Favorite/Best Method to Tier Players (1 Viewer)

[MrJimiT]

Prior to drafting, what is the best method (or your favorite method) to TIER players into groups? For example, do you use your own projections/rankings to tier players...do you use ADP to group and tier players...do you use some other publications for tiering of players? I'm not necessarily looking for the statistical breakdown to mathematically determine tier break levels (although I am fascinated by those calculations) but more or less, what metric do you use to begin the tiering process?

 

[sushinsky4tsar]

At my most rabid, full mock draft where I treat every team like it's my only one when I'm on the clock. If I have the energy, go through the entire draft . Every player that went consecutively at the same position is probably within the same tier. A couple picks between (or even one) might be due to individual team need, but it also might indicate a sub-tier difference. If nobody goes at that position for ten picks or a full round, then that's a clear tier break.

 

[Scoresman]

I do my own projections and group players that will score similar points together in tiers. Nothing scientific. Just group players within 10-15 points of each other together.

I have further indicators on my "cheat sheet" for injury risk and player volatility that I use more. This helps me see players I want to avoid and sometimes end up avoiding a good portion of a tier. This is particularly helpful for auction leagues.

 

[massraider]

I will start with ADP, I use Zealots and Fantasy Pros.
I do a first pass at moving guys up and down, then dive into guys I am on the fence with.

Within that list, my tiers form naturally. Example, the tier break after the top 3 WR this year is a natural tier.

My tiers wind up being based on: If I miss out on a guy from this group, how unhappy am I before I choose the next guy?

 

[RenegadeRoy]

I'll speak solely from a redraft/slight keeper POV.

I start by looking at how things ended in the previous season, both overall and by position. This will help me see where the tier breaks were in the previous year. If I'm feeling extra motivated I'll go back an additional year or two and look for trends. Then I looks at Fantasy Pros draft rankings (making sure to pare it down to trusted/accurate sources). I'll then make my own tier list by comparing my leagues final scoring from the previous year, Fantasy Pros rankings, and taking into consideration any personnel moves, etc.

I like to try to do it prior to training camp and then adjust as the preseason goes on, reports come in, yadda yadda. But the key is to not overreact. The shiny new toy (high ranked rookie and talent in new city) seems to always carry more weight with rankings than (IMO) it should. Other than that, pretty much what massraider said "f I miss out on a guy from this group, how unhappy am I before I choose the next guy?"

 

[zamboni]

I will start with ADP, I use Zealots and Fantasy Pros.
I do a first pass at moving guys up and down, then dive into guys I am on the fence with.

This is basically my approach. I start with Fantasy Pros, which amalgamates the ADP/rankings among a bunch of industry experts that do this for a living. Using the FP tiers, I tweak players as needed based on my league scoring rules and on my own personal opinions.

 

[Scoresman]

Do you guys do this by modifying projections? If not, how do you keep things straight between dependent positions? For example, if you bump Jamar Chase and Tee Higgins up from the average, how do you know how much of a bump you need to give Joe Burrow?

I always found this difficult to keep straight, just modifying rankings instead of projections. This is one of the reasons I do my own projections. I do it by team and make sure that passing TDs = Receiving TDs, Completions = Receptions, etc. So if I go to bump Chase and Higgins, my spreadsheet forces me to also adjust Burrow accordingly, and then the rankings just fall where they will, and I have peace of mind knowing everything adds up.

 

[Gally]

Do you guys do this by modifying projections? If not, how do you keep things straight between dependent positions? For example, if you bump Jamar Chase and Tee Higgins up from the average, how do you know how much of a bump you need to give Joe Burrow?

I always found this difficult to keep straight, just modifying rankings instead of projections. This is one of the reasons I do my own projections. I do it by team and make sure that passing TDs = Receiving TDs, Completions = Receptions, etc. So if I go to bump Chase and Higgins, my spreadsheet forces me to also adjust Burrow accordingly, and then the rankings just fall where they will, and I have peace of mind knowing everything adds up.

I don't necessarily want to correlate bump ups/downs across positions like you are referencing when it comes to projections. Projections are essentially guesses so they don't have to match across positions once I start adjusting individually.

I basically use the projections as a starting point and then if I feel that a particular player is going to do better than the ones around him on the projection list and bump him up the big board I won't use that to go with other players because in the end the projections are a guess. There is no guarantee that if Chase goes up that Burrow must go up too.

I think having "peace of mind knowing everything adds up" is a false sense of security. These are all guesses (however educated they may be). Projections are a good starting point but they aren't absolute. I have found it works much better if you don't force them to match. Granted I don't want the WR's to project to 30 TD's and have the QB at 15TD's. But being a few off plus or minus isn't an issue. They don't have to match because they are likely off anyway.

 

[Scoresman]

Do you guys do this by modifying projections? If not, how do you keep things straight between dependent positions? For example, if you bump Jamar Chase and Tee Higgins up from the average, how do you know how much of a bump you need to give Joe Burrow?

I always found this difficult to keep straight, just modifying rankings instead of projections. This is one of the reasons I do my own projections. I do it by team and make sure that passing TDs = Receiving TDs, Completions = Receptions, etc. So if I go to bump Chase and Higgins, my spreadsheet forces me to also adjust Burrow accordingly, and then the rankings just fall where they will, and I have peace of mind knowing everything adds up.

I don't necessarily want to correlate bump ups/downs across positions like you are referencing when it comes to projections. Projections are essentially guesses so they don't have to match across positions once I start adjusting individually.

I basically use the projections as a starting point and then if I feel that a particular player is going to do better than the ones around him on the projection list and bump him up the big board I won't use that to go with other players because in the end the projections are a guess. There is no guarantee that if Chase goes up that Burrow must go up too.

I think having "peace of mind knowing everything adds up" is a false sense of security. These are all guesses (however educated they may be). Projections are a good starting point but they aren't absolute. I have found it works much better if you don't force them to match. Granted I don't want the WR's to project to 30 TD's and have the QB at 15TD's. But being a few off plus or minus isn't an issue. They don't have to match because they are likely off anyway.

I sort of disagree with the bolded. If you think Chase is worth more fantasy points for whatever reason, then those extra receiving yards or TDs he's getting also translates to passing yards and TDs for Burrow or Browning (unless it's Deebo and you're projecting more runs). But I do agree there's wiggle room within this. For my own projections, if QB and WR TDs are within one of each other, that's good enough, for example.

I know it's guesswork, but as you said it's educated guesswork and at the end of the day, I feel like your rankings of the various positions should be honest with each other. It's very easy to look at WRs in a bubble and project them, and then be 3-6 TDs off from the QB totals. It happens to me when I'm projecting and I always have to adjust.

 

[Gally]

I sort of disagree with the bolded. If you think Chase is worth more fantasy points for whatever reason, then those extra receiving yards or TDs he's getting also translates to passing yards and TDs for Burrow or Browning (unless it's Deebo and you're projecting more runs). But I do agree there's wiggle room within this. For my own projections, if QB and WR TDs are within one of each other, that's good enough, for example.

Why can't Chase's increase be to a decrease from Higgins, WR3, and TE's and Burrow stay the same? My point was you are guessing at all position players and if you are trying to make sure all 5 or 6 guys totals are all a zero sum game then you are really putting pressure on the exactness of your assumptions. For me, I would rather go with an initial projection and try and have them match for a team as you are saying but once I start evaluating my tiers and big board sometimes I will move players up or down based on many factors and just because I move Chase up doesn't mean my projections or places for Burrow/Higgins/TE/WR3/etc must move because they are just projections.

The reason being if I miss on my Chase bump up and I move everyone else because of that then I will miss on all those guys too. However, If I move Chase and he doesn't do as I expected there is a chance all those other guys initial projections still hit. I am trying minimize the damage of all my projections if my change is wrong. Like I said, it's all guesswork anyway.

 

[Gally]

I know it's guesswork, but as you said it's educated guesswork and at the end of the day, I feel like your rankings of the various positions should be honest with each other. It's very easy to look at WRs in a bubble and project them, and the be 3-6 TDs off from the QB totals. It happens to me when I'm projecting and I always have to adjust.

We differ in that I believe the initial projections should be "honest" as you put in a bunch of time and effort to make these educated guesses. Trust them for sure (as much as you can). But when I am looking at the overall rankings based on these projections there are many times that stacked up I like player X over player Y even though my educated guess of a projection doesn't show out that way. So I move up a guy in the rankings but don't think I need to move the other guys from their rankings to keep it "honest".

Projections for a team should be honest but racking and stacking against the entire league on an individual position bases should be a little more touchy feely and not have to match down to the TD.

 

[Scoresman]

I sort of disagree with the bolded. If you think Chase is worth more fantasy points for whatever reason, then those extra receiving yards or TDs he's getting also translates to passing yards and TDs for Burrow or Browning (unless it's Deebo and you're projecting more runs). But I do agree there's wiggle room within this. For my own projections, if QB and WR TDs are within one of each other, that's good enough, for example.

Why can't Chase's increase be to a decrease from Higgins, WR3, and TE's and Burrow stay the same? My point was you are guessing at all position players and if you are trying to make sure all 5 or 6 guys totals are all a zero sum game then you are really putting pressure on the exactness of your assumptions. For me, I would rather go with an initial projection and try and have them match for a team as you are saying but once I start evaluating my tiers and big board sometimes I will move players up or down based on many factors and just because I move Chase up doesn't mean my projections or places for Burrow/Higgins/TE/WR3/etc must move because they are just projections.

The reason being if I miss on my Chase bump up and I move everyone else because of that then I will miss on all those guys too. However, If I move Chase and he doesn't do as I expected there is a chance all those other guys initial projections still hit. I am trying minimize the damage of all my projections if my change is wrong. Like I said, it's all guesswork anyway.

True, a bump to Chase could mean a decrease to higgins instead of a bump to Burrow. My point is that it's all interconnected and I was noticing in my own draft research that it was very easy to bump certain positions and have related, dependent positions not really match up.

Look at it this way, if you have all CIN receivers totaling 30 TDs, but you have Burrow at 35, you're already wrong on at least one of them going in.

 

[Gally]

Look at it this way, if you have all CIN receivers totaling 30 TDs, but you have Burrow at 35, you're already wrong on at least one of them going in.

Are you though? There are likely TD's going to people you don't project (the O-Lineman or 4th TE or fullback). That allow for your scenario to all be correct.

You are likely wrong on all of them anyway so i don't believe they have to match. I just think they shouldn't be glaringly off.

 

[Scoresman]

Look at it this way, if you have all CIN receivers totaling 30 TDs, but you have Burrow at 35, you're already wrong on at least one of them going in.

Are you though? There are likely TD's going to people you don't project (the O-Lineman or 4th TE or fullback). That allow for your scenario to all be correct.

You are likely wrong on all of them anyway so i don't believe they have to match. I just think they shouldn't be glaringly off.

When I say receivers I mean all receivers. I dont project all individuals but I do project "Team TE 2-4" for example.

We're not disagreeing on the bolded. I mis-implied (is that a word?) that they need to be an absolute match. 1 or 2 TDs difference is fine.

I originally asked because when I first started doing this I would often be off by way more than that and the way to keep everything in check is to do it by team and run the checks.

 

[RenegadeRoy]

Do you guys do this by modifying projections? If not, how do you keep things straight between dependent positions? For example, if you bump Jamar Chase and Tee Higgins up from the average, how do you know how much of a bump you need to give Joe Burrow?

I play in mostly auction leagues so I just need to rank positions in silos, doesn't really make a ton of sense to do an "all positions" tiered list IMO (although I will have a "top 300" list on hand at the draft or to go over pre-draft) .

More to your question: If I think the Bengals receivers are going to be good, I'll rank Burrow accordingly. There's also the fact that QB scoring and WR scoring are different. So 50 more receiving yards for Chase is worth more than 50 passing yards for Burrows. It's not really worth the effort for me to compare apples to oranges to wide receivers.

 

[Biabreakable]

For me the best thing about doing my own projections is what I would learn about these teams and players researching in the process of that.

I recall reading a article here talking about how each FBG staff projections were different. Some would have better years than others but if you averaged all of the projections together it was more accurate to what actually happened than the majority of the projections on their own.

An example of hive mind being better than most of the individual projectors.

I think it makes sense intuitively also. Some guys know more about specific teams and players than the majority does and that knowledge may mean more accurate projections for those teams or players that the average projection benefits from.

Using this as the data set I would suggest tiering by 2 PPG but that's up to you.

I would keep this separate from ADP. We will be aware of ADP but how we tier players is not that. That's how you buy low sell high find bargains avoid land mines.

In theory.

For dynasty I would do 3 year projections and rank based off of that but player ages also would create a different sub tier.

For example if 2 WR are projected similar points but one is much younger of course that player is more valuable.

Say you have 8 players in a tier by projections but 2 of them are producing at young age while the other 6 are 27-28 or something. The young ones would be a tier then the older players.

The ADP will often reflect things like this as well. We want to find the players where price value (ADP) does not match expected performance.

 

[ZWK]

I'd say that the hard part is getting rankings, and then the tiers just involve noticing which players are close together and where the gaps are.

Making rankings generally has two parts - first finding (or making) some systematic source of rankings, then making my own adjustments to it to turn it into a draft board that I like. The systematic source might be expert rankings, or ADP, or expert projections, or something that I cook up (like the formulas that I've sometimes used as a starting point for dynasty rankings). Then for the subjective adjustments, I think about both whether the source of the rankings doesn't quite match what I really care about for building a roster (e.g. for late picks in redraft leagues I want to focus on upside, so I'll want to take potential breakout players ahead of some guys with higher projections) and also my own takes on which players I like.

The systematic stage of the rankings suggests tier breaks based on (for example) which players have similar projections and which are far apart. And the subjective stage of making a draft board suggests tier breaks based on where it feels like the players are close together or it's hard to decide who to rank earlier, and where it feels like there is a significant gap. Although in some cases I don't bother making tiers - I find tiers most useful for making trades, so I might not bother if I won't have a chance to trade up and down during the draft.

(My actual process for making rankings is generally somewhat more involved than this. Usually I'll take multiple sources of ADP/expert rankings/projections/etc., and then take a weighted average of them. And in order to average them together, I have to convert them into the same type, e.g. you can't just average together a rank and a projection. And in many cases there is also tinkering to do to put them in the right format for a draft board, e.g. with projections you have to figure out positional adjustments in order to rank all the positions in one list. So the systematic stage involves all of that to churn out a first draft of a draft board, and then I make my own adjustments from there.)

 

[ratbast]

I tier be allocating my perceived position value, in my leagues, which are 3 or 5 keepers. Would I be happy with them as my RB2? If yes then they will be in RB2 tier. I then give a “+” for youth and a “-“ for old age or maybe injuries etc.
Example:
RB 2
Mixon -
Achane +
Etc

 

[MrJimiT]

Thanks all! I miss these types of draft strategy discussions that used to be a bit more common-place here. I realize strategies are what they are AND probably by their nature don't change from year to year. But many of us have been drafting for years (i.e. decades) now and I am curious if your particular draft strategies have taken on a few modifications and refinements over the years of draft experiences, as it relates to initially tiering or ranking or grouping players pre-draft.

 

[Gally]

Thanks all! I miss these types of draft strategy discussions that used to be a bit more common-place here. I realize strategies are what they are AND probably by their nature don't change from year to year. But many of us have been drafting for years (i.e. decades) now and I am curious if your particular draft strategies have taken on a few modifications and refinements over the years of draft experiences, as it relates to initially tiering or ranking or grouping players pre-draft.

The biggest difference between the good old days and now is that the information is so easy to get that by and large the advantage of coming up with your own rankings, sleepers, breakouts, etc is essentially lost. There is no such thing as a sleeper anymore.

The biggest adjustment I have found is really trying to pinpoint the gaps that @Biabreakable lists. Where are you higher/lower than ADP information so that you can mine value with every pick to some degree.

In the end it is much more luck based (due to everyone having so much info) that you need to miss injuries and hope the schedule fairy is kind to you in order to really win. But it is still fun thinking you know what you are doing by all these projections/ADP research/plusses and minues and getting them right.hahaha

 

[Biabreakable]

It's not new but should be said that tiering by VBD helps with decisions like should you take RB or WR.

If there are only 2 RB with similar VBD as 14 WR for example then seems pretty obvious to take the RB before they are gone.