|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jan 10, 2015 12:32:39 GMT -5
As I have stated before, I believe there needs to be some changes to the league scoring system. Primarily, the points per receptions is way out of whack, making the WR position and the RB position far exceed in value virtually every other position other than the QB position. Looking at the top 100 players from this past season, on a points per game average, only 2 defensive players broke the top 50, and only 14 in the top 100. Offense in this league way over performs the defense, and I think we need to regulate that a little so that we can have a better balance. Also, if you take a closer look at the numbers, WR's in this league far out perform running backs as well, with the exception of a pass catching receiver such as a Matt forte or a LeVeon Bell type of back. The more traditional pound and ground RB's are really no where to be found, other than maybe a Demarco Murray who had an outstanding year, and then at that undeservedly outperformed by a pass catching RB.
A comparison between DeMarco Murray and Matt Forte gives a good indication of this problem:
DeMarco Murray: 1845 rush yards 13 rush TDs 57 receptions 416 yards receiving 0 receiving td's Matt Forte: 1038 rush yards 6 rush td's 102 receptions 808 receiving yards 4 receiving td's
Murray 2261 total yards and 13tds Forte 1846 total yards and 10 td's
Despite these numbers, Forte finished with a 27.9 PPG average, while Murray finished with a 26.9 PPG average.
Murray clearly had the better year, and Forte was more highly rewarded. Why? Because Forte gets rewarded for his catches, while Murray get no credit for his rushing attempts.
I think clearly we need to drop the points per reception rule down from the current 1.75, and I would suggest down to 1.25 in order to make it a more balanced scoring system.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jan 10, 2015 12:48:01 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 16:55:04 GMT -5
im ok with both i prefer 1 ppr more
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 20:12:41 GMT -5
In another league that I am in, we award different points for each offensive skill position. This helps make the TE more relevant and still awards the receptions by WR more than receptions by RB.
Position PPR RB 1.00 WR 1.50 TE 2.00
Thoughts?
Defensive ideas to follow soon...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2015 21:26:13 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts? Possible Defensive changes:
Fumble Recoveries (from Opponent) 2 points each....................................increase to 3 points
Opponent Fumble Recovery Yards .025 point for every 1 (1 pt/40 yds)...change to .1 point for every 1 (1 pt/10yds)
Forced Fumbles 3 points each..............................................................increase to 4 points
Number of Interception Return TDs 6 points each .................................OKAY AS IS
Interceptions Caught 4 points each.......................................................increase to 6 points
Interception Return Yards .025 point for every 1 (1 pt/40 yds)...............change to .1 point for every 1 (1 pt/10yds)
Passes Defensed 1.25 point each..........................................................increase to 2.25 pts (same as a tackle -essentially the same affect - a play was stopped)
Blocked Field Goals 7 points each.........................................................OKAY AS IS
Blocked Punts 7 points each................................................................OKAY AS IS
Blocked Extra Points 7 points each.......................................................OKAY AS IS
Tackles 1.75 points each.....................................................................increase to 2.25 points
Assists 1 point each............................................................................increase to 1.25 points
Sacked a QB 3.5 points each...............................................................increase to 4 points
Tackles for a Loss 3 points each..........................................................increase to 3 points
Safeties 10 points each......................................................................OKAY AS IS
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jan 11, 2015 20:03:37 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts? Possible Defensive changes:
Fumble Recoveries (from Opponent) 2 points each....................................increase to 3 points
Opponent Fumble Recovery Yards .025 point for every 1 (1 pt/40 yds)...change to .1 point for every 1 (1 pt/10yds)
Forced Fumbles 3 points each..............................................................increase to 4 points
Number of Interception Return TDs 6 points each .................................OKAY AS IS
Interceptions Caught 4 points each.......................................................increase to 6 points
Interception Return Yards .025 point for every 1 (1 pt/40 yds)...............change to .1 point for every 1 (1 pt/10yds)
Passes Defensed 1.25 point each..........................................................increase to 2.25 pts (same as a tackle -essentially the same affect - a play was stopped)
Blocked Field Goals 7 points each.........................................................OKAY AS IS
Blocked Punts 7 points each................................................................OKAY AS IS
Blocked Extra Points 7 points each.......................................................OKAY AS IS
Tackles 1.75 points each.....................................................................increase to 2.25 points
Assists 1 point each............................................................................increase to 1.25 points
Sacked a QB 3.5 points each...............................................................increase to 4 points
Tackles for a Loss 3 points each..........................................................increase to 3 points
Safeties 10 points each......................................................................OKAY AS IS
Love these proposals by Browns GM. In fact these are some of the recommendations I was going to make as these talks continued forward. The only difference I would have is a more gradual change.
This is what I would propose on the defensive side of the ball:
Tackles down to 1.5 Tackles for loss down to 2.5 QB Sack up to 4 points Forced Fumbles up to 4 points Fumble recovery up to 3 points Interceptions up to 5 points Opponent Fumble Recovery Yards up to .050 point for every 1 yard (1 pt/20yds)
The reason why I would drop tackles a little bit is because middle linebackers can be dominant compared to the rest of the defense, some of these guys really rack up tackles that often times are created by lineman who eat up blockers and never get the credit. By increasing sacks and INT's this will be a direct benefit to other defensive positions other than LB's. If we were to drop points per catch on the offensive side of the ball, we may begin to se some more balance between the offense and the defense.
I'm also opened to a tiered reception points rule like Brown GM suggested to keep TE's a critical part of the game.
Here's what I would propose on the offensive side of the ball:
TE reception 1.5 points WR reception 1.25 points RB reception 1 point
I believe dropping the WR PPR is a must, and honestly dropping the RB PPR could be good as well as many cheap check down receptions that lead to nothing more than very minimal gains often times get an RB more points that he really deserves.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Bills GM (Anthony) on Jan 11, 2015 22:29:11 GMT -5
You want to get rid of PPR all together? Don't like that
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jan 11, 2015 22:40:42 GMT -5
No. I like points per reception. It's a statistical category that's essential to the game, I just think it has too much of an impact right now where it stands at 1.75 per reception. I just think we need a better balance.
|
|
|
Post by Bills GM (Anthony) on Jan 11, 2015 22:41:32 GMT -5
Yes , agreed just don't want it gone completely
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Jan 12, 2015 12:02:37 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts? I'd like to try and keep this simple as possible, so that everyone can chime in and not be burdened with the point increase/decrease proposals. I think because the nature of the game itself has changed it will continually present issues in regards to player position and the points they produce. Imo, there's not too much that can be done with an "all-around player", such as a RB who both runs and catches the ball v. those who are mostly restricted to either/or (workhorses v. teams that often implement change of pace or RB's that share play time). Same applies for LB's who are strictly tackle machines v. those who drop back in coverage or rush the QB, TE's who are essentially WR's., and teams that employ situational DE's. I do like the RB comparison [between Murray and Forte] made by the Rams and think this is something that could be bought into balance.Then there is the separate issue of Legacy teams not being able to field certain player positions adequately, and therefore having to make up the production in other areas. What I am saying, is that although the micro view (break down) presented seems to offer a viable solution of balance, how does the actual outcome look on paper? As I look from a macro standpoint over the past season's stats, offense has produced on average 50 more points per game. If we remove the QB, perhaps 30 or so more points. On defense, Safety's only seem to be down on average 2-3 ppg from LB's. Not much disparity, and could perhaps be tweaked. From there, CB's and DE's down perhaps another couple of points. DT's have always been the least valuable position and not sure much could be done in that position. I would like to see proposed stats on increasing points favorable to the strengths of Safety, CB, and perhaps DE's.
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Jan 12, 2015 19:33:28 GMT -5
No. I like points per reception. It's a statistical category that's essential to the game, I just think it has too much of an impact right now where it stands at 1.75 per reception. I just think we need a better balance. Perhaps minor adjustments on both sides of the ball will help create that better balance we're seeking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2015 1:24:10 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts? If only 14 defensive players were in the top 100, shouldn't we be increasing the points per tackle and other defensive categories? That was my thought in my previous post for the increasing DB points and giving the DL a chance to increase point totals with increased sack points and increased points for tackles for loss(TFL).
If MLB's racking up too many tackles (and points) is a concern, we could offer different points for each position.
Position Pts/tackle Pts/assist Pts/sack Pts/TFL Int Pass Defensed DT 3.50 2.50 6 4 8 3.50 (these guys currently aren't valued enough - this helps) DE 2.25 1.25 4 3 6 2.25 LB 2.00 1 4 3 6 2 CB 2.50 1.50 4 3 5 2.50 S 2.25 1.25 4 3 5 2.25
Note: If players receive points for a tackle during a sack, the sack and TFL points should be reduced.
Just another option to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jan 13, 2015 7:18:06 GMT -5
I think the other thing that we need to change is the points per tackle. Again, only 14 defensive players made the top 100 PPG list, and out of those 14 it was 13 LB's and 1 DE. The one DE of course being JJ Watt, who is a rare exception because he plays on both sides of the ball contributing to his numbers. If you make an exception for Watt, then you have no DE's, DT's, S's or CB's break the top 100 in PPG.
I think points per tackle needs to be dropped a little, and maybe raise INT's and even sacks a little.
Thoughts? I'd like to try and keep this simple as possible, so that everyone can chime in and not be burdened with the point increase/decrease proposals. I think because the nature of the game itself has changed it will continually present issues in regards to player position and the points they produce. Imo, there's not too much that can be done with an "all-around player", such as a RB who both runs and catches the ball v. those who are mostly restricted to either/or (workhorses v. teams that often implement change of pace or RB's that share play time). Same applies for LB's who are strictly tackle machines v. those who drop back in coverage or rush the QB, TE's who are essentially WR's., and teams that employ situational DE's. I do like the RB comparison [between Murray and Forte] made by the Rams and think this is something that could be bought into balance.Then there is the separate issue of Legacy teams not being able to field certain player positions adequately, and therefore having to make up the production in other areas. What I am saying, is that although the micro view (break down) presented seems to offer a viable solution of balance, how does the actual outcome look on paper? As I look from a macro standpoint over the past season's stats, offense has produced on average 50 more points per game. If we remove the QB, perhaps 30 or so more points. On defense, Safety's only seem to be down on average 2-3 ppg from LB's. Not much disparity, and could perhaps be tweaked. From there, CB's and DE's down perhaps another couple of points. DT's have always been the least valuable position and not sure much could be done in that position. I would like to see proposed stats on increasing points favorable to the strengths of Safety, CB, and perhaps DE's.Darryl,
You are right in that there will never be a perfect scoring system, because there are variables in the game itself that will not allow for it. A player like a JJ Watt is a freak of nature, and his multiple talents need to be awarded accordingly. The MLB position is one of those position that will always be in the middle of virtually every play, and should also be awarded for the tremendous job they do. I'm not trying to take that away as much as I'm trying to elevate all the other defensive positions. I think we can incrementally increase the production of DE, S and CB by tweaking up a few categories other than tackles. And, while DT's could benefit as well from some categories, I think by their very nature will always be a position that lack far behind all the other positions in a fantasy league.
My initially instincts were to drop the points per tackle, because I believe that a tackles in general are too highly rewarded in proportion to other types of stats. A tackle is equivalent to a 17 yard run in this league, to reward a tackle so highly seems very disproportionate to me. But, I'm not sure we can do much to remedy that kind of scoring disparity, since we have to find ways to reward defensive players that are somewhat equal to offensive players. While my concerns are that defensive players are not having enough of an impact on the game, having 13 LB's finish in the top 100 shows us that this defensive disparity does not come at the expense of that position. In fact, you can argue that LB's are represented very good in the statistical analysis. The disparity comes with all the other defensive positions. By dropping tackles, and increasing INT's, Sacks, and a few other defensive categories, we may begin to see a small balancing between LB's an the rest of the defense.
Now in regards to offensive players, I believe by dropping the points per reception, that would be a major way to bring down the disparity between offense and defense. If we went from 1.75 PPR down to 1.25, while at the same time dropping tackles from 1.75 down to 1.5, we would see an immediate regulating of LB's in proportion to the rest of the defense, and an even bigger regulating for the disparity on the offensive side that brings defense as whole up closer to par with the offense. I guess what my vision would be is to slightly increase the production of DE, DT, S and CB. Slightly decrease the production of LB's. And a moderate decrease of the points for reception rule. I'm thinking this may be close to the balance needed...
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Jan 13, 2015 15:42:56 GMT -5
I like the idea...perhaps, time given, I could run a couple of player stats for each position and see how the numbers would correlate with goals.
I feel we could accomplish some sort of balance, but can it be done without creating an additional monster (imbalance).
Eg. Some Safety's(as well as other positions) make their living off of tackles and others take aways and or sacks/causing fumbles etc.
So increasing ppt for Safety would boost their stats perhaps over that of LB's if that position's points were reduced un-proportionate.
Overall, I agree with what you are looking to obtain. Not sure if I like the Browns suggested numbers, but I do like the suggested format, and we may be able to work with those numbers to come up with a few game total outcomes for the differing types and quality of players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2015 16:16:31 GMT -5
Darryl - In another league that I am in on MFL, we created a new identical league and put in the new numbers. In that league we had different goals we were trying to meet, but at least you would get to see the numbers for the players as you suggested.
Interested to hear the outcome.
|
|