Rankings Game

[Trudem]

isnt part of the charm including those that get injured? That is part of the mystery that I enjoy.

 

[TREFF]

I was thinking for the overall ranking to include PPG

whats your thoughts about that

what I am thinking is I can prorate there season to 16 games and take the average of their prorated season and their actual season....

I feel like this would make a more accurate ranking than just their actual season...

That's not something I'm for at all. The rankings are end of season rankings, If I downgrade L. Bell because I assume he misses his usually 2-4 games, and he misses 2-4 games, why should someone who ranked him #1 score the same as I do? If SP knocks Charles way down his list, and I don't, and Charles does end up having problems with that knee, why do I get relief and SP gets no credit?

If you want to do a per game average rankings contest, by all means go for it. But per game average and end of season are two entirely different beasts and shouldn't be lumped together

 

[MilkSpiller22]

That's not something I'm for at all. The rankings are end of season rankings, If I downgrade L. Bell because I assume he misses his usually 2-4 games, and he misses 2-4 games, why should someone who ranked him #1 score the same as I do? If SP knocks Charles way down his list, and I don't, and Charles does end up having problems with that knee, why do I get relief and SP gets no credit?

If you want to do a per game average rankings contest, by all means go for it. But per game average and end of season are two entirely different beasts and shouldn't be lumped together

This doesn't take away the risk of picking an injury prone player on top... I think you are over-rating the affect...

Players with high PPG who miss little games will be on top no matter what... What this really does, is if player A and player B have similar end of season stats, the player who played less games will take the lead...



Again, I am not saying we will do this, I just thought it would have been a good idea... I always thought we care more about who had the better season not who was luckiest to not get hurt...

 

[ehb5]

That's not something I'm for at all. The rankings are end of season rankings, If I downgrade L. Bell because I assume he misses his usually 2-4 games, and he misses 2-4 games, why should someone who ranked him #1 score the same as I do? If SP knocks Charles way down his list, and I don't, and Charles does end up having problems with that knee, why do I get relief and SP gets no credit?

If you want to do a per game average rankings contest, by all means go for it. But per game average and end of season are two entirely different beasts and shouldn't be lumped together

Because injuries are unpredictable and people shouldn't get credit for getting lucky or unlucky with injuries.

 

[leftypower]

This doesn't take away the risk of picking an injury prone player on top... I think you are over-rating the affect...

Players with high PPG who miss little games will be on top no matter what... What this really does, is if player A and player B have similar end of season stats, the player who played less games will take the lead...

Again, I am not saying we will do this, I just thought it would have been a good idea... I always thought we care more about who had the better season not who was luckiest to not get hurt...

I guess the basic question is the purpose of this 'game'. Is it to identify the guys who are the most valuable to a fantasy team? or is it something else?

Actually I don't really care how it is done as long as the scoring is clear to all. ....

 

[Chef99]

Actually I don't really care how it is done as long as the scoring is clear to all. ....

That's a bingo.

 

[tlance]

I guess the basic question is the purpose of this 'game'. Is it to identify the guys who are the most valuable to a fantasy team? or is it something else?

Actually I don't really care how it is done as long as the scoring is clear to all. ....

I agree!

i would make the case that an RB who gives 15 points per game for 8 weeks will make a greater impact than an RB who gives 8 points per game over 16 weeks.

Just an idea, but perhaps you could use PPG and then weight it with a fractional multiplier based on games played.

Something like this:

A guy who plays 16 gets a multiplier of 1. For every game missed, the multiplier gets reduced by .05.

Using the previous example here are the calculations:

A: multiplier = 1 -.05 * 8 games missed = .6
.6 * 15 PPG = 9

B: multiplier = 1
1* 8 = 8

Player A would still be more valuable.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I agree!

i would make the case that an RB who gives 15 points per game for 8 weeks will make a greater impact than an RB who gives 8 points per game over 16 weeks.

Just an idea, but perhaps you could use PPG and then weight it with a fractional multiplier based on games played.

Something like this:

A guy who plays 16 gets a multiplier of 1. For every game missed, the multiplier gets reduced by .05.

Using the previous example here are the calculations:

A: multiplier = 1 -.05 * 8 games missed = .6
.6 * 15 PPG = 9

B: multiplier = 1
1* 8 = 8

Player A would still be more valuable.

I could see where my suggestion may over-rate players, as I was just trying to make it very easy... so I like your idea better...

But however we do this, I do think we should include games missed somehow...

 

[TREFF]

Because injuries are unpredictable and people shouldn't get credit for getting lucky or unlucky with injuries.

Actually they are and aren't. .freak injuries like broken legs, ligament and tendon years are unpredictable. ..the same player missing 4 games every year becuase his vajajay hurts is very predictable

 

[TREFF]

This doesn't take away the risk of picking an injury prone player on top... I think you are over-rating the affect...

Players with high PPG who miss little games will be on top no matter what... What this really does, is if player A and player B have similar end of season stats, the player who played less games will take the lead...



Again, I am not saying we will do this, I just thought it would have been a good idea... I always thought we care more about who had the better season not who was luckiest to not get hurt...

What I'm saying is I don't care for the effect to be measured at all, regardless of how major or minor the effect is

 

[TREFF]

I agree!

i would make the case that an RB who gives 15 points per game for 8 weeks will make a greater impact than an RB who gives 8 points per game over 16 weeks.

Just an idea, but perhaps you could use PPG and then weight it with a fractional multiplier based on games played.

Something like this:

A guy who plays 16 gets a multiplier of 1. For every game missed, the multiplier gets reduced by .05.

Using the previous example here are the calculations:

A: multiplier = 1 -.05 * 8 games missed = .6
.6 * 15 PPG = 9

B: multiplier = 1
1* 8 = 8

Player A would still be more valuable.

But player A wasnt more valuable becuase he was useless half the season. Who gives a damn if he scored one more point on average, if he wasn't available in my lineup half the season?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But player A wasnt more valuable becuase he was useless half the season. Who gives a damn if he scored one more point on average, if he wasn't available in my lineup half the season?

Your missing what I am trying to do...

If player A has 300 points(in 16 games)

Player B has 290(in 10 games)

who had the better fantasy season??

I would say B... you would not??

 

[TREFF]

Your missing what I am trying to do...

If player A has 300 points(in 16 games)

Player B has 290(in 10 games)

who had the better fantasy season??

I would say B... you would not??

I'm not missing that at all. .I totally get what you're saying. .but, what you're apparently missing, is that this has never been about that, it's always been about predicting where guys will finish. .period, two totally seperate things here. Which is why I'm all for doing two seperate deals, and is gladly participate in both, but to me, the point behind each is fundamentally different enough that they shouldn't be lumped together, one or the other, both independently, just not both incorporated together. .that creates something entirely different

 

[TREFF]

Your missing what I am trying to do...

If player A has 300 points(in 16 games)

Player B has 290(in 10 games)

who had the better fantasy season??

I would say B... you would not??

And I would say A, becuase he contributed to my playoffs, B helped get me there and then was the cause of my early exit...that or the 6 games he missed at the start or the middle helped keep me out of the playoffs, and being a stud in weeks 14&15 were pointless

 

[TREFF]

One way is a subjective, "most valuable player" type prediction game, the other is a simple, straight numbers, no opinions or subjectivity to it.

I hate giving credit for times a guy wasn't available. The only time I'll lend it any weight whatsoever, is if I'm trying to predict what a guy MIGHT do next season, and then rank him accordingly. .trying to retroactively say it doesn't matter that he missed games, he was still where you though he'd be had he not missed games is meaningless, becuase he did miss games, he wasn't there when you needed him, there's no credit to be had there

 

[Yellow Fuzzies]

I am in!
Great that Milk is taking this on. Milk you da man...I guess that makes youthe Milk Man.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

One way is a subjective, "most valuable player" type prediction game, the other is a simple, straight numbers, no opinions or subjectivity to it.

I hate giving credit for times a guy wasn't available. The only time I'll lend it any weight whatsoever, is if I'm trying to predict what a guy MIGHT do next season, and then rank him accordingly. .trying to retroactively say it doesn't matter that he missed games, he was still where you though he'd be had he not missed games is meaningless, becuase he did miss games, he wasn't there when you needed him, there's no credit to be had there

I guess, this is another thing we disagree about...LOL

Its not about giving credit to injury players it is recognizing how good they were in the games they did play...

your playoff point is valid, although missing a certain number of games doesn't necessary mean you did not play in the playoffs... But I can agree that the more games you play the bigger the probability that you played the games that were most important...

@tlance,
I think I came up with the formula- if we do decide to go forward with this...

season fantasy points + games missed* base number ppg

where the base number is an agreed upon

the idea is that every player in the position uses the same base PPG, and that it should be around but below Pool average...

I was thinking for RBs and WRs we would use a base PPG of 8,9,10 or 11

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I am in!
Great that Milk is taking this on. Milk you da man...I guess that makes youthe Milk Man.

I do look like JJ Watt... I mean, if you took away the height, the muscles and some other good looking features...

 

[tlance]

And I would say A, becuase he contributed to my playoffs, B helped get me there and then was the cause of my early exit...that or the 6 games he missed at the start or the middle helped keep me out of the playoffs, and being a stud in weeks 14&15 were pointless

See, I would say player B, because he was an elite player in those 10 games. We all preach the importance of depth at RB and WR because we know these players can and will get hurt. Total points does not tell the story.

You need to take the weekly average, subtract the expected score for a replacement level player and then multiply by games played. That is how to determine a player's true value.

What if player A scored 10 points a game, but the best waiver wire replacements scored 9? Player A is only adding 1 point a week for Those extra games. If player B adds 5 points a week over replacement level, he is helping your record more than player A even if he misses 6 games, because I can find a guy to give me 9 points those other weeks.

In the example above, player A would have contributed 16 points above replacement in his 16 games, while player B gives you 50 points in 10 games. I am rolling with B all day long.

 

[tlance]

I guess, this is another thing we disagree about...LOL

Its not about giving credit to injury players it is recognizing how good they were in the games they did play...

your playoff point is valid, although missing a certain number of games doesn't necessary mean you did not play in the playoffs... But I can agree that the more games you play the bigger the probability that you played the games that were most important...

@tlance,
I think I came up with the formula- if we do decide to go forward with this...

season fantasy points + games missed* base number ppg

where the base number is an agreed upon

the idea is that every player in the position uses the same base PPG, and that it should be around but below Pool average...

I was thinking for RBs and WRs we would use a base PPG of 8,9,10 or 11

LOL. I just read this. Pretty sure you and I are talking about the exact same thing. Your base PPG I think is my replacement player production.