacks and emphasize passes defensed. And on and on...Because fantasy football points are supposed to reflect value to the team's production on the field.
I also think if a receiver draws a 50 yard PI call, shouldn't it count for something?I don't think everyone thinks this way. I can agree to a point, but I agree more with socrates' earlier post concerning the evolution of scoring FF starting with newspaper box scores. If we were truly trying to gauge production, we would involve line play. We may credit hurries to some extent (not just sacks), we may devalue tackles made by cornerbacks and emphasize passes defensed. And on and on...Because fantasy football points are supposed to reflect value to the team's production on the field.
I play in a league like this and did some research before this year. As it turns out, the top RBs and WRs get approximately the same number of first downs. While RBs get more touches, WRs tend to get first downs on a higher percentage of their touches. It largely evens out.RB's get too many first downs and would increase their value even more.I wouldn't limit it to only Receptions.Pasquino wrote an article about Point Per First Down Reception (PPFDR) and made a good case for it being better than PPR. I agree with him but haven't any leagues doing it.
But was that rushing AND receiving first downs (I've played that way before) or was it only receiving first downs?I play in a league like this and did some research before this year. As it turns out, the top RBs and WRs get approximately the same number of first downs. While RBs get more touches, WRs tend to get first downs on a higher percentage of their touches. It largely evens out.RB's get too many first downs and would increase their value even more.I wouldn't limit it to only Receptions.Pasquino wrote an article about Point Per First Down Reception (PPFDR) and made a good case for it being better than PPR. I agree with him but haven't any leagues doing it.
I agree that fantasy ball rules lag behind actual on-field happenings. But the demand and perceptions of all those who play fantasy ball pretty drive what type of fantasy rules/leagues are more popular and less popular. I just don't see the problem with that.Some leagues, maybe.Since the previous scoring gap between RB's and WR's was in the other direction (RB's got way overvalued in terms of their game importance), demand drove the rise of PPR leagues.I'm not doing anything other than observe that the scoring gap between RBs and WRs/TEs that gave rise to PPR no longer exists.
Given this, it stands to reason that PPR should also no longer exist.
If that skew has disappeared, demand for PPR leagues will diminish.
It'll take care of itself, wouldn't you say?
Most leagues, almost certainly not.
People tend to hold onto ideas well past their expiration date. I know this veers off into a different direction, but requiring two RBs to start (and it's worse if their is a flex option to have potentially three RBs start), is a relic from a much different NFL than what we see every Sunday now. PPR is a solution to a problem that mostly no longer exists. Few leagues will respond to the changes in the football landscape with appropriate adjustments in the fantasy landscape in a timely fashion, if at all.
Because it's for girls...little girls.Fantasy Football for Girls?Definition of PPR . . .I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsFantasy Football for Girls
Fantasy Football is driven by statistics. You choose the statistical categories you wish to reward and the basis upon which you award them, you create a league based upon that criteria, league owners agree to the scoring, and that is how you assign the points. I am open to varying rules. You value and draft players based upon that particular scoring criteria. In this instance, Sproles' value is increased by the virtue of this being a PPR league. If you prefer a different statistical criteria to reward, or another method of computing such, that is fine. PPR is not the only criteria for assessing a player's value, but why complain about the value of PPR if that is the agreed-upon set of rules?
If that is what makes you feel manly, then by all means, carry on.Because it's for girls...little girls.Fantasy Football for Girls?Definition of PPR . . .I don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsFantasy Football for Girls
Fantasy Football is driven by statistics. You choose the statistical categories you wish to reward and the basis upon which you award them, you create a league based upon that criteria, league owners agree to the scoring, and that is how you assign the points. I am open to varying rules. You value and draft players based upon that particular scoring criteria. In this instance, Sproles' value is increased by the virtue of this being a PPR league. If you prefer a different statistical criteria to reward, or another method of computing such, that is fine. PPR is not the only criteria for assessing a player's value, but why complain about the value of PPR if that is the agreed-upon set of rules?
In standard fantasy football, also known as manly FF, players are rewarded for helping to advance the football down the field toward the ultimate goal of a TD or FG. Attempting to do so and failing is a bad thing! We you also give points per Negative Pass completions, negative rushing attempts missed field goals? (hey they hit the ball with their foot that's a point)
If points per reception
exactly. but not only to wr and te, but to other rbs as well.Actually it's the opposite... to shrink the pool of dominant RBs. Decades ago folks got the idea that RBs were scoring too many points in FF, relative to WR and TE. So, an arbitrary means to boost up WR and TE points was sought. "Hey, let's just award a point per reception, that'll help." And the rest is history.the why is to deepen the pool of valuable RBs.i don't play in PPR. I would still like to understand. "he should get 4 points because it's PPR" doesn't answer the 'why' question.
PPR scoring lives on, even as its reason for existence has faded into irrelevance -- RBs don't dominate WRs and TEs in standard scoring anymore, so there's no need for a "more balanced" scoring system.
This is a cool idea, but do any of the major sites provide this stat?Pasquino wrote an article about Point Per First Down Reception (PPFDR) and made a good case for it being better than PPR. I agree with him but haven't any leagues doing it.
Then he'd just change the thread title to "Why should 0 yards and 0 points score 1 point?"Hey consider going to 0.25 PPR, 0.5 PPR or consider getting rid of the flex.
Someobdy used to. They had a stat category for first down rushes and one for first down receptions. I've used it. I think it was Fox Sports though, which I left years ago because they suckedThis is a cool idea, but do any of the major sites provide this stat?Pasquino wrote an article about Point Per First Down Reception (PPFDR) and made a good case for it being better than PPR. I agree with him but haven't any leagues doing it.
Then 10 catches for 197 yards on 0 TDs shouldn't be awarded points either because they didn't score any actual points for their team. See how silly this argument is?I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.
If MFL started using it I'd join a league that uses PPFDR.Someobdy used to. They had a stat category for first down rushes and one for first down receptions. I've used it. I think it was Fox Sports though, which I left years ago because they suckedThis is a cool idea, but do any of the major sites provide this stat?Pasquino wrote an article about Point Per First Down Reception (PPFDR) and made a good case for it being better than PPR. I agree with him but haven't any leagues doing it.
I get it now. You're Doc Walker, and it's a manhood issue.Because it's for girls...little girls. In standard fantasy football, also known as manly FF, players are rewarded for helping to advance the football down the field toward the ultimate goal of a TD or FG. Attempting to do so and failing is a bad thing!
You seem to be the one telling people how they should play.Because it's PPR......Why do people choose to reward 0's with points?Definition of PPR . . . Point Per Reception. 4 Receptions = 4 PointsI don't get it.
Why should Darren Sproles score 4 points (PPR) when he finished with 0 yards and 0 points?
That's my question.
This forum seems to be so full of people who think that playing magic football differently than them (not playing PPR) is just plain stupid...maybe these people can explain to me why a player deserves 4 points for 0 yards and 0 points.
I see how silly YOUR argument is.Then 10 catches for 197 yards on 0 TDs shouldn't be awarded points either because they didn't score any actual points for their team. See how silly this argument is?I think you all are missing his point. I gather what PPR means, but if you are not productive, you should not be awarded points, catching passes or not.
The OP is right on, 4 catches for 0 yards should not warrant any points, should have stipulations on that in PPR.
Whose boat are you in?In your same boat, currently down by 6 and played Darren Sproles. I mean, I'm not going to complain about it because it's literally exactly what I signed up for.. but I guess I can see your point. Best advice? Maybe join a standard league next season?
Of course it's arbitrary. A reception represents an opportunity to do something to help your team --specifically, to gain yards and score a touchdown. It's no different in that regard than rushing attempt or a pass thrown. Or a FG attempt, for that matter.It's what you do with that opportunity that matters, not simply getting the opportunity. This is recognized by the fact that none of these other types of opportunities score FF points...only the resulting yards and TDs count. Just receptions count in and of themselves, and they do for the sole purpose of artificially and arbitrarily boosting WR and TE scoring.VaTerp said:Disagree. It deepens the pool of RBs who have FF value. It does not, and never really did, shrink the pool of dominant RBs as most of the top RBs in FF also get a lot of value for the passing game.
And it's not arbitrary either. Receptions are a high profile stat, and since FF is based on stats, some of us like to include it in our scoring systems.
80-yard TD would be worth 15 points8 for yardageJohn 14:6 said:I'm not too sure about the point for 1st down idea. If player A gets 80 yards, 8 1st downs, and a TD, that'd be 22 points. If player B scores an 80 yard TD on a single play, that's only 14 points. Does player A deserve the extra 8 points? An 80 yard TD is a very significant play...