Time to abandon the PPR? (1 Viewer)

[FF Ninja]

I don't see it as a slippery slope at all.. In standard formats you are usually trying for a "hammer" type back off waivers that will get work on the goal line, in PPR, you are searching for "passing" down backs who typically do not have the TD upside.  In your hypothetical you were arguing that if a player racked up catches, yardage AND a TD that he would unfairly be productive against a guy who can only simply score a TD.  I think it's clear in this scenario which is more valuable.

My point isn't really that one is better, it's just two sides of the same coin when someone complains about the PPR format lending itself to having "cheap" production.  

That was not what I was arguing but I see how you could read it that way. If I'm looking at the right hypothetical, I was pointing out how a scrubby garbage time guy could outscore a RB1 who is playing more snaps and receiving more touches. But it wasn't a main point I wanted to focus on.

I don't think it is fair to assume you only want a hammer back in 0ppr. We're not talking about TD only leagues. If I'm in the predicament of scouring the FA pool for a starter, I should be looking for a guy who can get yards with a chance of TD, not a guy whose only purpose is short yardage. Often, this is the same guy in PPR and 0PPR, but the difference is that the upside is much higher in PPR.

Just to be clear, I play both formats, too. I just think PPR kind of glorifies garbage time and balloons the value of some bit players while reducing the value of some guys who are playing significant snaps.

 

[Zdravko]

Just to be clear, I play both formats, too. I just think PPR kind of glorifies garbage time and balloons the value of some bit players while reducing the value of some guys who are playing significant snaps.

I think that's spot on. Garbage time stats and Theo-Riddick-relevance are legit PPR downsides. The latter one is solve-able through tiered PPR for RBs and 1st-down conversion points for WR/TE, but am really curious if anyone has ideas how to fix the garbage time problem.

 

[tone1oc]

That was not what I was arguing but I see how you could read it that way. If I'm looking at the right hypothetical, I was pointing out how a scrubby garbage time guy could outscore a RB1 who is playing more snaps and receiving more touches. But it wasn't a main point I wanted to focus on.

I don't think it is fair to assume you only want a hammer back in 0ppr. We're not talking about TD only leagues. If I'm in the predicament of scouring the FA pool for a starter, I should be looking for a guy who can get yards with a chance of TD, not a guy whose only purpose is short yardage. Often, this is the same guy in PPR and 0PPR, but the difference is that the upside is much higher in PPR.

Just to be clear, I play both formats, too. I just think PPR kind of glorifies garbage time and balloons the value of some bit players while reducing the value of some guys who are playing significant snaps.

I think both formats can glorify meaningless or menial production..

Re: the bolded text, its extremely hard to find a guy sitting on the wire with those qualifications.. But that could probably be because I only play with the best of the best 

 

[FF Ninja]

Certainly, but I would add a TD is 'less huge' in PPR, because it is more easily offset by other stats. Those other stats comprise the overwhelming majority of touches, while TD touches are a small fraction. I'd rather have a player receive some reward on a per-touch basis instead of having most of the reward concentrated in a couple possible TD touches per game.

But putting that aside, I think your RB24 example is absolutely valid. Yet you have to admit this only works when looking at the scoring as averaged out over the course of a season. Yes, in that case, Asiata will likely end significantly behind Cobb, but my frustration is driven by the game-to-game randomness as in the example above. PPR reduces that luck factor. As someone who invests a decent amount of time and energy in FF, I greatly prefer a system that reduces randomness.

Yeah, it is less huge... for the RB24, an extra TD = 70% jump in scoring for 0ppr vs. a 58% jump in ppr. Both are really big, but I feel like people think it's a bigger discrepancy between the two formats than it is.

As for the RB24 example, I actually think it works the opposite way. If you look at season ending RB24 average ppg, you would NOT be happy with that production. Those numbers are actually dragged down due to injuries, suspensions, etc. In reality, the 24th best RB each week should score more than the season end RB24 ppg avg.

I actually feel like PPR really bumps up the luck factor because, sure there will be an Asiata here or there, but it feels like there are more Chris Thompsons than Asiatas and the upsides are higher for the Thompson-esque players. Plus, with an Asiata, you run the risk of getting pretty much nothing out of him most weeks in 0ppr (he actually scored no TDs last year).

 

[FF Ninja]

I think both formats can glorify meaningless or menial production..

Re: the bolded text, its extremely hard to find a guy sitting on the wire with those qualifications.. But that could probably be because I only play with the best of the best 

I agree, which is precisely why I like that format! I'm rarely the one scouring the FA pool, so I would rather it be difficult for my opponents to pick up a garbage time player and put up big points. Nothing is more frustrating than watching Chris Ivory get trounced by some scrub.

 

[FF Ninja]

I think that's spot on. Garbage time stats and Theo-Riddick-relevance are legit PPR downsides. The latter one is solve-able through tiered PPR for RBs and 1st-down conversion points for WR/TE, but am really curious if anyone has ideas how to fix the garbage time problem.

What sites actually offer points per first down?

 

[Run It Up]

I think MFL is probably the only one to offer first down tracking. Can do tiered PPR on fleaflicker.

 

[Toomuchnv]

I think that's spot on. Garbage time stats and Theo-Riddick-relevance are legit PPR downsides. The latter one is solve-able through tiered PPR for RBs and 1st-down conversion points for WR/TE, but am really curious if anyone has ideas how to fix the garbage time problem.

You are assuming garbage time stats are a problem....most look at match ups to try and predict who might be out there for a chance at some garbage time stats.  That is called strategy....not a problem.

 

[Zdravko]

I actually feel like PPR really bumps up the luck factor because, sure there will be an Asiata here or there, but it feels like there are more Chris Thompsons than Asiatas and the upsides are higher for the Thompson-esque players. Plus, with an Asiata, you run the risk of getting pretty much nothing out of him most weeks in 0ppr (he actually scored no TDs last year).

Agree the risk is greater with Asiata vs. Chris Thompson, but I think this supports the PPR = less luck argument. Asiata is ultimate boom-or-bust, i.e., you get lucky or you don't. No middle ground. With Chris Thompson, the variability around the predicted production is much smaller, suggesting the impact of luck is much smaller as well.

Maybe we define the 'luck' factor differently, though. I don't think of the Chris Thompsons as "luck factor" because I assume everyone has broadly the same expectation of Thompson's expected production on a per game basis and that production rarely fluctuates that much. So, as long as all owners are aware of the potential of Chris Thompson to be a viable, albeit desperate RB start, then I don't think its about luck anymore - it's now about adapting drafting and roster strategy to make the most use of the artifacts of your scoring system (PPR or not) and lineup requirements....hence, the opposite of luck!

 

[Zdravko]

You are assuming garbage time stats are a problem....most look at match ups to try and predict who might be out there for a chance at some garbage time stats.  That is called strategy....not a problem.

That's a fair point. Most owners here would adjust decisions for the likelihood of garbage time stats. So I do agree that from this perspective it is indeed part of the strategy and skill. 

However, I do disagree that it is somehow a desired outcome and not a problem. I haven't heard a good argument so far why garbage stats should be conceptually worth as much as non-garbage ones. Intuitively, it makes little sense. The fact that we all adapt our lineup choices for that peculiarity does not change the main argument about the relevance of garbage stats.

 

[FUBAR]

I agree, which is precisely why I like that format! I'm rarely the one scouring the FA pool, so I would rather it be difficult for my opponents to pick up a garbage time player and put up big points. Nothing is more frustrating than watching Chris Ivory get trounced by some scrub.

OTOH, having to start your recent waiver pickup and he puts up 6/113/2 is great no matter the format (Seth Roberts last year).

 

[Toomuchnv]

That's a fair point. Most owners here would adjust decisions for the likelihood of garbage time stats. So I do agree that from this perspective it is indeed part of the strategy and skill. 

However, I do disagree that it is somehow a desired outcome and not a problem. I haven't heard a good argument so far why garbage stats should be conceptually worth as much as non-garbage ones. Intuitively, it makes little sense. The fact that we all adapt our lineup choices for that peculiarity does not change the main argument about the relevance of garbage stats.

The argument for why is because there is no conceptual way to differentiate what is or isn't a garbage time stat.  Use the NYG/Car game last season as an example....would you consider the Giants 2nd half all garbage stats because they were down big even though they eventually caught up in the 2nd half?  

"Garbage Time" stats will always exist in FF because there isn't a fair way to clearly defined what is or isn't a garbage time stat.

 

[cstu]

PPFD (point per first down) is the solution, but I haven't seen any leagues implement it.

 

[cstu]

I think that's spot on. Garbage time stats and Theo-Riddick-relevance are legit PPR downsides. The latter one is solve-able through tiered PPR for RBs and 1st-down conversion points for WR/TE, but am really curious if anyone has ideas how to fix the garbage time problem.

You don't need tiers - every reception that results in a first down gets a point.

 

[cstu]

PPFD is a very viable route, although I'd prefer a single point. I really dislike garbage time being a huge swing factor in FF, and defenses will readily give up 10-15 yard 1st downs to keep guys in bounds at the end of games.

Not much you can do about garbage time, but PPFD makes much more sense than PPR. 

 

[mr roboto]

It's all ####### stupid. It's a set of signs and signifiers. We are assigning arbitrary points to real human ####### beings' athletic achievements. As long as all the owners agree before the season I say lets play. Doesn't ####### matter. 

'But we should try to approximate real football!!!11!' No. That's ####### stupid unless you are willing to get in a 3-point stance and hit a 285 lb lineman. 

'But such-and-such a position is devalued/overvalued!!!1!' Who ####### cares. Values are abitrary when playing magic internet football. 

Any excuse/rejoinder is pointless. It's a game with no greater purpose. Markets need rules so the rational players of the market have something by which to develop strategy based on value. K or no K. Team D or IDP. PPR, PPC, longest ####... Doesn't matter. Set the rules and play. 

 

[Shutout]

Played in a lot of different leagues over the years and I think all of them have inherent flaws. I can clearly recall voting out 1ppr in a league one year after Roy Helu or somebody got 20 catches (about 14 in garbage time) in a game.

I can recall people having different opinions on minimum starting lineups of 1RB vs. 2, 2 Wr vs. 3, maximum numbers of positions.  It's all relevant and in established dynasty leagues it is hard to have an honest conversation because everyone naturally wants what they have best leveraged.  

There probably is no "correct" answer to something like this.   

 

[Black]

I started two PPR leagues (that have been running about 10 years now), so back in 2005-ish.   

I would like to convert my mostly redraft league to a conditional scoring format of using 1 point per first down, to replace the PPReception.  I think for one year we'll try 0.5 PPR and 0.5 PPFirstDown and see how it goes.

Has anyone tried this?  

I think it will weed out the 1 catch for -2 yards junk, but still I reward players who are catching balls and moving the sticks.  It will also reward short-yardage specialists who are grinding out 3rd and 4th and short.

 

[nirad3]

Played in a lot of different leagues over the years and I think all of them have inherent flaws. I can clearly recall voting out 1ppr in a league one year after Roy Helu or somebody got 20 catches (about 14 in garbage time) in a game.

I can recall people having different opinions on minimum starting lineups of 1RB vs. 2, 2 Wr vs. 3, maximum numbers of positions.  It's all relevant and in established dynasty leagues it is hard to have an honest conversation because everyone naturally wants what they have best leveraged.  

There probably is no "correct" answer to something like this.   

Let me guess ... you were on the losing end of that.  

I know, let's just get rid of all garbage time stats.  

In fact, I think we should just go back to TD-only leagues.  Those are the only things that matter.  BRING BACK LEORY HOARD!  

Everyone thinks they have the perfect solution.  You're spot on here with your last statement.... there's no correct answer.  Best answer - probably - is to find the most balanced option that everyone in your particular league feels most comfortable with.  

I personally like graduated PPR.  0.5 for RB/WR and full for TE.  I'd like to actually incorporate bonuses for benchmarks like 100 rush/rec or 300 passing... but that's a topic for another day.

 

[Thunderlips]

PPR is simply a tool to help teams compete in a serpentine redraft.  If you don't like it....stop going with the antiquated "RB IN THE FIRST ROUND...NO MATTER WHAT! NOW GET OFF MY LAWN"" attitude and start looking at stud WR1s. 

 

[DropKick]

lol

Way to respect someone's opinion...  Then don't draft a one dimensional back like Peterson.

Like several others have said, it's a scoring system.  We award 1 PPR and 0.2 per carry so a back that catches 5 balls and a RB with 25 carries both get 5 points for their involvement.  TEs, WRs and RBs can all catch passes.  We also have a sliding scale for the productivity (yards per touch) as well as bonuses for certain point plateaus (100, 150, 200).  Yes, those numbers are arbitrary but so what?  So is crossing the goal line.

Think about a classic possession receiver.  Moves the chains, makes lots of big plays but  not necessarily for tons of yardage.  Is 8 for 65 a better stat line than 2 for 70?  Is it better than 1 for 9 with a TD?

You're also too hung up on "NFL value".  What's your take on NFL teams posting tons of points in garbage time because they've clearly lost and the opposing "D" is playing prevent?

 

[spider321]

Way to respect someone's opinion...

I'm not required to respect anyone's opinion, just as you are not required to respect mine.

Some of the "delicate little flowers" and their safe spaces around here are hilarious.

It's ok if someone challenges your thoughts and ideas. 

It's even ok if someone tells you that you are wrong, and you don't get a participation trophy today.

 

[DropKick]

I'm not required to respect anyone's opinion, just as you are not required to respect mine.

Some of the "delicate little flowers" and their safe spaces around here are hilarious.

It's ok if someone challenges your thoughts and ideas. 

It's even ok if someone tells you that you are wrong, and you don't get a participation trophy today.

There's a difference between challenging someone's beliefs and being rude in the process.

Ironically, it sounds like you're the one who has their mind made up.

 

[spider321]

Ironically, it sounds like you're the one who has their mind made up.

Yes, my mind is made up.  I stated this fact in the original post.

Not coincidentally, my shtick has generated 4 pages(so far) of people trying to convince me that I am wrong, and having interactions with one another about other ways to best set up a scoring system.

Maybe, part of me wanted to be proven wrong.

This thread has only strengthened my personal belief that PPR is outdated, but others may come away from it with new ideas for how to better their leagues.

You're all welcome!!!

 

[DropKick]

Yes, my mind is made up.  I stated this fact in the original post.

Not coincidentally, my shtick has generated 4 pages(so far) of people trying to convince me that I am wrong, and having interactions with one another about other ways to best set up a scoring system.

Maybe, part of me wanted to be proven wrong.

This thread has only strengthened my personal belief that PPR is outdated, but others may come away from it with new ideas for how to better their leagues.

You're all welcome!!!

I don't think that's true.  You start a thread asking for people's opinions and tell them there is nothing to discuss if you disagree on a certain point (like the value of carries and receptions)?  Then you pat yourself on the back and call it all "shtick".  In the future, I'll make sure to ignore the comedy act.

 

[spider321]

I don't think that's true.  You start a thread asking for people's opinions and tell them there is nothing to discuss if you disagree on a certain point (like the value of carries and receptions)?

Yes, I did tell Toomuchnv that we have nothing to discuss if he believes yardage is no more indicative of production than the number of times a guy touched the football.

As you stated, we all have a right to our opinions, and in this case his opinion was ridiculous.

...but I guess you can still give him a participation trophy, if you want.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Outdated. Outmoded.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

The old solution to fantasy balance was PPR or 1/2PPR.

Now people are just comfortable with it. Unwilling to use a better fix. 0-RB.

NonPPR is the proper answer.

 

[Toomuchnv]

I don't think that's true.  You start a thread asking for people's opinions and tell them there is nothing to discuss if you disagree on a certain point (like the value of carries and receptions)?  Then you pat yourself on the back and call it all "shtick".  In the future, I'll make sure to ignore the comedy act.

Agreed, I will be sure to ignore his so called poll questions with answers that are biased towards the answer he wants in the future.  Don't ask for opinions if you can't handle someone arguing the other side of what you expect to hear.  

 

[Tau837]

What sites actually offer points per first down?

MFL does. I posted earlier in the thread that I run a dynasty league that gives points for rushing and receiving first downs but no points for (non first down) receptions.

 

[FF Ninja]

Agree the risk is greater with Asiata vs. Chris Thompson, but I think this supports the PPR = less luck argument. Asiata is ultimate boom-or-bust, i.e., you get lucky or you don't. No middle ground. With Chris Thompson, the variability around the predicted production is much smaller, suggesting the impact of luck is much smaller as well.

Maybe we define the 'luck' factor differently, though. I don't think of the Chris Thompsons as "luck factor" because I assume everyone has broadly the same expectation of Thompson's expected production on a per game basis and that production rarely fluctuates that much. So, as long as all owners are aware of the potential of Chris Thompson to be a viable, albeit desperate RB start, then I don't think its about luck anymore - it's now about adapting drafting and roster strategy to make the most use of the artifacts of your scoring system (PPR or not) and lineup requirements....hence, the opposite of luck!

Eh, see that's why I think PPR is more of a luck factor... Asiata isn't actually a boom or bust, he's mediocre or bust. Rarely is a 0ppr FA add going to blow up and actually score RB1 points, but the Helus and Thompsons of the world do have a chance of putting up RB1 points in any given week. And to make it worse, they're just bit players whose fraction of snaps is directly correlated to the margin by which their team is losing. And I'd argue the variability is much higher for those guys, too, which is what increases the luck factor. A TD dependent guy is going to net you like 1-8 points in 0ppr, whereas a scat back is going to net you 2-20 in ppr - depending on if their team actually dominates the game or gets blown out.

 

[Joe Bryant]

You don't need tiers - every reception that results in a first down gets a point.

Interesting. I can see how this might be fun. Do many leagues use this scoring?

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks for the discussion on this guys. Obviously, the original post wasn't really a poll but aside from that, the following talk is good. I've learned some things.

I personally favor PPR but I understand the downsides. Would it be too simple to just dial down the points per reception? That seems like the easiest way to balance things.

Thoughts?

J

 

[FF Ninja]

You are assuming garbage time stats are a problem....most look at match ups to try and predict who might be out there for a chance at some garbage time stats.  That is called strategy....not a problem.

I love how PPR fans act like this is lost on PPR detractors. This simple strategy is not lost on us.

The "strategy" you mention is similar to an off-balance 3 pointer about 5' behind the arc. It's a very weak strategy that hinges on an occurrence that has less than a 50% chance of happening (how many games actually have a vegas line in double digits, and of those how many actually hit?). Obviously when this strategy hits, it can hit big, though.

Quality managers fill their teams full of players that are in a position to get playing time each and every game. Weaker managers with holes in their roster are able to pick up bit players who have a decent, but not great, chance to outscore regular contributors. I'd argue that this task is much more difficult in 0ppr, where bit players are not as highly rewarded.

Having a bit player outscore an RB1 is one of those situations like playing pool where you don't have to call your shots. If it is you who is aiming at a corner pocket and accidentally hit it in a side pocket, you don't feel good about it. And when you're playing against a guy who does that you, you just have to roll your eyes, especially when they act like it was planned all along. "I knew for a fact the Redskins were going to get blown out!" Right, it's just a coincidence that you didn't have anyone else worth a damn to fill that spot.

As I've mentioned before, I play both formats and have fun in both, but I feel the strategy is simpler in PPR and it is a more forgiving format for weaker managers.

 

[FF Ninja]

Thanks for the discussion on this guys. Obviously, the original post wasn't really a poll but aside from that, the following talk is good. I've learned some things.

I personally favor PPR but I understand the downsides. Would it be too simple to just dial down the points per reception? That seems like the easiest way to balance things.

Thoughts?

J

As others have mentioned points per first down is really the best way to go. It's just a matter of waiting for the websites to catch up. It sounds like MFL is the only one that offers it. Really need the yahoos and espns of the world to add the option before this can catch on.

 

[Joe Bryant]

As others have mentioned points per first down is really the best way to go. It's just a matter of waiting for the websites to catch up. It sounds like MFL is the only one that offers it. Really need the yahoos and espns of the world to add the option before this can catch on.

Thanks. If the goal is to minimize the garbage time points or the non star players, will first down points really do that? In other words, plenty of first downs are racked up in garbage time. Coupled with the fact few sites are doing this, wouldn't just a lower point per reception be a much more practical and maybe better answer?

J

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If you're worried about FA pick ups you should increase the roster size to the point where there's very little left on it. I will concur that in-season acquisitions are a problem.

And rosters should definitely be frozen for the playoffs.

 

[FF Ninja]

Thanks. If the goal is to minimize the garbage time points or the non star players, will first down points really do that? In other words, plenty of first downs are racked up in garbage time. Coupled with the fact few sites are doing this, wouldn't just a lower point per reception be a much more practical and maybe better answer?

J

I don't think that is the only reason some people want to move back to 0ppr. Rewarding garbage time was just an unfortunate byproduct, IMO. I always thought PPR was invented to move some value to WR (and/or away from RB) back when there were a dozen 300 carry RBs. Now that there are hardly any left, it seems unnecessary. In fact, the shift to RBBC has made some passing down backs more valuable than their early down counterparts who are playing more snaps in more critical roles (3rd and short). Points per first down would reward the guys that are getting those critical yards (2 yards on 4th and 1 = 1.2 points that way) and cease to reward guys getting 7 yard dump offs on 3rd and 20.

If people voice an interest in PPFD, it'll eventually happen. First downs are already being tracked (you guys have it in your data dominator, for example) so it should be relatively simple to implement if the sites realize there is a demand.

While I've got you here, I'd like to ask a couple random questions... (1) why did you guys remove snap count from your game logs? (2) why did you guys remove playoff games from your game logs?

 

[FF Ninja]

If you're worried about FA pick ups you should increase the roster size to the point where there's very little left on it.

And rosters should definitely be frozen for the playoffs.

100% agree. I'm all about huge rosters, but most people aren't on board with that.

 

[Shutout]

Let me guess ... you were on the losing end of that.  

I know, let's just get rid of all garbage time stats.  

In fact, I think we should just go back to TD-only leagues.  Those are the only things that matter.  BRING BACK LEORY HOARD!  

Everyone thinks they have the perfect solution.  You're spot on here with your last statement.... there's no correct answer.  Best answer - probably - is to find the most balanced option that everyone in your particular league feels most comfortable with.  

I personally like graduated PPR.  0.5 for RB/WR and full for TE.  I'd like to actually incorporate bonuses for benchmarks like 100 rush/rec or 300 passing... but that's a topic for another day.

no. I was the commish and just remember it because the guys who were on the bad end of it (we played double headers so two opponents) used it as a strong example to convince other owners). It was one of those things that people had openly griped about but that particular week illustrated it very well.  And I think the general sentiment was since it was a big dynasty league where a lot of the rules were specifically put in to try to favor long-term strategy and emulate the NFL that these types of rules didn't belong.  This was a league where we had in place for a LONG time already things like graduated PPR between positions and different scoring between CB/S and DT/DE. We had done a lot to try to get it right but for some reason we had let that rb PPR linger. 

 

[Holy Schneikes]

My opinion is that PPR NEVER made sense.  It was was an easy solution to a perceived problem (RB dominance).  It did partially address the issue, but there were and are BETTER WAYS to address that issue (if it even needed to be addressed at all).

What REALLY doesn't make sense to me is the notion that scoring system doesn't matter as long as everybody is playing by the same rules.  To me, it matters a lot.  My primary goals for a scoring system are that it:

• is predictable to some degree (not arbitrary) - I want good fantasy players to be able to differentiate themselves, I want arbitrary bonuses and other factors that increase randomness to be minimized
  
• as much as possible rewards the best actual NFL players (on a given day) with the most points
  

There USED to be another goal, which was for it to be easy to calculate.  TD only leagues are great for that, and PPR is pretty good too.  But in this day and age, calculation is cheap and easy, so it's kind of irrelevant to me.

As for the first goal, you could create a league where guys ONLY score if they get at least 100 yards on the day.  Hell you could make it so they only score if they get EXACTLY 100 yards on the day.  The "everybody's playing buy the same rules" crowd have to acknowledge that those scoring systems don't make sense unless you are honestly into a truly random league.  No one could accurately predict when a guy would pull in exactly 100 yards, and it would much harder to predict how many times a guy will go over the 100 yards mark during the season than it would be to predict a guy will "do well" over the course of a season.  A guy could get 97 yards every single game and never score you a point.  It's introducing randomness, which goes against my first goal.  Some bonus systems seem fun, and they may be, but they aren't good if you want to play a game which helps good players win.  Same with TD only leagues.  They can be fun too, but there just isn't as much opportunity to shine which is why they dropped by the wayside for the most part.

The second goal is where PPR fails miserably.   A catch for 0 yards is NOT of equal worth to a team as a 10 yard run (pick your example, there are many).  To be blunt, that idea is just dumb to me.  Sorry.  If good players doing productive things scoring more points than players doing less productive things, isn't a goal of yours, that's fine.  But to me, that's kind of the whole point.  Again to take things to extremes, you could set up a scoring system that ONLY rewards a back for things like carries and not yards.  That might be fairly predictable and consistent, but it doesn't really reflect how much a guy is doing for his team.  Catches are very much like that.  A catch by itself is fairly meaningless and could even be a negative for a team in a given situation.  To a large degree, what matters is moving the ball forward.

So if there is a positional imbalance, what do you do?  Change the yardage scoring by position.  It's easy.  It makes sense.  It solves the problem.

Similarly, if non PPR is too dependent on TDs, solve the REAL problem - change the ratio of yardage scoring to TD scoring.  Lower TD scores (traditionalists hate this), or raise yardage scoring across the board until it makes sense for the kind of league you want to run.  The reason this wasn't done in the first place is that it just seemed easier to do PPR, but is that really an excuse at this point with all of the online league management systems?

There is nothing magic about 10 yards per point.  It was just easy to calculate back in the days of yore.  8 yards per point would work just as well.  And if you think TE yards are better somehow (or harder to come by) make them worth a little more.  We already do that for QB vs the other positions, but folks still seem to resist mightily to making the OTHER positions have independent scoring.  Why?  If you made passing yards 10 yards/point QBs would be considerably over valued.  Sound familiar?  So if RB is overvalued, fix it the right way.  And if it isn't anymore, change it back.

PPR isn't evil, and it not the end of the world.  It just makes a lot less sense than more direct solutions to whatever "problems" you might have in your league.

Edit:

BTW, I love the FD scoring idea.  It's really about the same as scoring a TD, only on a smaller scale.  Being able to get two yards when you need two yards is pretty valuable skill.

 

[FF Ninja]

no.

I love how people assume that the only reason someone could dislike a system is sour grapes.

 

[Shutout]

I don't think that is the only reason some people want to move back to 0ppr. Rewarding garbage time was just an unfortunate byproduct, IMO. I always thought PPR was invented to move some value to WR (and/or away from RB) back when there were a dozen 300 carry RBs. Now that there are hardly any left, it seems unnecessary. In fact, the shift to RBBC has made some passing down backs more valuable than their early down counterparts who are playing more snaps in more critical roles (3rd and short). Points per first down would reward the guys that are getting those critical yards (2 yards on 4th and 1 = 1.2 points that way) and cease to reward guys getting 7 yard dump offs on 3rd and 20.

If people voice an interest in PPFD, it'll eventually happen. First downs are already being tracked (you guys have it in your data dominator, for example) so it should be relatively simple to implement if the sites realize there is a demand.

While I've got you here, I'd like to ask a couple random questions... (1) why did you guys remove snap count from your game logs? (2) why did you guys remove playoff games from your game logs?

Yes, garbage points are always just that stupid little thing that makes you mad or happy, depending on which side you are on. You can't legislate it to be fair. I remember opening night last year and the Steelers were clearly going to lose. The game was decided.  Anyone playing against Antonio Brown that night felt "okay" for about 58:30 of that game. He had points but not the BIG points.  And then on that last drive it was Antonio here, Antonio there, Antonio in the end zone. He got the TD, the yards, and he moved the chains for the 1st downs so no matter how you slice it, his 13 point night became 26 no matter what.

As far as the history of PPR, maybe my leagues were different but we actually went PPR because there WEREN'T a lot of options. It was 4-6 RBs that were absolute heavy lifters that got ALL the work and they were 100 points ahead of everyone else. So someone got the idea that if you rewarded a guy that caught the ball some that he could offset all those 150 yard days that the 35 carry a game (Seemed like it was that much) guys got.  So for a while it made sense. And then guys like Marshall Faulk came along and did both and then there was that era where there were about 3-4 mega backs and it seemed like we needed ppr even more than before and just had to live with the ELITES (like we do with JJ Watt and Gronk and Antonio Brown now).

But over time, with the way the league has transformed, it seems that the "runners" don't get the number of carries to offset the small handful of passes some other guy gets.

So I think the idea was okay but what we failed to do, by and large, was re-evaluate when the needle moved. It MIGHT be that the answer in today's game is to move a RB from .5 PPR to .25 (reasoning that since guys that used to carry 25 times now are more like 18-20, then maybe the catch side needs deflated (sorry Pats fans) a bit also).  I don't know, but I think that the answer lies somewhere in that we don't need to move BACK to one of the extremes but find the new operating zone.

In most leagues I have been involved in during recent years, most only require 1RB starter these days so it's really not the feast or famine syndrome we used to see. If you have a great back, you got him and if you don't then you load up on WR and offset the opponents that way. 

 

[FF Ninja]

My opinion is that PPR NEVER made sense.  It was was an easy solution to a perceived problem (RB dominance).  It did partially address the issue, but there were and are BETTER WAYS to address that issue (if it even needed to be addressed at all).

What REALLY doesn't make sense to me is the notion that scoring system doesn't matter as long as everybody is playing by the same rules.  To me, it matters a lot.  My primary goals for a scoring system is that:

• is predictable to some degree (not arbitrary) - I want good fantasy players to be able to differentiate themselves, I want arbitrary bonuses and other factors that increase randomness to be minimized
  
• as much as possible rewards the best actual NFL players (on a given day) with the most points
  

There USED to be another goal, which was for it to be easy to calculate.  TD only leagues are great for that, and PPR is pretty good too.  But in this day and age, calculation is cheap and easy, so it's kind of irrelevant to me.

As for the first goal, you could create a league where guys ONLY score if they get at least 100 yards on the day.  Hell you could make it so they only score if they get EXACTLY 100 yards on the day.  The "everybody's playing by the same rules" crowd have to acknowledge that those scoring systems don't make sense unless you are honestly into a truly random league.  No one could accurately predict when a guy would pull in exactly 100 yards, and it would much harder to predict how many times a guy will go over the 100 yards mark during the season than it would be to predict a guy will "do well" over the course of a season.  A guy could get 97 yards every single game and never score you a point.  It's introducing randomness, which goes against my first goal.  Some bonus systems seem fun, and they may be, but they aren't good if you want to play a game which helps good players win.  Same with TD only leagues.  They can be fun too, but there just isn't as much opportunity to shine which is why they dropped by the wayside for the most part.

The second goal is where PPR fails miserably.   A catch for 0 yards is NOT of equal worth to a team as a 10 yard run (pick your example, there are many).  To be blunt, that idea is just dumb to me.  Sorry.  If good players doing productive things scoring more points than players doing less productive things, isn't a goal of yours, that's fine.  But to me, that's kind of the whole point.  Again to take things to extremes, you could set up a scoring system that ONLY rewards a back for things like carries and not yards.  That might be fairly predictable and consistent, but it doesn't really reflect how much a guy is doing for his team.  Catches are very much like that.  A catch by itself is fairly meaningless and could even be a negative for a team in a given situation.  To a large degree, what matters is moving the ball forward.

So if there is a positional imbalance, what do you do?  Change the yardage scoring by position.  It's easy.  It makes sense.  It solves the problem.

Similarly, if non PPR is too dependent on TDs, solve the REAL problem - change the ratio of yardage scoring to TD scoring.  Lower TD scores (traditionalists hate this), or raise yardage scoring across the board until it makes sense for the kind of league you want to run.  The reason this wasn't done in the first place is that it just seemed easier to do PPR, but is that really an excuse at this point with all of the online league management systems?

There is nothing magic about 10 yards per point.  It was just easy to calculate back in the days of yore.  8 yards per point would work just as well.  And if you think TE yards are better somehow (or harder to come by) make them worth a little more.  We already do that for QB vs the other positions, but folks still seem to resist mightily to making the OTHER positions have independent scoring.  Why?  If you made passing yards 10 yards/point QBs would be considerably over valued.  Sound familiar?  So if RB is overvalued, fix it the right way.  And if it isn't anymore, change it back.

PPR isn't evil, and it not the end of the world.  It just makes a lot less sense than more direct solutions to whatever "problems" you might have in your league.

Very well said. Bolded my favorite parts.

 

[Keepers]

While I feel PPR is a silly stat that is meaningless, I play in a 1/2 pt PPR league for variety.  Have played in full pt PPR but moved on from those leagues.

Variety is nice though, really like pt for 1st downs.

 

[Shutout]

I love how people assume that the only reason someone could dislike a system is sour grapes.

Kind of life in a nutshell, isn't it?  Art imitating life here. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't think that is the only reason some people want to move back to 0ppr. Rewarding garbage time was just an unfortunate byproduct, IMO. I always thought PPR was invented to move some value to WR (and/or away from RB) back when there were a dozen 300 carry RBs. Now that there are hardly any left, it seems unnecessary. In fact, the shift to RBBC has made some passing down backs more valuable than their early down counterparts who are playing more snaps in more critical roles (3rd and short). Points per first down would reward the guys that are getting those critical yards (2 yards on 4th and 1 = 1.2 points that way) and cease to reward guys getting 7 yard dump offs on 3rd and 20.

If people voice an interest in PPFD, it'll eventually happen. First downs are already being tracked (you guys have it in your data dominator, for example) so it should be relatively simple to implement if the sites realize there is a demand.

While I've got you here, I'd like to ask a couple random questions... (1) why did you guys remove snap count from your game logs? (2) why did you guys remove playoff games from your game logs?




 




 

Let me take a look there at the stats for you.

J

 

[Spin]

Yes, most TE's will score fewer fantasy points, but that is because most TE's are not as important to the offense as RB's and WR's.

If that is true, then why are the Patriots paying Gronk more then any of their RBs/WRs?  They're paying him more money because he's less important?  There's a number of teams where they pay the TE more then any of their RBs/WRs.  

 scoring system we were using made little sense in relation to those players' actual NFL value.

Do you score for Points per 1st down then?  A RB that has a season of 40 carries for ~80 yards but is 80% on converting 3rd downs is extremely valuable for an NFL team, wouldn't do squat for fantasy though.

 

[Tau837]

If that is true, then why are the Patriots paying Gronk more then any of their RBs/WRs?  They're paying him more money because he's less important?  There's a number of teams where they pay the TE more then any of their RBs/WRs.

The post you responded to said most TEs will score fewer fantasy points because most of them are not as important to the offense as RBs and WRs. So you bring up Gronk as a counterpoint? Do you think Gronk fits the mold of "most TEs?"

Why don't you name all the teams that pay the TE more than any RBs or WRs, and then we can see if those guys fit the mold of "most TEs."

 

[Yenrub]

If you're worried about FA pick ups you should increase the roster size to the point where there's very little left on it. I will concur that in-season acquisitions are a problem.

And rosters should definitely be frozen for the playoffs.

My main league (21st year this season) has 20 man rosters. Allows one FA pick up per week (unless you trade for more) and freezes rosters come playoff time.