|
Doltos posted:I'd say injury prone is totally valid for past injuries but predicting future injuries in different parts of the body isn't really an exact science. Some guys tear their ACL and play out their career while other guys get nagging tendon soreness that causes them to get shelved a couple weeks each year. Some guys tear their rotator cuff and never worry about it again while others re-tear it and re-tear it. But I guess being Gronk and injuring every different part of his body is just bad luck. When you don't have access to sufficient information to predict an outcome, we call the outcomes "random", even if you live in a deterministic universe. I completely believe that there is a compelling mechanistic narrative behind why any given player got injured and why others didn't. My understanding of the literature is that these explanations may include movement biomechanics, scar tissue buildup, bone brittleness, preparation and hydration, balance deficiencies, reflex speed, and pain tolerance. The problem is, none of us have access to any of that information. "He missed games in the past" has become a crutch for our ignorance, and I've been happy to scoop up Demarco Murray in the second or Gronk in the third or Edelman and FJax and Big Ben practically for free. I avoid guys with a concussion history and rarely play guys hurt during the season but that's about it.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
Hrochard posted:PPR: 1 for TEs, .5 for WRs, .25 for RBs This is a really good idea. I think the idea of splitting values of PPR across positions is a really good idea. I hadn't seen that before. I could see a case for making TE's 1 and RB's and WR .5 VVV SouthShoreSamurai fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Aug 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
SouthShoreSamurai posted:This is a really good idea. I'm just curious why the RB PPR is only .25. If you wanted to increase the value of pass catching RBs, why not just make it 1PPR? For the record, my league does 1PPR for RB, .75PPR for TE, and .5PPR for WR which I think makes more sense than straight 1PPR for all positions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Hrochard posted:Guys, thanks for all the valuable feedback. I was feeling slightly nuts considering Gronk at #1 overall, but the scoring bonus really makes him valuable. Also, this sets my mind straight on the Hopkins issue. No problem. Just in case you needed data to make yourself feel better about taking Gronk as a first rounder, take a look at the numbers for total targets for TE's last year: http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/reports/targets/te.php Something interesting to note, Gronk is #1 even with a big fat 0 in game 17.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Gearman posted:No problem. Just in case you needed data to make yourself feel better about taking Gronk as a first rounder, take a look at the numbers for total targets for TE's last year: Honestly, that just sells me more on the idea of Greg Olsen later on. The drop off between Gronk in the first and Olsen in say...the 4th isn't anywhere near the drop off of a 1st round RB to a 4th round RB
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
89 posted:Honestly, that just sells me more on the idea of Greg Olsen later on. The drop off between Gronk in the first and Olsen in say...the 4th isn't anywhere near the drop off of a 1st round RB to a 4th round RB Honestly I'd be happy with either Gronk in the first or someone like Bell/Charles/Peterson. In my 0.5 PPR league, Gronk ended up with 219 points, to Olson's 173, a difference of 3 points per game. That's a pretty nice advantage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
89 posted:Honestly, that just sells me more on the idea of Greg Olsen later on. The drop off between Gronk in the first and Olsen in say...the 4th isn't anywhere near the drop off of a 1st round RB to a 4th round RB Olsen now has to compete with funchess for targets though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
Three things: I have edited my ESPN Pre-draft player rankings twice now and they are not saving. I was clicking the save button after every couple of moves and that still did not help. But the weird thing is that they are roughly what I want them to be. Is this a known issue? I'm using elboberto's cheat sheet generator linked in Berr4theBeerGod's reddit post. Anyone else have luck with these? With scoring like this:  the elboberto cheat sheet generator suggests taking a QB very early. Even without the big game bonuses, Luck and Brees are slated to score almost 800 points. Should I break the "take QB late round" rule and grab one ASAP?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Papes posted:Olsen now has to compete with funchess for targets though. Damnit. I'm really just trying to mentally prepare myself what to draft at 7th pick in my 10 man league. I'm thinking there's a good chance that Gronk, Charles, and CJ Anderson will be there. I could possibly nab CJ in the 2nd, but I think I'm gonna try to get JJ Watt there. I am SUPER high on CJ Anderson. He was already a beast last year and now with Gary Kubiak there.....oh my CJ. I'm thinking CJ finishes top 3 in RBs. - Gary Kubiak makes RBs superstars (See Arian Foster, Justin Forsett) - He uses bell cow backs and has stated it's CJ's job to lose - Gotta up that run game and protect Peyton so he doesn't notoriously fall apart at the end of the year - CJ Anderson was the top scoring RB for the rest of the year last year after he got the starting job 89 fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Aug 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Thanks for the all the advice guys ill look into 4 for 4 as well as getting off my rear end and doing actual research
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
PyroDwarf posted:the elboberto cheat sheet generator suggests taking a QB very early. Even without the big game bonuses, Luck and Brees are slated to score almost 800 points. Should I break the "take QB late round" rule and grab one ASAP? A point per completion has got to be some sort of typo or something because that is batshit crazy. You'd have to take a qb in the first no matter who is on the board and then think about taking a second in the next round to cover byes and tough matchups. It will be the norm for qbs to outscore all of the skill positions combined. It's like playing a game where you draw a quarterback out of a hat and see who drew the best one, only the game takes 15 weeks to play and you're forced to pay attention to a bunch of other things that don't matter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:A point per completion has got to be some sort of typo or something because that is batshit crazy. You'd have to take a qb in the first no matter who is on the board and then think about taking a second in the next round to cover byes and tough matchups. It will be the norm for qbs to outscore all of the skill positions combined. I was debating about this; while it's going to cause QBs to outscore everyone else by an absurd amount, their relative values shouldn't change that much because most QBs have about the same yards per completion. In other words, positional scarcity isn't going to shift, so you'd still want to value the top RBs and WRs over the QBs. But... that assumes nobody ever gets hurt. In this format, having to pull a QB off of FA is going to murder you because you absolutely must have a starting quality QB every week. That means most teams are probably going to draft a QB for the bench, which means there's going to be a run on QBs in the draft. Kind of a tough call.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Doltos posted:I'd say the quality of the team is the most important factor but of course I agree that age and injury history matters too. You saying personnel changes at other positions just agrees with my argument, but whatever. I think the inability to even cede a little bit that good player on good team will usually have more chances to put up points than good player on bad team is mind boggling. Your first four picks are your most valuable! You can't gamble on your WR1, RB1, or your next two picks that will hopefully be confident picks that you can trot out every week. You don't want your third or fourth round picks to be gambles, you want sure fire scorers there. Once you start delving into your late QB picks or 2nd/3rd WR/RBs, then you can start gambling on the T.J. Yeldons and Latavius Murrays of the world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Drew Brees 1.01 in points per completion
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:When you don't have access to sufficient information to predict an outcome, we call the outcomes "random", even if you live in a deterministic universe. Sports injuries in general are a hugely debated topic in the exercise science community in general. Like for instance there's equal research on both sides of the argument that stretching before a game prevents injuries. There's research that says stretching before working out makes you weaker. There's research that says ACL injuries can be guessed through genetics. And, like you said, there's so many explanations that combine physiological deficiencies, dietary concerns, and just plain bad luck to explain why people get hurt and why people don't. But, you can sort of tell the other story with injuries. Like the player might not get injured again, but the injury could have sapped the agility from the person. You can take a Victor Cruz and maybe at least have a reasonable expectation that he's not going to put up big yards again not only because of the addition of ODB taking targets, but also because today's Cruz is probably going to be physically inferior to pre-injury Cruz. It's why we avoid older RBs who have dinged up injury histories or speedster WRs that just got a foot injury. I think it's very reasonable to let some guys drop based on a combined age+injury history assumption. Gronk in the third is ridiculous since he's still in the prime of his life, but 30-31 year old Gronk who will definitely be dinged up more as the years go by will probably put up a subpar line and not be worth the 2nd round ADP he's given in the 2020 fantasy draft.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:I was debating about this; while it's going to cause QBs to outscore everyone else by an absurd amount, their relative values shouldn't change that much because most QBs have about the same yards per completion. In other words, positional scarcity isn't going to shift, so you'd still want to value the top RBs and WRs over the QBs. That's not true, you're getting 1 point per completion, not points per completion percentage or yards per completion. Brees had the most completions at 456, to Matt Ryan's 415 in second, to Andrew Luck's 380 in sixth, to Derek Carr's 348 in twelfth. With just (1) 1 point per pass completion, (2) 4 pt passing TD, and (3) 1 point per 20 passing yards, but ignoring all the yardage bonuses because those are annoying to add in, Brees was QB#1 averaging 53 ppg, Cutler QB#6 averaging 47 ppg, and Palmer QB#11 at 45 ppg. 8 ppg difference from #1 to #12 at a position is pretty ridiculous. Having such a large completion bonus really fucks with things in other ways, too, like making Rodgers QB#7, I guess because Green Bay's offense is too efficient. In terms of points per game, it also made QBs #13 through 17 Foles, Sanchez, Orton, Stafford, and Cousins  I imagine the bonuses will cure a little of that insanity, but that's a really counter intuitive change to scoring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Doltos posted:Sports injuries in general are a hugely debated topic in the exercise science community in general. Like for instance there's equal research on both sides of the argument that stretching before a game prevents injuries. There's research that says stretching before working out makes you weaker. There's research that says ACL injuries can be guessed through genetics. And, like you said, there's so many explanations that combine physiological deficiencies, dietary concerns, and just plain bad luck to explain why people get hurt and why people don't. Focus, dude. I believe that you can avoid tangents if you put your mind to it. I said "people have superstitions about injury proneness", to which you said "What I think real injury prone is risk of injuries in the same spot. So past ACL tearers should be avoided". This is literally exactly the superstition I am saying that I will take advantage of. If you avoid people who have torn their ACL, you would have missed out on big seasons from AP, JCharles, Frank Gore, Maclin, Brady, Rivers, and Gronk (none of whom have torn their ACL a second time, because previous ACL tears aren't predictive of future ACL tears in football). All of these guys fell later than they should have because of superstitions about injury proneness. The performance impact of particular injuries on performance is a separate issue (and why I am avoiding Cruz and Reed this year). The helpfulness of stretching is irrelevant. Age is a non-sequitur (unless you mean to say that age is correlated with injury risk, in which case that's correct - in the sense that younger players tend to miss more games to injury than older players, in opposition to your implication). I am making a simple statement about "injury proneness": people are superstitious about players that have missed games in the past, which in turn causes those players to fall later than they should during drafts. edit: speaking of ACLs, reports coming in that Gurley will miss the first few games. Forever_Peace fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
I'm going to check out the fantasypros premium service, but in the meantime, allow me to vent about my Keeper conundrum (10-Team standard ESPN scoring). I'm going to lock in Jeremy Hill for a 10th round pick and am tossing up between: Kelvin Benjamin - 8th Round Matt Forte - 1st Round (I have the 8th Pick) I've spent hours trying to work out who my opponents are going to keep and assuming I take Benjamin my results are that there will be 3 Top 10 RBs on the board and 4 live picks by the time it gets to my Pick 8. I'm praying the Rodgers fanboy uses his first round pick on that which still leaves 3RBs for 3 people before me. Do I take the risk that an RB will fall to me and go for the extra keeper value with Benjamin in the 8th (Is Benjamin going to be good this year?) or do I just suck it up and use my Pick 8 on the Forte keeper and lock in an (on paper) stud RB combo from the beginning?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
xcore posted:I'm going to check out the fantasypros premium service, but in the meantime, allow me to vent about my Keeper conundrum (10-Team standard ESPN scoring). Keep hill and Forte and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJTnhLv0jvk
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
LmaoTheKid posted:Keep hill and Forte and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJTnhLv0jvk Normally I would agree with this take, but I think the marginal difference between Forte and who else you could get at 1.8, even in a keeper league where the first round is barren, is too small to be worth it. Benjamin for an 8th is great value. Like, the worst case scenario if you pass on Forte and he's gone by 1.8 is... what, Frank Gore? gently caress, I might prefer Gore to Forte this year anyways.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
xcore posted:I'm going to check out the fantasypros premium service, but in the meantime, allow me to vent about my Keeper conundrum (10-Team standard ESPN scoring).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Running backs win championships and WRs are a dime a dozen. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
LmaoTheKid posted:Running backs win championships and WRs are a dime a dozen. Counterpoint: Chicago sucks donkey dick and Forte is gonna catch much fewer passes this year. I'd honestly rather have Gore or Lamar Miller.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Focus, dude. I believe that you can avoid tangents if you put your mind to it. I said "people have superstitions about injury proneness", to which you said "What I think real injury prone is risk of injuries in the same spot. So past ACL tearers should be avoided". This is literally exactly the superstition I am saying that I will take advantage of. If you avoid people who have torn their ACL, you would have missed out on big seasons from AP, JCharles, Frank Gore, Maclin, Brady, Rivers, and Gronk (none of whom have torn their ACL a second time, because previous ACL tears aren't predictive of future ACL tears in football). All of these guys fell later than they should have because of superstitions about injury proneness. I'm not going off on a tangent. I'm saying that there have been plenty of examples of players tearing their ACL or getting some other nagging injury that slows them down for the next season or the rest of the career, and theres plenty of examples of players tearing their ACL and going on to have several more successful seasons. The other Steve Smith was one of the best PPR guys in fantasy for a year, got second-thirdish round ADP in 2010, then disappeared after his injuries. On the other hand you get your example of Jamaal Charles coming back from an ACL tear and tearing up the league. So don't you think it's okay that some people should be wary about the injury prone tag while others can gamble on it? Either way performance impact from particular injuries isn't a separate issue. It ties in directly to the discussion about the superstition on injury proneness. People don't just avoid 'injury prone' players because they might miss time, they also avoid them because they believe that the player won't put up the same statline if he's not as explosive anymore. The helpfulness of stretching isn't irrelevant either, it was tying into the argument that research into how a body gets injured while performing high intensity sports is still relatively thin despite how many exercise scientists are out there. Here's why I said it: Forever_Peace posted:I completely believe that there is a compelling mechanistic narrative behind why any given player got injured and why others didn't. My understanding of the literature is that these explanations may include movement biomechanics, scar tissue buildup, bone brittleness, preparation and hydration, balance deficiencies, reflex speed, and pain tolerance. The problem is, none of us have access to any of that information. I'm going for my masters in exercise science and we discuss sports injuries in pretty much every class every semester. I do have access to that information (the research into sports injuries, not the actual medical information that teams provide to the resident M.D.), and I brought up stretching as an example of the back and forth nature of understanding sports injuries. There is a 'compelling mechanistic narrative' behind injuries but it's still being discovered. Avowing to one school of thought that ACL injuries do or don't sap players over time or will or won't lead to future injuries is just a misinformed statement, no matter which side you stand on. Frankly I'm amazed that any of these guys come back so well from their injuries and maintain such a high level of athleticism. I'm also interested where it says younger players tend to miss more games than older players and how that correlates to age too. I'd assume at a quick glance that older players tend to get injured less because they're played less as their athleticism ages, or that they're more adept in their skillset as their professional career grows and can avoid awareness injuries like banged knees or big hits. Either way my gut and other peoples' guts tell them to avoid damaged goods. I do agree with you and often take players who I see slipping too far for perceived injury histories. I do it in multiple fantasy sports between basketball, baseball, and football. But I can also say that I can see the logic behind your friends letting some of these guys slide down rounds. Like Jamaal Charles and Gronk might be set, but I'm wary about ADP this year because he's a year out of football, he's a 30 year old power back, and what makes him such a good runner (his explosiveness) might be sapped. Or ADP can be a freak of nature and go on to put up 2k yards on the ground again, who knows? Doltos fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Forte still gonna do Forte things. Hell I'll probably take him at 8 in my draft if he's there depending on who's left.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
cheese posted:Benjamin in the 8th is amazing value. Even with the first round low on start RBs, I'm not sure I would even want Forte in the first. Forte seems to be good for 1k yards and 50ish receptions a year no matter who's coaching him which is pretty great first round value.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
It's not just Forte vs. Gore/Miller/etc., its Forte vs. Gore AND Kelvin Benjamin at a big discount. I'll take the latter, personally, since it also spreads out your risk profile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
I'm starting to get the sense that we actually agree with one another, but what I call "superstition" you call "a gut feeling" and either way the result is folks being able to get Gronk in the 3rd. Though if you want to put your own confidence to the test you are welcome to name 10 guys that you think are "injury prone" and 10 other guys of the same role that you think are not. I will be impressed if the number of "doubtful" (or worse) designations differs by more than five by the end of the season. (I contend they will not because this stuff is functionally random for us as fans)
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
the_american_dream posted:Let's give a hypothetical if you're a newly married guy and your new wife over the past year realized how much you spent on fake sports and limited you greatly Rotoviz
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:I'm starting to get the sense that we actually agree with one another, but what I call "superstition" you call "a gut feeling" and either way the result is folks being able to get Gronk in the 3rd. DeMarco Murray was considered to be injury prone....
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Need keeper advice. 0.5ppr, 10 teams, 10th pick, and 3 keepers. Typical starting roster plus has W/T and W/T/R flexes Locks are L Bell (9) and Jordy (5). I'm waffling between Hopkins (10) and L Miller (6). I had Miller locked until Foster disintegrated so now I'm unsure. Either keep Hopkins and go RB/RB or keep Miller and go WR/RB (or possibly RB/TE if Gronk isn't kept). Phone posting so I don't really wanna get into a pros/cons list. Thanks brosefs
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
I would go Hopkins.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
For everyone who no longer values free time or sanity, the Calvinball thread should be going up this weekend. If you don't know what Calvinball fantasy football is, I envy your existence and weep for the loss of my innocence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
The charity league will consist of 16 teams and include IDP. God help us.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I would go Hopkins. Really? Not sure why you would want to take a sophomore WR with absolute dogshit at QB instead of a potential RB1 and lock RB2. Yah the 10th is good value for Hopkins but there is just a lot of uncertainty around his production this year. Miller is on a good team with a solid offense. What pick do you have in your draft? It would make a difference if you expected to be drafting a couple stud RBs vs. WRs. I'm not discounting what you are saying, just want to know your reasoning. Edit: just realized he is a 3rd year WR, not a sophomore, my bad MrSargent fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
I'm in both of these leagues and can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 06:03
|
|
|
MrSargent posted:Really? Not sure why you would want to take a sophomore WR with absolute dogshit at QB instead of a potential RB1 and lock RB2. Yah the 10th is good value for Hopkins but there is just a lot of uncertainty around his production this year. Miller is on a good team with a solid offense. Hopkins put up 1k yards with 3 QBs last year as the WR2. I don't think he'll have too much trouble producing. He's also a 10th rounder so if he ends up a w/t for me again, that's not too bad, especially since he's cheap and young. I understand your argument though; that's exactly why I'm waffling. He is so cheap it kinda makes up for the situation. 10th pick. This year it's looking like only two owners aren't drafting in the first round (JC and Lynch owners). e: Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I would go Hopkins. Thanks! 3 DONG HORSE fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Thanks for the QB advice, I think that I'll be fine grabbing one early. I don't think the other guys know what the deal is. This is the same league that had one point per tackle for D/ST last year. But what about :quote:I have edited my ESPN Pre-draft player rankings twice now and they are not saving. I was clicking the save button after every couple of moves and that still did not help. But the weird thing is that they are roughly what I want them to be. Is this a known issue?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
PyroDwarf posted:Thanks for the QB advice, I think that I'll be fine grabbing one early. I don't think the other guys know what the deal is. This is the same league that had one point per tackle for D/ST last year. But what about : What the hell is wrong with this league. Whatever. Here's your first round using today's projections. Godspeed dude.  edit: if you take Luck, get Tannehill a few rounds later for weeks 1 and 10. If you take Brees, grab Peyton the next round for weeks 10 and 15. If you land Ryan, take Romo somewhere in the mid rounds for weeks 4, 9, and 10. Forever_Peace fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
And yet another goon tries to lazily apply the sophomore slump narrative on a player who isn't even a sophomore. This is Hopkins 3rd year and he is very underrated imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 13:51
|
|