FantasySharks.com

Kind of random, but wanted to see what some vets thought about this...

We can talk about players, projections, scarcity all we want...end of the day it's about production relative to the position. Every year I do my own projections (not overly deep but enough). I was thinking about how to gauge which positions to focus on in a given year depending on settings.

So for say League A (say 12 teams), I make setting changes and get the new point projections. Then, I take the projected points of player minus the average points projected for the starters (12 QB, 24 RB, 36 WR, 12 TE). This gives me a "spread". Then in one sheet, I hard-coat it all in and sort by the "spread". Then rank the sheet 1 though xx. Then I sort back by position...and then take both the average and standard deviation of the starters of each position's rank.

Now I should have an ordered list measured based on my expectations of players relative to their own position but weighed against other positions. Now this doesn't account for the magnitude of spread (how much player A is above average), but gives an idea of where the positions measure up against each other in terms of production skew.

This year, it shows (relatively and based on my projections) that QB is most spread followed by RB, TE, then WR. This tells me I should look to tie up a top QB and then go after RBs. I know, I know...gee whiz. But it might be more useful if the settings were much different and left me wondering where things stacked.

Thoughts? And if still reading...thanks for taking the time to read and hopefully comment on if it's worthwhile, what else to use it for, if it's just one long waste of time, etc.

Yeah, VBD is basically what I had in mind without using the term. For what it's worth, I think I was looking at it on a more zoomed-out approach that which player to take and where. I was thinking as far as draft makeup like: QB RB RB WR WR WR TE type approach instead of by player (although that of course is the obvious perk)....through using the avg and std of the "VBD" rank. Thanks for the link. I think I might try and incorporate some of the understood methods in as well for more relation....such as average draft position to weigh the ebb and flow of the positions.

I use the same process. It shows where the value is. Me likey.

The problem with the VBD is it doesn't take into account how many people are available at a given position. In most leagues you start 1 QB ad at least 2 RBs. After round 4 there are no RBs worth playing. This means in order to have a hope of competing you have to take at least two RBs by the end of round 4. If you grab a top QB early you could then go RB/RB at the next turn and probably be okay (depending on your draft). But if you sleep on RBs you will get burnt.

This is why I do work out a value for each player, I also keep ADP on my sheet and sort by both before making a decision. Sometimes you can get more value over all by taking a lower value player now and getting the higher valued player a round or two later.

Each draft is unique. There as no one best strategy that always works. It's best to give yourself flexibility in your sheets.

_________________
QB: Rivers,Cutler
WR:Welker,Malcolm Floyd, Hawkins, Andre Roberts
RB:Charles, Lawfirm, McGahee, Stewart
TE: Graham

1 20 passing
1 10 rushing/receiving
1 PPR, 12 man league.
All TDs 6 Points.

sure it does, at least the way the OP is doing it. you are comparing the #1 starter vs. the worst starter at each position. i do the deviation based on this but still add a half dozen more player's #'s to get a better idea how the positions tail off. since i draft more than just starting positions.

_________________
K/DEF challenge 2011 & 2012 champion

I do like your system, I wish more sites would do something like this.

One other factor to throw in would be a players ceiling/floor. I'm not really sure how to do this, but it would help you target players with high ceilings in the later rounds of the draft when you are rounding out your flex/bench positions.

Most rankings already take the high ceiling players into account and bump their predictions for these players to compensate.

Did I just say anything useful or have I been drinking too much on Labor day?

vbd does incorporate the number of players at each position if you tweak the baselines a bit...

i do it a little bit more involved but you can generally start by counting your total starters (including the flex)

so if you start RB, RB, WR, WR, flex, TE in a 12 team league you have 72 starters total...

now list your RBs, WR, and TEs in scoring order from your projections...

lets say you have 13 TEs 26 RBs and 33 WRs...

use those as your VBD baseline along with the 12th QB, D, K...etc

this is a modified worst starter (as I said, I incorporate past drafting data from my league that I have been drafting with for a long time, so this is just where I start from)...

but it along with ADP on hand is a way to set baseline and incorporate true player value, and where the bargains are from VBD

I don't think I explained my objection well enough. You are both correct you can incorporate number of available players and number of players started. But what it doesn't account for well is how many of those players are worth starting. For instance I play in a league where you can play 3 RBs. I use a variation of this as one of my considerations when drafting, I also use ADP and projected points. I like to have a full picture when making a decision. Not just limiting my self to a weighted number. So, I'm not arguing against using a VBD I'm arguing against exclusively using a VBD and ignoring everything else.

_________________
QB: Rivers,Cutler
WR:Welker,Malcolm Floyd, Hawkins, Andre Roberts
RB:Charles, Lawfirm, McGahee, Stewart
TE: Graham

1 20 passing
1 10 rushing/receiving
1 PPR, 12 man league.
All TDs 6 Points.

The problem with projections is I have never seen a single set of reliable projections when it comes to football, so the sample you're using (whatever it is) is useless. This is a beneficial practice when it comes to baseball, but in football it's bunk.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32

We've argued about this before, and I know your approach is a little different; but from my perspective, assigning numbers to players isn't divorced from basic talent/opportunity assessment. It's all the same thing--numbers just make comparisons easier for certain tasks, and are certainly useful for communication.

Yes, yes we have, turning into an annual thing! The output of a dataset is a lot more comforting on draft day, but I'll argue until I'm blue in the face that it doesn't matter if the dataset is an unreliable one.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32

What I like to do is on my first pick take the best player available.
And with my second pick I take the best player available there as well.
And on my third pick I will take the best player available.

It's a strategy that has worked out about 50/50 for me

Just as unreliable as tier ranking, or any kind of list. Opportunity is difficult to quantify--so to that end, I believe numbers end up too complex to be useful for the layman. I would be surprised though, if Vegas didn't have lots of projections, and lots of numbers involved in their decisions.

Agreed about the difference between Baseball and Football though....a lot different.