|
Value-Based Draft Strategies
Mind Over Matter - Gaining A Better Perspective
by Emil Kadlec (5/2002)
|
There are two main ingredients to a successful draft: 1) A solid cheat sheet; and 2) A solid drafting strategy. Using one without taking advantage of the other isn't an option.
That hasn't always been the case. …
Cheat sheets were all the rage back in the early '90s. So much so that drafting strategies were largely overlooked. As a result, only a small percentage of owners actually sat down at the table with some kind of overall plan, meaning the vast majority of owners spent draft day flying by the seat of their pants. These poor drafters made it easier for the strong to thrive!
Things have changed considerably since then.
These days, everybody has a strategy. And even though some of the old, "always take two running backs in the first three rounds" conventions still tend to hold true, we know have models that validate them. More importantly, we're able to offer owners a better understanding of when those old conventions should be avoided.
As owners become better educated, draft day "steals" become fewer and farther between - a phenomenon that forces owners hoping to maintain or gain an edge over the competition to draft with more precision than ever before.
All of which brings us to the theory known as Value-Based Drafting (VBD). Although it's only one of the many theories currently making the rounds, we believe it offers owners the best perspective on the difficult task of drafting.
Determining the true origin of the VBD is difficult, but Joe Bryant of footballguys.com certainly played a major role in bringing the concepts to life. And despite a fast-growing list of variations and spin-offs, the basic principles behind the Value-Based Drafting - many of which were initially developed by Rotisserie Baseball gurus - remain unchanged.
The Theory Of Relativity
One very important part of a successful draft is determining the relative value between skill positions. Is it time to take a WR? How long can I - and should I -- wait before selecting my starting QB? How high should the first TE go?
VBD disciples answer those questions by assigning relative values - commonly referred to as X numbers - to every player in the draft pool. The X number is used to adjust the Fantasy scoring value (FSV) for each player based on your league's configuration.
For example - let's say your league's rules specify a starting lineup consisting of 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 1 TE & 1 PK. Let's further assume it's a 12-team league. Of course, each team needs a starting QB, meaning 12 NFL QBs will start each week's games -- just like it will take 36 NFL wideouts (12*3) to meet your league's requirements for starters and so on.
X numbers normalize the bottom starting players at each skill position. This is done by subtracting the last "starting" player's FSV from all players of that skill position. Therefore, the 12th QB has an X number of zero and the 36th WR has an X number of zero and so on. The following table provides an example of QBs normalized to the 12th player who is Brett Favre. Accentually you subtract Favre's FSV from all QBs to get their X number. The same is shown for the WRs.
As you can tell, the top WR (Randy Moss) fits between QBs Warner and Manning in an overall list even though his FSV puts him far below the 15th best QB. Why is this? The answer is basically the league structure. Let us take this for an example. Let us assume of your nine starting players each week there were no limits on how many at each skill position. If that were the case you would draft directly according to Fantasy scoring value (FSV) making quarterbacks very popular first-round picks and strategy would no longer be a factor.
But the league structure in our first example limits each team to just one starting QB. But you do need three receivers, which is why wideouts normalize to a higher value.
Einstein would be proud. … Maybe.
|
| QUARTERBACKS |
|---|
| Rank | Player | Bye | FSV/X# |
|---|
| 1 | Culpepper, MIN | 9 | 365/133 |
| 2 | Warner, STL | 9 | 350/118 |
| 3 | Manning, IND | 5 | 324/92 |
| 4 | Garcia, SF | 7 | 320/88 |
| 5 | McNabb, PHI | 6 | 303/71 |
| 6 | Gannon, OAK | 5 | 274/42 |
| 7 | Johnson, BUF | 6 | 253/21 |
| 8 | Green, KC | 11 | 246/14 |
| 9 | Grbac, BAL | 14 | 245/13 |
| 10 | Griese, DEN | 16 | 244/12 |
| 11 | Brunell, JAX | 6 | 237/5 |
| 12 | Favre, GB | 8 | 232/0 |
| 13 | Testaverde, NYJ | 12 | 232/0 |
| 14 | Brooks, NO | 3 | 226/-6 |
| 15 | Johnson, TB | 3 | 219/-13 |
|
|
| WIDE RECEIVERS |
|---|
| Rank | Player | Bye | FSV/X# |
|---|
| 1 | Moss, MIN | 9 | 186/104 |
| 2 | Harrison, IND | 5 | 177/95 |
| 3 | Owens, SF | 7 | 174/92 |
| 4 | Holt, STL | 9 | 174/92 |
| 5 | Moulds, BUF | 6 | 165/83 |
| 6 | Westbrook, WAS | 10 | 154/72 |
| 7 | Smith, DEN | 16 | 153/71 |
| 8 | McCaffrey, DEN | 16 | 150/68 |
| 9 | Bruce, STL | 9 | 147/65 |
| 10 | Carter, MIN | 9 | 144/62 |
| 11 | Horn, NO | 3 | 140/58 |
| 12 | Alexander, KC | 11 | 137/55 |
| 13 | Freeman, GB | 8 | 135/53 |
| 14 | Johnson, TB | 3 | 134/52 |
| 15 | Boston, AZ | 1 | 134/52 |
| 16 | Brown, OAK | 5 | 130/48 |
| 17 | Smith, JAX | 6 | 130/48 |
| 18 | Crowell, DET | 4 | 126/44 |
| 19 | McCardell, JAX | 6 | 124/42 |
| 20 | Chrebet, NYJ | 12 | 118/36 |
| 21 | Taylor, BAL | 14 | 118/36 |
| 22 | Muhammad, CAR | 15 | 116/34 |
| 23 | Warrick, CIN | 9 | 116/34 |
| 24 | Thrash, PHI | 6 | 116/34 |
| 25 | Toomer, NYG | 13 | 114/32 |
| 26 | Robinson, CHI | 4 | 114/32 |
| 27 | Scott, CIN | 9 | 111/29 |
| 28 | Jeffers, CAR | 15 | 109/27 |
| 29 | Terrell, CHI | 4 | 105/23 |
| 30 | Galloway, DAL | 5 | 102/20 |
| 31 | Glenn, NE | 17 | 98/16 |
| 32 | Mathis, ATL | 8 | 96/14 |
| 33 | Mason, TEN | 4 | 96/14 |
| 34 | Gadsden, MIA | 7 | 96/14 |
| 35 | Hilliard, NYG | 13 | 95/13 |
| 36 | Johnson, CLE | 8 | 82/0 |
| 37 | McKnight, MIA | 7 | 82/0 |
| 38 | Jackson, SEA | 7 | 82/0 |
| 39 | Morris, KC | 11 | 80/-2 |
| 40 | Morton, DET | 4 | 79/-3 |
|
|
Where To Normalize?/Where Does Relativity Lie?
Before you get too excited, I'll remind you this isn't an exact science. In fact, instead of using the starting line to determine their normalization point - as we did in the above example - some owners use roster size.
Which means, if most managers carried four running backs on their roster, they would use 48 (4*12) as their normalization point at that position and so on. Other owners take a middle of the road approach somewhere in between. I prefer using the starting lineup to set my normalization points.
Without trying to sound too analytical, these different normalization points will usually result in different overall lists. Hence there is typically some non-linearity in the cheat sheet and real stats. If you use the roster limits as your normalization point significant shifts will occur with respect to using a starting lineup normalization point. Which one is right? I believe the starting lineup normalization is "better" because it places more emphasis on the more valuable players - your starting ones!
Potential Skill Position Saturation (SPS)
Each of us has a preference for a certain skill position when we draft. A typical tendency is to favor RBs. This falls in line with what I call Skill Position Saturation (SPS) and is why a RB happy drafter is usually successful.
SPS can affect your draft and can be determined quickly. Let's say your league has 16 managers and you have to start 2 RBs each week. That means there will be 32 RBs in your leagues starting lineup and only 32 starting in the NFL (not counting fullbacks) each week. When the number of RBs needed to fill all the leagues starting lineups is so close to the available starting players, SPS occurs. When SPS is present, the VBD theories tend to fall through. Typically runs will occur on the SPS skill position and rightfully so. This is why it is a good idea to keep the Fantasy starting players needed to NFL starting players available around a .8 ratio when setting up your league. It is a good idea to run this simple calculation on each skill position (except PK & Def. team) before setting up your drafting strategy.
This saturation can cause drafting strategy to fail in the early rounds where getting your RBs become somewhat of a free for all. If a league has 14 or more (16) owners, I suggest a starting lineup of 1 QB, 1 RB, 3 WR along with a "flex" player who can be a RB, WR or TE. This reduces the saturation point of RBs and yet still allows each owner the opportunity to start two RBs!
Flex Players/Twist Of Fate
Many leagues incorporate a flex positions typically of one player that can be a RB, WR or TE. However, it makes us have to think a little harder on draft day. If we added this flex player to our main example we could now start one of these three examples: 3 RBs, 3 WRs & 1 TE or 2 RBs, 4 WRs & 1 TE or 2 RBs, 3 WRs & 2 TEs.
Two things occur. First, it gives you some flexibility on draft day. Secondly your have a dilemma as to where to put your normalization points. I typically try and get a feel for the other owners in the league as to what they usually lean towards. Most managers are RB happy and in this cast you could pick a normalization of: RB 2.7*12 (32), WR 2.3*12 (27.5) & TE 1*12 (12). This creates a saturation (SPS) point on RBs and leaves WRs with lower pressure during the draft. With this setup you are predicting an early run on RBs and your X numbers will give you the forecasting you need to draft well. In this case I recommend looking closely at the worst-case saturation points. First, let's take a starting lineup of 2 RBs and 4 WRs in our 12 owner league. There is a saturation points of 24/32 = .67 for RBs and 48/64 = .75 for WRs. Both of these are well below 1.0, which is good. So in my opinion you could go into this draft assuming you are going to have a starting lineup of 2 RB and 4 WRs and be more successful then a 3 RB and 3 WR setup. While most owners are getting their third RB you will be picking up an undervalued WR or getting an excellent QB!
One way to help minimize this saturation problem is to find ways to have more viable RBs. The World Championship of Fantasy Football (wcoff.com) has incorporated one point per catch for all players in their rules. This brings in a few FBs and third down backs into the picture and reduces the stress on starting RBs. It also gives WRs a little boost since there SPS is much lower then the RBs.
Draft Day Fundamentals -- Looking Ahead/ Tier Analysis
A key factor in a draft strategy is what most people call tiering. As each round goes by, it is important to look ahead to not only your next pick but the following one also. Let's say it is your pick and you also have a pick in 6 more picks. You haven't taken a wideout yet and you have already taken a quarterback and a running back. The first thought is to take WR1 whom has the largest X#. However, there is a large wideout tier of six players and only a one player tier at the running back position. Hence, you take RB1 (97) and the worst you can do with your next pick is WR6 (96). That is a total X# of 193. If you take WR1 (100) you probably won't get a shot at RB1 (97) but end up with RB2 (89) totaling 189.
This makes sense unless you have already filled your starting RB quota and need two WRs to fill. Then you may want to take WR1 (100) and hope you get at least WR6 (96) totaling 196.
Tiering is not always straight forward, but there are usually good opportunities during a draft to better choices.
|
| Remaining QBs |
|---|
| | X# |
| QB1 | 70 |
| QB2 | 68 |
| QBs | 65 |
|
| Remaining RBs
|
|---|
| | X# |
| RB1 | 97 |
| RB2 | 89 |
| RB3 | 88 |
| RB4 | 87 |
| RB5 | 83 |
|
| Remaining WRs |
|---|
| | X# |
| WR1 | 100 |
| WR2 | 99 |
| WR3 | 99 |
| WR4 | 98 |
| WR5 | 96 |
| WR6 | 96 |
| WR7 | 84 |
Roster Watching
Like tiering, watching your opponent's rosters during the draft can be very useful. I find it most helpful when drafting quarterbacks, tight ends, kickers and team defenses. These positions typically have only one player in a starting lineup. For example, let's say you have the next pick and have a pick in 6 more picks. You haven't taken a QB yet and pickings are getting slim. But there is a very short tier at RB and you have to decide if an adequate QB will be around in 6 picks if you take an RB now. This is a 12 team league and 8 managers have already taken one QB each. A quick examination of the six picks between your two is need to determine how many of these managers still haven't drafted a QB. Depending on the answer you may be able to draft the RB and still get your QB.
Simple Theories For Drafting Place-kickers & Team Defenses
One parameter that is not implemented into most VBD calculations is probabilities - or should I say consistencies. Some skill positions are easier to predict then others. Most would agree that place-kickers and team defenses are two of the hardest to forecast each year. Hence it can be argued that X numbers for these skill positions could be scaled down a little to reflect this lesser probability. The effect of this would drop these players down on the overall cheat sheet. Most drafters do this in there head by ignoring X numbers for place-kickers and team defenses and waiting to take them until late in the draft.
Not a bad move in my book and I have an even easier way of going about it. Wait until 5 to 8 kickers have been taken and then strike. Pretty simple isn't it! And the same goes for Team defenses. One never wants to take the first kicker nor the first team defense. The only way I would violate this theory is if it was the last two of three rounds of the draft and less then 5 kickers had been taken.
Bye Week Strategy
I personally believe bye week draft strategy can be overworked. There are just a few situations that can really make a difference.
The first one involves skill positions that have only one starter - like QBs, TEs, PKs and team defenses. In these cases it is important to make sure your backup has a different bye week. The quarterback is the most important, followed by the tight end. If your starting place kicker or team defense doesn't have a bye week until say after week 6, I wouldn't be as concerned about the backup's bye week. In these two positions, there is a good likelihood you will have cut your backup or starter and selected another via free agency by then anyway. If there is no way to acquire new players in your league, well it is obvious to get a different bye week backup.
Other then the situations I described above, I recommended ignoring the bye week. I believe in taking the best players available given the VBD principles. If you end up with a very large number of players on your roster with the same bye week, then you'll have one rough week and the rest aren't so bad. Now that the NFL has an even number of teams again, you don't have to worry about bye weeks interfering with your Fantasy playoffs either!
Trading Down
There can be very specific situations during a draft that trading down can be beneficial. The simplest situation is when there is a nice sized tier at your skill position of greatest need. If other skill positions just emptied out a tier and there is a significant drop off of talent at these positions then trading down should be considered. One persons junk is another ones treasure, so you typically can find someone to trade with. When the situations is right, trading down is one of my favorite draft principles to achieve.
Conclusion
Remember, the object of the draft is to fill your roster with quality player that can fill your starting lineup evenly. If you have two top ten QBs and only one good RB you may not do as well as someone with one top ten QB and two good RBs (assuming a normal starting lineup).
We also provide a FREE custom cheat sheet tool on the web that will take your league structure and league scoring system and build your cheat sheet for you. You can find our CheatSheet Live tool at cs.footballdiehards.com.
|
|
Our latest Cheat Sheets updated constantly through September.
|
|
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr1')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Jermicheal Finley Says No Progress On Contract Yet
(2/3 11:45 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on the ongoing story. ... Finley is a free agent this offseason and there hasn't been any movement on a new contract. "Hey, it's the NFL," Finley said Friday. "With business right now, I don't even know what's going on. ...You just have to play that (waiting) game. It's the Green Bay way. "I don't know anything. I'll just hope for the best."
Diehards Line:
As Journal Sentinel staffer Tyler Dunne notes, if Finley does receive the franchise tag from the Packers, it's expected that he will seek to be classified as a wide receiver. An arbitrator would make that final call. The franchise tag number for wideouts will likely be around $9 million. This season, Finley had 55 catches for 767 yards and eight touchdowns.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr2')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Report: Chiefs Going With Daboll As OC
(2/3 10:00 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on the previous item. ... ESPN's Adam Schefter reports the Chiefs hired former Dolphins assistant Brian Daboll as their offensive coordinator.
Diehards Line:
Daboll, most recently Miami's offensive coordinator, has a history with general manager Scott Pioli and he was selected over QBs coach Jim Zorn and former Raiders OC Al Saunders.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr3')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Report: Bills, Rian Lindell Agree To New Contract
(2/3 9:32 PM PT)
The Facts:
According to a league source, the Bills and Lindell have agreed on a contract that will keep him in Buffalo. Lindell was set to become an unrestricted free agent on March 13, but the two sides have hammered out an agreement.
Diehards Line:
Lindell has spent nine seasons as the kicker for Buffalo since arriving from the Seattle Seahawks. From 2003 to 2010, Lindell didn't miss a single game for Buffalo. It wasn't until this past season that he missed eight regular season games due to a shoulder injury. In his career in Buffalo, Lindell has connected on 204 field goals out of 246 attempts, a field goal percentage of nearly 83-percent. He's also missed only one extra point, that coming on a block against the Chicago Bears at the Rogers Centre in Toronto in 2010.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr4')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Super Bowl XLVI Injury Report; Final Edition
(2/3 4:25 PM PT)
The Facts:
Friday's final Super Bowl XLVI Injury/Status Report is now available for your review.
Diehards Line:
Under NFL rules, teams are only required to list if a player practiced or not until Friday. Then they must reveal the player's status for the game (out, doubtful, questionable, or probable). That information can now be accessed HERE.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr5')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Ryan: Sanchez, Holmes Have Talked; Hope To Meet Soon
(2/3 2:02 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on a previous item. ... Mark Sanchez and Santonio Holmes have talked by phone in an attempt to repair their relationship, and they're planning to meet soon for a kind of quarterback-wide receiver retreat. HC Rex Ryan told ESPN.com Friday that Sanchez and Holmes have discussed the possibility of taking an entire weekend to hash out their differences -- a couple's getaway, NFL style. "I'm not sure if they're going to or not, but that's something they mentioned," Ryan said. "I'm not sure where it would be or anything like that. I know they had mentioned that to me."
Diehards Line:
Ryan said he has spoken individually to Sanchez and Holmes, whose year-long rift became public at the end of the season. Asked if he planted the seed for the get-together, Ryan smiled and said, "I'm not going to take credit for that." Owner Woody Johnson revealed Thursday that he's planning to have dinner next week with Sanchez, and the team also has to make a final decision on Holmes' contract. If they wanted to cut him, they'd have to do it by Wednesday, according to a clause in the five-year, $45 contract he signed last summer. If he's still on the roster by Wednesday, his guaranteed money increases from $7.75 million to $15 million. Ryan, reiterating the team's public stance on Holmes, said there's no chance of him being released. "That's not going to happen," he said. ... We'll see.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr6')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Bradshaw, Nicks Listed As Probable For Super Bowl XLVI
(2/3 2:01 PM PT)
The Facts:
Ahmad Bradshaw didn't participate in practice Friday, the final session before Sunday's Super Bowl. Defensive back Tyler Sash and defensive end Osi Umenyiora (ankle, knee) were limited. All three players are listed as probable, along with wide receiver Hakeem Nicks (shoulder), cornerback Corey Webster (hamstring) and linebacker Jacquian Williams (foot).
Diehards Line:
The absences came after HC Tom Coughlin had presented a rosy picture of his team's health while addressing the media Friday morning. "Everyone wants to be a part of it at this point in time," Coughlin had said. "No one wants to be someone who is not able to participate or be a part of this wonderful experience. We’ve had everyone on the practice field, and hopefully, thank God, it will be that way Sunday. ..." As NFL.com's Albert Bree notes, Bradshaw had participated in Wednesday's practice on a limited basis and was a full participant Thursday. It has not been unusual for Bradshaw to play in a game after missing a day or two of practice since he broke a bone in his foot during the regular season.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr7')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Irsay Releases (Another) Statement On Peyton Manning
(2/3 1:57 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on the ongoing story. ... Colts owner Jim Irsay released a statement on Friday. “Peyton Manning, Jim Irsay and the entire Colts family remain close and unified as we continue to work through all the options that relate to his future with the Colts,” the statement reads. “The present focus is on the Super Bowl and the great game that awaits.”
Diehards Line:
At the risk of sounding cyncial and mean-spirited, the words in the release don't match the actions either side have taken this week. The two sides appear to be using the enormous world-wide stage that comes with the Super Bowl being hosted in Indianapolis to gain some kind of media or public relations advantage in what appears to be the process of separating after a lengthy and mutually-beneficial relationship. And every time they say it's not so, it becomes even clearer that it is. ... We'll further suggest we'd expected more from both sides.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr8')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Gronkowski, Welker Listed As Questionable For Super Bowl XLVI
(2/3 1:13 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on the ongoing story. ... TE Rob Gronkowski is listed as questionable on the team's final injury report. Gronkowski participated in Friday's hour-long walk-through. He practiced for the second straight day after being limited in practice on Thursday. The Patriots listed 10 other players as questionable, including safety Patrick Chung (knee), left guard Logan Mankins (knee), linebacker Brandon Spikes (knee) and wide receiver Wes Welker (knee).
Diehards Line:
All 11 players were listed as taking part in a limited portion of Friday's practice and Boston Herald staffer Ian Rapoport advised his readers that Gronkowski is likely to play, as will likely all of the questionable. "This is kind of like Saturday for us," said HC Bill Belichick. "We've had a little bit of extra time this week (to practice). I think we're ready to go. We've worked hard this week Monday, Wednesday and Thursday in practice, and we had good practices back (in Foxboro) last week. We went through some mental-review things out there (Friday). ..." Stay tuned. We'll be posting the full injury report for Sunday's game once it's released by the league office.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr9')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Matt Forte Says Intent Of Franchise Tag Will Determine His Approach
(2/3 12:36 PM PT)
The Facts:
Following up on the ongoing story. ... Matt Forte said he would be fine with the Chicago Bears using the franchise tag on him as long as it leads to a long-term deal and is not simply a tactic to keep him off the free-agent market for another season. "It depends on the motive of (the franchise tag)," Forte said Thursday. "If they are doing the franchise tag just to get more time in order to negotiate a long-term deal then I would be OK with it. But if it's just to hold me another year and just 'Let's throw some money at him right now to keep him quiet,' that's not going to solve anything."
Diehards Line:
Bears president and CEO Ted Phillips said on Tuesday that the team has no intention of letting Forte become a free agent. Forte, who made his first Pro Bowl in the final year of his rookie contract, hopes that means an amenable resolution to a contract issue that has gone on since the lockout ended in July. Forte turned down a contract offer from the Bears before the season with $13 million to $14 million in guaranteed money, ESPN.com reported. Now with Phil Emery taking over for Jerry Angelo as Bears GM, Forte is hopeful an agreement can be reached. He said his agent has already spoken with Emery and expects to have more conversations in the next few days. Forte missed the final four games of the regular season after suffering a sprained right medial collateral ligament during the Bears' home loss to Kansas City on Dec. 4. He finished the season with 1,487 yards from scrimmage and returned to play in Sunday's Pro Bowl.
|
class="headline" onClick="expanddiv('tr10')" style="cursor:hand; cursor:pointer" onmouseover="window.status=' ';return true">Chiefs Considering Daboll For OC Opening
(2/3 12:29 PM PT)
The Facts:
The Kansas City Chiefs are talking to Brian Daboll about their vacant offensive-coordinator position, according to a league source.
Diehards Line:
As previously noted, the Chiefs have also looked at Jim Zorn as an in-house candidate and have spoken to former Raiders coordinator Al Saunders, who has worked previously in Kansas City. Daboll, most recently Miami's offensive coordinator, has a history with general manager Scott Pioli and several executives expect him to be a top candidate for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
