He's a reliable fantasy football producer, putting up good numbers year after year. And then last year the numbers were far below what we've come to expect. You have to guess. Perhaps the player is now in decline, and will never produce high value fantasy points again. Or perhaps circumstance led the player to a down year, and he is ready to return to high fantasy football production.
Several 2008 disappointments lead to this dilemma in 2009 fantasy drafts. I'm (mostly) not talking about players like Tom Brady or Carson Palmer, who missed most of the previous season with injury; whether you draft players like that is dependent on whether you think they've recovered from their injuries. I
LaDanian Tomlinson
From 2002-2007, Tomlinson averaged 2070 yards from scrimmage and 19.8 touchdowns per season; he is one of the greatest fantasy players ever. In 2007, at 29 years old, Tomlinson still produced a solid fantasy season for a first round RB (1536 and 12), but it was not what we were used to, and it was not a season to justify a top-three pick. Worse, Tomlinson has a career 4.4 yards per attempt, and in 2008 had 3.8 yards per attempt, lowest since his rookie year.
Those who draft Tomlinson this season would probably be happy with 1500 total yards and 12 total touchdowns. The question is whether 2008 indicated a decline.
Down year or downturn?
Torry Holt
From 2000-2007, Holt averaged 1,384 yards receiving and from 2003-2007 he averaged 9.6 TDs per season. In 2008, on a terrible Rams team, the 32 year old Holt had 796 yards and 3 TDs. He's switched teams, joining a Jacksonville Jaguar team long in need of a good #1 WR. Good wide receivers are often productive into their mid-30s. But is Holt no longer worthy of being a fantasy starter?
Chad Ochocinco
From 2003-2007 under the name Chad Johnson, Ochocinco averaged 1,374 receiving yards and 8.6 TDs. In 2008 the Bengals' offense struggled mightily, as Carson Palmer missed most of the season. The 30 year old Ochocinco had 540 yards and 4 TDs. Will the return of his quarterback return Ochocinco to fantasy lineups, or has Ochocinco hit his steep decline?
Matt Hasselbeck
From 2002 to 2007, you knew what you got from Matt Hasselbeck: about 1.5 TDs and somewhere over 200 yards per game. He's not a fantasy stud, but if you're using early picks on RBs and WRs, he's a solid QB to fill out your lineup. In 2007, he had a career hight 3,966 yards and 28 TDs. In 2008, at age 33, he followed up a career year by missing nine games with injury and generally stinking in the games he played (52.2% passing, 5 TDs, 10 INTs). Should he enter 2009 as a fantasy backup, or as a quality starter for a team focused on strength at other positions?
Friday, July 10, 2009
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Coast Guard: Tom Brady v. Peyton Manning
The Coast Guard: policing the police. I judge writers' fantasy football arguments. I am assessing the quality of the argument, not the quality of the player being argued about. I keep my assessments of players closer to the 100% polyester vest, because those lascivious Hazelweirders read this blog.
At Yahoo!, Andy Behrens and Brandon Funston debate whether Tom Brady or Tom Brady is the better 2009 fantasy pick.
I'd call their argument a draw. Each cites very useful numbers, and each cites relevant facts. Behrens' most interesting stat is that even with Matt Cassel last season, the Patriots outscored and outgained the Indianapolis Colts. I personally side with Funston because he cites Manning's incredible year-to-year consistency; when I draft a fantasy quarterback, I like when I just know he's getting 26 TDs and 4,000 yards, which is what I know with Manning.
I'm very interested in where each Brady and Manning get drafted this season. I think it's largely a matter of personal preference which gets taken first. Does anybody have an argument for one over the other than Behrens and Funston didn't use?
At Yahoo!, Andy Behrens and Brandon Funston debate whether Tom Brady or Tom Brady is the better 2009 fantasy pick.
I'd call their argument a draw. Each cites very useful numbers, and each cites relevant facts. Behrens' most interesting stat is that even with Matt Cassel last season, the Patriots outscored and outgained the Indianapolis Colts. I personally side with Funston because he cites Manning's incredible year-to-year consistency; when I draft a fantasy quarterback, I like when I just know he's getting 26 TDs and 4,000 yards, which is what I know with Manning.
I'm very interested in where each Brady and Manning get drafted this season. I think it's largely a matter of personal preference which gets taken first. Does anybody have an argument for one over the other than Behrens and Funston didn't use?
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
"You're just postponing the inevitable."
I don't know why I should remember this; in fact, I might not be remembering it, but might be making up a memory. But I think there is an episode of Northern Exposure, when everybody in town was waiting for some sort of ice to break, and until it does, many people are excessively horny. Rob Morrow's character and Janine Turner's character are horny for each other and fantasizing over each other. In one fantasy (and this scene may have been used in the commercial promo, which is why it's ingrained in my memory), Morrow is looking at Janine Turner (probably in negligee), who erotically says,
"You're just postponing the inevitable."
This phrase has been stuck with me for decades. It comes to me at strange moments. I didn't even stick with the show (on the other hand, it's quite understandable that lines from Seinfeld and The Simpsons remain firmly at hand in my memory). My adolescent fascination with Janine Turner passed. Still that line.
Every day this summer, I click on some football news sites, expecting to see a news story about Brett Favre signing with the Vikings. This story will come with no surprise. We all expect to see it eventually. In fact, I would be surprised (and mildly relieved) to hear that Favre is not joining the Vikings. But still I check, waiting for the solid confirmation. Every day I think, you're just postponing the inevitable.
"You're just postponing the inevitable."
This phrase has been stuck with me for decades. It comes to me at strange moments. I didn't even stick with the show (on the other hand, it's quite understandable that lines from Seinfeld and The Simpsons remain firmly at hand in my memory). My adolescent fascination with Janine Turner passed. Still that line.
Every day this summer, I click on some football news sites, expecting to see a news story about Brett Favre signing with the Vikings. This story will come with no surprise. We all expect to see it eventually. In fact, I would be surprised (and mildly relieved) to hear that Favre is not joining the Vikings. But still I check, waiting for the solid confirmation. Every day I think, you're just postponing the inevitable.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Fantasy: The Revolution Continues
Check out Fanball's Fantasy Football 2009 magazine. In "Darn the Luck! Fantasy Football Play Formats" (26-27), Danny Goldin discusses the flaws of head-to-head formats, and suggests a few alternatives. One of those alternatives will be familiar to Hazelweirders, and to regular readers of this blog:
"Another format that I personally recommend utilizes what is called a power scheduling system. In this format, every team plays every opponent every week. For example, let's say you play in a 12-team league. If you score the most points in the league on a given week, you'd accumulate an 11-0 record. On the flipside, if you end up with a lowest point total, you'd go 0-11."
Terrific! We call this cross-country scoring, but by any name I support the revolution. Thank you, Danny Goldin, for helping to spread the revolution.
However, Goldin's power scheduling system also includes "a creative playoff format." I believe the concept of fantasy football playoffs is absurd. In fantasy football, you have no control over your opponent's performance; the game is more like golf, where several competitors play independently and the best performer wins, without impacting each other's performance in a concrete way. A fantasy playoff, then, simply rewards a team for having a hot performance in week 15, 16, or 17, or for facing an opponent (or opponents, in Goldin's variation) that has a cold week. I understand a playoff in real football: the teams compete in a contest in which they directly engage with each other. But in fantasy football, why should week 15 be more important than, say, week 8? Or week 11? Or week 2? It's just random. Fantasy playoffs are another way in which luck gets injected into the system.
Luck will always be a part of everything. However, when devising a fair competition, you should attempt to limit hazard as much as possible. Awarding a fantasy team that had its best performances in week 15 and 16, but may not have been the best team over the course of the entire season, allows hazard too much control. With cross-country scoring, you can just eliminate the playoff entirely. The Hazelweird League has no playoff, and it's pretty rare for the champion to be determined before week 17.
A few other suggestions:
We've also developed a way to maintain interest and competition to the very end of the season. We now determine the next year's snake draft order by the order of the final standings the previous season. Not reverse order, but the same order. This will be the first season we try it, but it is an effort to prevent people from tanking at the end of the season for better picks (I've done it: in 2005 my entire week 17 lineup was Minnesota Viking players). We hope that people will compete with interest to the end of the season, partly for pride, of course, but partly to secure better picks the next season. I also don't think it will lead to a great competitive imbalance, since I'm not sure there's a direct correlation between early picks and winning a league.
I also have a recommendation for other leagues. Determine your snake draft order early, then allow for trading of draft picks. This can add a few months extra fun to your fantasy football league. It also allows for even more strategy and control. Of course an auction draft is preferable (it's fair and extremely fun), but if you must do a snake draft, allowing the trading of picks gives you a little more control. And why wouldn't you want to stretch out the fun of fantasy football?
"Another format that I personally recommend utilizes what is called a power scheduling system. In this format, every team plays every opponent every week. For example, let's say you play in a 12-team league. If you score the most points in the league on a given week, you'd accumulate an 11-0 record. On the flipside, if you end up with a lowest point total, you'd go 0-11."
Terrific! We call this cross-country scoring, but by any name I support the revolution. Thank you, Danny Goldin, for helping to spread the revolution.
However, Goldin's power scheduling system also includes "a creative playoff format." I believe the concept of fantasy football playoffs is absurd. In fantasy football, you have no control over your opponent's performance; the game is more like golf, where several competitors play independently and the best performer wins, without impacting each other's performance in a concrete way. A fantasy playoff, then, simply rewards a team for having a hot performance in week 15, 16, or 17, or for facing an opponent (or opponents, in Goldin's variation) that has a cold week. I understand a playoff in real football: the teams compete in a contest in which they directly engage with each other. But in fantasy football, why should week 15 be more important than, say, week 8? Or week 11? Or week 2? It's just random. Fantasy playoffs are another way in which luck gets injected into the system.
Luck will always be a part of everything. However, when devising a fair competition, you should attempt to limit hazard as much as possible. Awarding a fantasy team that had its best performances in week 15 and 16, but may not have been the best team over the course of the entire season, allows hazard too much control. With cross-country scoring, you can just eliminate the playoff entirely. The Hazelweird League has no playoff, and it's pretty rare for the champion to be determined before week 17.
A few other suggestions:
We've also developed a way to maintain interest and competition to the very end of the season. We now determine the next year's snake draft order by the order of the final standings the previous season. Not reverse order, but the same order. This will be the first season we try it, but it is an effort to prevent people from tanking at the end of the season for better picks (I've done it: in 2005 my entire week 17 lineup was Minnesota Viking players). We hope that people will compete with interest to the end of the season, partly for pride, of course, but partly to secure better picks the next season. I also don't think it will lead to a great competitive imbalance, since I'm not sure there's a direct correlation between early picks and winning a league.
I also have a recommendation for other leagues. Determine your snake draft order early, then allow for trading of draft picks. This can add a few months extra fun to your fantasy football league. It also allows for even more strategy and control. Of course an auction draft is preferable (it's fair and extremely fun), but if you must do a snake draft, allowing the trading of picks gives you a little more control. And why wouldn't you want to stretch out the fun of fantasy football?
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Fantasy: Against Head to Head
I've already argued against the logical fairness of head-to-head standings here and here. But there's a better argument for cross-country scoring in fantasy football: fun.
Cross-country scoring works like this. Each week, you are essentially competing in a head-to-head matchup with every team in your league. If you are in a ten team league, and you score the most points, then you won each of your matchups to finish 9-0. If you had the second-most points that week, then you beat eight opponents, but suffered one defeat, to finish 8-1. Etc. You can use an online league to keep track of the scoring, and then you simply have one person in your league keep the standings based on that scoring.
This makes fantasy football incredibly fun because virtually every football game features fantasy interest. If you are playing head-to-head, the only games with a fantasy impact are games featuring your team's players, and games featuring your opponents' teams' players. But in cross-country scoring, you are competing against every starter in your league, and there is rarely a game that doesn't feature at least one starter.
Monday Night Football is particularly fun. Let me paint a simplified and imagined scenario. Going into a Monday Night game between the Jaguars and Steelers, you have 60 points, the fourth most of the week so far, and have Maurice Jones-Drew. Another opponent has Santonio Holmes, and he's going into the week with 61 points, third most of the week. The second highest score is 68, and the highest score of the week is 75. As you are watching the game, every play made by either MJD or Holmes is full of tension. Every point scored by one of these players pushes you ahead of or behind your closest opponent. Furthermore, you know that if MJD scores a TD and gets even a modest number of yards, you can catch the second-place finisher to finish 8-1. And if MJD runs wild, you could win the week with a 9-0 finish.
Every play matters; a touchdown at any point by your own player might give you 2-3 more wins that week. This is a frequent occurrence in the Hazelweird League: a bunch of teams are bunched together within five points of each other, and one player scoring a TD late in a Monday Night matchup can push his team past multiple other teams.
Of course, this is a simplified scenario. In a Monday Night game between the Steelers and Jaguars, typical fantasy starters would be MJD, Holmes, plus Ben Roethlisberger, Hines Ward, the Steeler Defense, the Steeler Kicker, and possibly the Jaguar Defense, Willie Parker, Heath Miller, the Jaguar Kicker, and David Garrard. In a head-to-head league, you wouldn't care about most of those players. In a cross-country league, you care about every one of these players. You have to: every single fantasy starter in a game could impact your finish for the week.
Cross-country scoring means you're watching every game with fantasy interest. The Hazelweird League features 90 starting positions--that means there are 90 players out there impacting your fantasy finish. You can imagine how fun it is to follow stats and scores on a Sunday.
Any questions about our revolution?
Cross-country scoring works like this. Each week, you are essentially competing in a head-to-head matchup with every team in your league. If you are in a ten team league, and you score the most points, then you won each of your matchups to finish 9-0. If you had the second-most points that week, then you beat eight opponents, but suffered one defeat, to finish 8-1. Etc. You can use an online league to keep track of the scoring, and then you simply have one person in your league keep the standings based on that scoring.
This makes fantasy football incredibly fun because virtually every football game features fantasy interest. If you are playing head-to-head, the only games with a fantasy impact are games featuring your team's players, and games featuring your opponents' teams' players. But in cross-country scoring, you are competing against every starter in your league, and there is rarely a game that doesn't feature at least one starter.
Monday Night Football is particularly fun. Let me paint a simplified and imagined scenario. Going into a Monday Night game between the Jaguars and Steelers, you have 60 points, the fourth most of the week so far, and have Maurice Jones-Drew. Another opponent has Santonio Holmes, and he's going into the week with 61 points, third most of the week. The second highest score is 68, and the highest score of the week is 75. As you are watching the game, every play made by either MJD or Holmes is full of tension. Every point scored by one of these players pushes you ahead of or behind your closest opponent. Furthermore, you know that if MJD scores a TD and gets even a modest number of yards, you can catch the second-place finisher to finish 8-1. And if MJD runs wild, you could win the week with a 9-0 finish.
Every play matters; a touchdown at any point by your own player might give you 2-3 more wins that week. This is a frequent occurrence in the Hazelweird League: a bunch of teams are bunched together within five points of each other, and one player scoring a TD late in a Monday Night matchup can push his team past multiple other teams.
Of course, this is a simplified scenario. In a Monday Night game between the Steelers and Jaguars, typical fantasy starters would be MJD, Holmes, plus Ben Roethlisberger, Hines Ward, the Steeler Defense, the Steeler Kicker, and possibly the Jaguar Defense, Willie Parker, Heath Miller, the Jaguar Kicker, and David Garrard. In a head-to-head league, you wouldn't care about most of those players. In a cross-country league, you care about every one of these players. You have to: every single fantasy starter in a game could impact your finish for the week.
Cross-country scoring means you're watching every game with fantasy interest. The Hazelweird League features 90 starting positions--that means there are 90 players out there impacting your fantasy finish. You can imagine how fun it is to follow stats and scores on a Sunday.
Any questions about our revolution?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
