Value at the Top

[wilwhite]

How much does nabbing the top player help you, position by position?

I checked for the last five years, and was moderately surprised by the results. For each year, only the top scorer at each position is shown, with how much better their FF pts were than the average of the rest of the top 10 (i.e., you'd have at least this many points advantage at that position over the season).

Used 6-pt passing TDs, since it was easy to get historical stats from CBS - and used their DST and K scoring.

2009
114.0 RB1 - CJ2K
68.4 QB - Rodgers
48.2 DST - Packers
43.4 TE - Vernon Davis
28.7 WR1 - Andre Johnson
22.3 K - Kaeding

2010
99.2 RB1 - Foster
44.7 QB - Brady
40.9 TE - Witten
40.8 DST - Steelers
27.1 WR1 - Lloyd
21.3 K - Janikowski

2011
111.8 TE - Gronk
109.2 QB - Rodgers
81.2 RB1 - Rice
75.8 WR1 - Megatron
45.2 K - Akers
38.3 DST - Ravens

2012
80.2 RB1 - AP
71.0 QB - Brees
52.7 DST - Bears
33.2 TE - Graham
27.3 WR1 - Megatron
17.9 K - Walsh

2013
176.8 QB - Peyton
88.4 TE - Graham
83.7 RB1 - Charles
51.9 DST - Seattle
23.3 WR1 - Gordon
19.2 K - Gostkowski

I think there's a lot to get from this... one thing that jumps out at me is that the best TE gave you more of an advantage than the best WR every single year, even before the heyday of Graham and Gronk.

 

[leftypower]

Interesting list Wil. ..... keep it up, I think you're hooked.

 

[Barilko]

Wil you never cease to amaze

 

[Xponentialchaos]

Very interesting.

 

[wilwhite]

Huh. Thought somebody would do more with this....

 

[SmokingMonkey]

Huh. Thought somebody would do more with this....

well, you could argue that it would be more valuable to compare the top guys at each position to the tier that they were in, and not necessarily just going blindly off of the top 'X' number of players at that position.

That way you'd have a better understanding of how that player compared to others at his position, and guys that were roughly drafted around the same time.

I was typing that up when you first put this post up, but then realized that defining the tiers from each season (you'd ideally want to use preseason tiers, and not base the tiers off of how they finished each season) would be more of an exercise in opinion than anything useful for us to analyze.

 

[averagejoe]

Huh. Thought somebody would do more with this....

It is interesting. But the list does represent the best at each position after the season is done. Just looking at 2013, Manning wasn't the 1st QB off the board, Charles wasn't the first RB taken, and Gordon was no where near the top WR drafted.

You can make similar observations from some players in the other years as well.

Sorry, but I'm brain dead. Maybe I'm not reading between the lines?

 

[SteelersPride]

It is interesting. But the list does represent the best at each position after the season is done. Just looking at 2013, Manning wasn't the 1st QB off the board, Charles wasn't the first RB taken, and Gordon was no where near the top WR drafted.

You can make similar observations from some players in the other years as well.

Sorry, but I'm brain dead. Maybe I'm not reading between the lines?

im with you here joe.

What i take away from it is its very valuable to draft the guy who ends up being the top scorer at his position........most of those guys arent the consensus top picks, or really thought of as the top pick coming into said season

 

[TREFF]

Is a lot of info to think about. . But the biggest thing I notice is that we really see the same guy as the top scorer in his position in back to back seasons. It happens, but there sure seems to be a new name in the slot the next year almost across the board. Which means., its definitely to your benefit to grab that top guy, it's very likely that top guy isn't going to be who you thought it would be.

 

[wilwhite]

It is interesting. But the list does represent the best at each position after the season is done. Just looking at 2013, Manning wasn't the 1st QB off the board, Charles wasn't the first RB taken, and Gordon was no where near the top WR drafted.

True - but when somebody takes a guy off the board at a position, they're hoping they've correctly assessed that guy as the highest scorer remaining at that position in the coming year. So if you take the first guy at a position, you're looking for him to be the top scorer. Nobody drafted AP first overall thinking he'd be the 8th RB last year; they thought he'd be the best.

My question is, how much good does it do you if you're right (position by position)?

But I will do a similar chart based on top ADP by position - coming soon.

 

[SteelersPride]

True - but when somebody takes a guy off the board at a position, they're hoping they've correctly assessed that guy as the highest scorer remaining at that position in the coming year. So if you take the first guy at a position, you're looking for him to be the top scorer. Nobody drafted AP first overall thinking he'd be the 8th RB last year; they thought he'd be the best.

My question is, how much good does it do you if you're right (position by position)?

But I will do a similar chart based on top ADP by position - coming soon.

actually im gonna disagree.....No one should think AP is always gonna be first in scoring, or that the first wr taken will be the top scorer. They should think they got a high scoring consistent player...........I never think i drafted the top scorer, i think i got my rock, my stud, my consistent player.........if that makes sense, its impossible to think you got #1

 

[wilwhite]

If you had Charles rated higher, would you still have taken AP first?

 

[SteelersPride]

no, but the point is, its foolish to assume your gonna be right, you want the guy thats DEFINITELY gonna put up points, and be big

 

[TREFF]

no, but the point is, its foolish to assume your gonna be right, you want the guy thats DEFINITELY gonna put up points, and be big

True. . But of the names on that list, the only ones that MIGHT not have been expected to DEFINITELY put up big points that year are Lloyd, Davis, and Gordon. Everyone else, you should have had a reasonable expectation that they'd be at, or very near the top. You're right, it's crazy to assume that your guy is going to be the #1.. even with Graham.. but, there's usually only a very small handful of guys worthy of being in that discussion.

 

[SteelersPride]

right, i mean u assume they have a shot, but you can always argue 3-6 guys could be that guy

 

[Nosferatu]

What it shows me and i'm stating the obvious is that you cannot build your draft board on what happened last year, a lot and I mean a lot of people do.


Rodgers, Calvin and Graham. That's it, in five years they are the only ones to lead their position more than once. I think it would be more interesting to see top 5 at each position each year.

 

[Barilko]

i do not know about everyone- but when i pick at 1 i will always pick who i feel will lead the league in FF points---whether i am write or not i am certainly thinking that my pick will be the best

WW ' s logic is right i didnt draft because i predict the 8th best i draft who i feel will be the best

 

[wilwhite]

One of the things I got out of those numbers, though, is that nailing the top WR usually does less for you than nailing the top TE or DST.

So if I thought I had a good handle on what the top DST will be (I often don't), I'd probably take them "unreasonably" high. And I wouldn't take a WR until my picks for top QB and TE were gone.

 

[Barilko]

One of the things I got out of those numbers, though, is that nailing the top WR usually does less for you than nailing the top TE or DST.

So if I thought I had a good handle on what the top DST will be (I often don't), I'd probably take them "unreasonably" high. And I wouldn't take a WR until my picks for top QB and TE were gone.

very true WilofWhiteDuffBeer

however when it comes to you picking that Wr you and anyone else will be picking the Wr you feel will score the most of the ones who are left

which is so obvious to me i dont know how he could have rebutted that and why i jumped in agreeing with you....

 

[wilwhite]

Was inspired by a couple of other threads to bump this thread with a new question:

If Peyton's miracle season was predictable (and actually predicted by Smostradamus Monkey), who is set up to lead their position by a wide margin this year?

Treff, I think, mentioned that Rodgers may be pissed about falling into the shadows and want to be in the record-setting convo along with Brees and Brady and Peyton. His receiving corps seems deeper, and Lacy has emerged. But even if he gets 50 TDs, would Peyton and Brees (and maybe Stafford and a rejuvenated Brady) keep it close enough so that it's not a great edge?

With Sproles gone, might Graham get even more targets and put up a superhuman year and leave all the other TEs 150 points behind?

Picks? Theories?