Overall ranking method

[queler 0]

What do the new catagories mean, "Stud Running back", QB by committee, etc. and how do they relate to standard

[docholdaway 0]

We start 2 QB, 2 or 3 RB, 2 or 3 WR, TE, K, Def.

 

Any recommendations on which "overall ranking method" I should use.

 

Rush/Receive = 1 pt per 10 yards

Passing = 1 pt per 25 yards

all TD = 6

 

Thanks in advance for your input.

 

D

[Mike FF Today 611]

Hi queler & docholdaway,

 

Here's some info on the various ranking methods along with a couple articles on Value Based Drafting that you might find useful.

 

Value Based Drafting

 

Principles of a VBD System

 

Clipped from Mike MacGregor post...

 

Once you understand these methods, the other methods I can explain more easily. They start with Median Drafted as the base, but then adjust the importance of certain positions up and down to more properly reflect how they should be drafted in the overall rankings than the traditional methods do. The adjustments are:

 

Stud RB method: RB = 1.5; baseline is increased by 50% over median drafted

 

QBBC method: QB = 0.65; baseline is 65% of the median drafted

 

Compiler Recommended: QB = 0.8, RB = 1.2, WR = 0.9, TE = 0.65, K = 0.2, DEF = 0.4, DL = 0.5, LB = 0.6, DB = 0.45

 

Overall, I like the results the Compiler Recommended gives for most leagues. (Some leagues starting 2 QB might have issue with it.) If you want to go with a traditional method, I recommend Median Drafted. It tends to emphasise building a strong, deeper team than you'll see from Last Starter, the most common method people use.

 

Personally, I would always just keep the "exclude position from overall rankings" option checked on for K and DEF, as I will always draft those late. That is why in the Compiler Recommended method they are adjusted so low.

[pk2448 0]

docholdaway, Your league sounds very much like mine, and i am going to use the compiler recommended. I ran it stud back and compiler rec and there is not a whole lot of difference. Owens and Harrison moved up to the #10 and 12 spots on the compiler recommended.

 

Mike, If You read this, why did they move up when the running backs below them are forcasted to score more points? They re going to score more points but carry a higher value on the overall sheet.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Thanks for the pickup Mike. I would recommend Compiler Recommended for start 1 QB leagues, but it does tend to underrate QB a little bit for start 2 QB leagues, so I'd be inclined to go with Median Drafted for that.

 

As I told a buddy of mine recently in a start 2 QB league, although QB will go faster than start 1 QB, it does not mean you have to get one of the top QBs (McNabb, Culpepper, Vick...whoops, scratch him ).

 

What is more important than where you select your 1st QB, is where you get your 2nd QB. I would still approach the draft like I do for start 1 QB, and wait on getting one so you get better value (Gannon, Brooks, or later w/ Favre, Green, Collins, etc.), but then be one of the first teams to get your 2nd QB. Same guys - Favre, Green, Collins, Hasselbeck, etc. A pair of them for a couple mid round picks will do better than a McNabb + Hutchinson pairing for a 1st/2nd round pick and later pick. Not to mention you'll have better RB/WR since you used your early picks on those rather than QB.

 

pk - I think Harrison and Owens would have moved up on the Stud RB method because there is no WR adjustment as there is for Compiler Recommended. So the difference between them and the baseline player is greater. I'd really have to see the results in front of me to make a better assessment, but that is what I think is going on there.