defensive scoring?

[redwolf 0]

A debate about defensive scoring has begun in our AOL league. Points scored by defenses range from the standard sacks, fumbles, and interceptions just like most leagues. The debate begins with points allowed and continues for yards allowed with negative points for allowing too many points and yards. Some feel that alot of points are earned/lost in garbage time once a game is decided so there may be too much weight given to those two statistics (Bears are #2 in points). I did an analysis of the top 10 defenses as scored in our league and compared them to the top 10 quarterbacks and running backs. Quarterbacks scored an average of 269 points compaired to 229 for defenses and 220 for running backs. The standard deviation for running backs is the greatest but drops considerably once Tomlinson is subtracted from the scoring. I could go on but the analysis seems to point in one direction. In our league the defenses are just as important to overall scoring and winning as running backs and quarterbacks. Is this scoring ratio normal in other leagues? Any one have any thoughts on this?

[plasma george 52]

Good topic that doesn't get enough attention.

We (all but 2 owners) voted to HALF the Defensive scoring 2 years ago.

Case in point--

last week the owner that had Miami D (selected off WW) had a shutout, and last year would have had 22 points, and that would have won a playoff spot...this year he only got 11 points, and lost.

In the end, he lost because his studs lost (QB,RB,WR) (were outplayed by the other owner's studs).

And THAT'S what FF is all about, STUDS VS STUDS, what we draft for, trade for, study for.

 

Defenses are drafted in the last rounds...and ANY of them can score fumble, INTs, KO, Punt TD on returns on ANY GIVEN PLAY, they're all speed burners.

Couple owners have commented to drop Defenses all together....make it an offensive scoring league only.

It become a valid points as we watch GB or ARI score long TDs....it's luck and FF bullsh!t defined.

I like halving the scoring and keeping Defenses, they're fun to have, BUT shouldn't have scoring any where near the top dogs.

 

Print this out, take it to your draft, and show the owners to "reduce" defensive scoring power, to make your league better.

Your welcome.

[chidoy 0]

I know a lot of people would disagree with our league scoring for defenses, but oh well.... NOT SAYING it's right or wrong, but a different way to look at it.

 

The Bears and Ravens DEF is ranked 4 and 5........ overall.

 

IMHO, would I pick a DEF that early? H3LL NO!

 

But a monster/stud player will get you stud points (i.e. LT).

 

So why shouldn't a monster/stud DEF get those stud points too? I mean a huge game = a huge game so they should be rewarded for it, right?

 

n e ways, that's all I have for now.

[Ambroc 0]

A debate about defensive scoring has begun in our AOL league. Points scored by defenses range from the standard sacks, fumbles, and interceptions just like most leagues. The debate begins with points allowed and continues for yards allowed with negative points for allowing too many points and yards. Some feel that alot of points are earned/lost in garbage time once a game is decided so there may be too much weight given to those two statistics (Bears are #2 in points). I did an analysis of the top 10 defenses as scored in our league and compared them to the top 10 quarterbacks and running backs. Quarterbacks scored an average of 269 points compaired to 229 for defenses and 220 for running backs. The standard deviation for running backs is the greatest but drops considerably once Tomlinson is subtracted from the scoring. I could go on but the analysis seems to point in one direction. In our league the defenses are just as important to overall scoring and winning as running backs and quarterbacks. Is this scoring ratio normal in other leagues? Any one have any thoughts on this?

 

For starting line-ups, we play 1QB, 1 RB, 1WR, 1TE, 1PK, and 1 DF with two flex that can start anywhere in RB, WR, and TE.

 

Our scoring system puts the elite defenses at around average QBs, about ten points above PKs. Unlike the previous poster, we like defenses to have an effect. Figuring out which defense to play often times is the biggest thrill to the weekly decision making. More big decisions, more interesting, more fun, IMHO.

 

If you like defenses, but are worried they score too much relative to other players, then you can half the points (as directed above) or you can figure out a system that puts a realistic check on how many points they score. For example, I've seen some defensive scoring count SACKS as much as INTs and FRs. Make Sacks worth 1/4 as much as INTs and FRs (e.g. .5 v. 2,2). Remember, many sacks also lead to FRs.

 

Bring defensive TDs back from 6 to 4. Reason: Your wide receiver does not get two points for a catch and then 6 points for the TD when he scores, why should the intercepting or fumble recovering team get two points for the INT and another 6 points for the TD?

 

Another big mistake: Double counting. Some leagues give points for total yards allowed AND points allowed. Sure, sometimes there is a big difference, but rarely. Both stats essential measure the same thing. Pick one (I suggest points allowed) and stash the other.

 

Yeah, yeah - sometimes defenses give up garbage time points. So what? You haven't seen a running back punch in a meaningless score with the game in hand? (All those who played against LT last week, know what I mean.)

 

Good luck.

[plasma george 52]

I know a lot of people would disagree with our league scoring for defenses, but oh well.... NOT SAYING it's right or wrong, but a different way to look at it.

 

The Bears and Ravens DEF is ranked 4 and 5........ overall.

 

IMHO, would I pick a DEF that early? H3LL NO!

 

But a monster/stud player will get you stud points (i.e. LT).

 

So why shouldn't a monster/stud DEF get those stud points too? I mean a huge game = a huge game so they should be rewarded for it, right?

 

n e ways, that's all I have for now.

So the "unknown defenses" that are 1-3 score LT type FF points ?

That's what's f-ed up in your league.

 

Defenses are a crap shoot after the 1 or 2....it's like that every year.

That's why some league have or don't have TEs, there aren't enough to go around.

Defensaes are MUCH worse.

[adanley 1]

A debate about defensive scoring has begun in our AOL league. Points scored by defenses range from the standard sacks, fumbles, and interceptions just like most leagues. The debate begins with points allowed and continues for yards allowed with negative points for allowing too many points and yards. Some feel that alot of points are earned/lost in garbage time once a game is decided so there may be too much weight given to those two statistics (Bears are #2 in points). I did an analysis of the top 10 defenses as scored in our league and compared them to the top 10 quarterbacks and running backs. Quarterbacks scored an average of 269 points compaired to 229 for defenses and 220 for running backs. The standard deviation for running backs is the greatest but drops considerably once Tomlinson is subtracted from the scoring. I could go on but the analysis seems to point in one direction. In our league the defenses are just as important to overall scoring and winning as running backs and quarterbacks. Is this scoring ratio normal in other leagues? Any one have any thoughts on this?

 

I drafted chicago in the 8th. Why not get rewarded for that? Not everyone gets a top pick to draft LT or Larry Johnson.

[Creeper 0]

Personally dont have a problem with D's scoring alot of points

even extra for int or fumble returns-its a big momentum change and can demoralize the other team

Whats the old cliche about defenses win you championships? its the same on any level

Just look at the Ravens of a couple years ago

Just my .02

[plasma george 52]

I drafted chicago in the 8th. Why not get rewarded for that? Not everyone gets a top pick to draft LT or Larry Johnson.

BECAUSE there are other RBs in the pool and their performance typically drops as predicted/drafted, IOW you get what you drafted for, typically.

The other 30 defenses are a complete crap shoot, know one has any idea how they're going to perform.

 

This is a VERY difficult concept to grasp, and takes alot of explaining and understanding.

Believe me, I pitched this idea to some very veteran, stubborn FF guys that like traditional league policy (against changing things), and after 2 years, they're FINALLY seeing the results of what we did.....for the better.

 

The only negative to reducing defenses, is it drops them down a few rounds.

There are too many positives.

#1 being, more weight is on our studs.

[chidoy 0]

So the "unknown defenses" that are 1-3 score LT type FF points ?

That's what's f-ed up in your league.

 

Defenses are a crap shoot after the 1 or 2....it's like that every year.

That's why some league have or don't have TEs, there aren't enough to go around.

Defensaes are MUCH worse.

 

I see what your saying, but wouldn't you say (in terms of DEF, no offense in the equation) that BALT or CHI had LT like #'s this year?

Like I said, people will disagree with the scoring but again, a huge game for anybody (regardless of OFF or DEF) should equate huge points right?

[plasma george 52]

I see what your saying, but wouldn't you say (in terms of DEF, no offense in the equation) that BALT or CHI had LT like #'s this year?

Like I said, people will disagree with the scoring but again, a huge game for anybody (regardless of OFF or DEF) should equate huge points right?

I agree with huge games...the problem is huge games can come from ANY defense on any given Sunday.

 

It's not about the TOP defenses....it's about the rest and the unpredicatbility vs reward.

 

Should we talk about Kickers...cause we reduced their scoring too.

Not in half...about a refreshing 25% drop.

A little fat bellied geek puts up 4 FGs, and outscores everyone in the league !

[adanley 1]

I agree with huge games...the problem is huge games can come from ANY defense on any given Sunday.

 

It's not about the TOP defenses....it's about the rest and the unpredicatbility vs reward.

 

Should we talk about Kickers...cause we reduced their scoring too.

Not in half...about a refreshing 25% drop.

A little fat bellied geek puts up 4 FGs, and outscores everyone in the league !

 

Every rule change compounds. I just don't understand arbitraily taking points away, by cutting them by a percentage. Everyone in the league plays by the same rules, so why does it matter. FF is all about being unpredictable. Otherwise, you are just left with the LT's, Larry Johnsons, Peyton Manning's...

[Blaneyfan 0]

A couple yrs ago we dropped the team defense and went with 2, flex IDP spots, instead. There were 2 fellas really resistant to it, but agreed to try it for a year. We've been doing it since and won't be going back.It adds a little more and a new demension to the game and I highly recomend it.

We have the top DPs scoring about as much as a solid WR#2, and there's lots of them at, or near that level. You do need to pay attention too it as it does make a difference and requires a fair amount of stradegy in most cases.

[plasma george 52]

It's directly opposite of "arbitrarily taking points away".

We discuss everything in the offseason and vote on it near or at the draft.

 

I don't agree with your other comment....sounds like your not in contention anymore blaming FF LUCK wasn't on your side.

I drafted Gore and FWP (now have Chester Taylor).....was it unpredictable that they'd have alot of yards and TDs when their coaches came out and said they will be the focus of their offenses.

Let alone the 15 RBs drafted ahead of them.

 

You can NO WAY plan on this from the #3 Defense or Kicker.

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE in the unpredictablity for the 29 other Defenses and Kickers.....hence luck.

 

Every rule change compounds. I just don't understand arbitraily taking points away, by cutting them by a percentage. Everyone in the league plays by the same rules, so why does it matter. FF is all about being unpredictable. Otherwise, you are just left with the LT's, Larry Johnsons, Peyton Manning's...

I'm interested.

Who are the top players, and how do they score ?

[redwolf 0]

Good topic that doesn't get enough attention.

We (all but 2 owners) voted to HALF the Defensive scoring 2 years ago.

Case in point--

last week the owner that had Miami D (selected off WW) had a shutout, and last year would have had 22 points, and that would have won a playoff spot...this year he only got 11 points, and lost.

In the end, he lost because his studs lost (QB,RB,WR) (were outplayed by the other owner's studs).

And THAT'S what FF is all about, STUDS VS STUDS, what we draft for, trade for, study for.

 

Defenses are drafted in the last rounds...and ANY of them can score fumble, INTs, KO, Punt TD on returns on ANY GIVEN PLAY, they're all speed burners.

Couple owners have commented to drop Defenses all together....make it an offensive scoring league only.

It become a valid points as we watch GB or ARI score long TDs....it's luck and FF bullsh!t defined.

I like halving the scoring and keeping Defenses, they're fun to have, BUT shouldn't have scoring any where near the top dogs.

 

Print this out, take it to your draft, and show the owners to "reduce" defensive scoring power, to make your league better.

Your welcome.

thanks

[cyclone24 1,814]

Great topic....

 

i looked at our 12 man league......

 

The guy in our league with the worst point total for defenses still is getting 12 points a game from a defense (Kansas City)

 

Which to me is ridiculously high.

 

 

I plan next year on grabbing Chicago in round 4 (seriously). Why not? They average 20+ a game...thats more than just about any rb or wr.

 

Especially when you consider how many WR's get 1000 yds and 7 tds......

 

So for example since ill be drafting 11th next year (most likely).

 

Westbrook, FWP, Palmer, Chicago def

 

Through 4 rounds? That guarantees me right there 60 points a game in a 6pt td league.

[redwolf 0]

Great topic....

 

i looked at our 12 man league......

 

The guy in our league with the worst point total for defenses still is getting 12 points a game from a defense (Kansas City)

 

Which to me is ridiculously high.

I plan next year on grabbing Chicago in round 4 (seriously). Why not? They average 20+ a game...thats more than just about any rb or wr.

 

Especially when you consider how many WR's get 1000 yds and 7 tds......

 

So for example since ill be drafting 11th next year (most likely).

 

Westbrook, FWP, Palmer, Chicago def

 

Through 4 rounds? That guarantees me right there 60 points a game in a 6pt td league.

i'm trying to be open minded about all of this as i'm a bit of a traditionalist. but keeping defensive scoring up could lead to more balanced scoring overall between teams. it may just complicate your draft strategy because a top 2 defense could score as many points as consistently as a top running back or quarterback. so those of us who may consider settling for what's left at one position could get that same player or equivalent later and instead take a defense in one of the early rounds.

 

the guy with the highest scoring defense in our league also has tomlinson. the two combined average 55 points a week! that's a considerable advantage. i like the idea of only scoring points for points allowed and eleminating yardage points because it lessens the penalty against a pretty good defense with a great offense may experience due to garbage time points. definately good discussion here.

[Let Da Big Dog Eat 37]

A couple of points:

 

1. There are always 2-3 perceived tier 1 QB's, RB's, TE's and WR's when you go to the draft. Then X # tier 2, 3 etc. It seems to me that the same is true for D's. D's should score enough that the true tier 1's affect drafting stategy. No different than any other position.

 

2. D scoring should affect the outcome of games. Otherwise, just forget them. Waste of time.

 

3. There are always players at every position that come out of no where to become top 5-10. Colston, Romo etc.

 

4. D scoring should be set in the same way as every other position. Enough that a "monster" game can allow you to win with pedestrian performances from the rest of you roster ala LT or a Brees 5 TD game. But, not enough to give you a win when the rest of your team tanks, just like any other position.

 

5. Biggest one for me. Negative scoring only creates misery for owners. It's almost impossible for it to happen at any other position, why would you make it a frequent possibility for a D? Actually, I don't believe in negative scoring at any position but that is another thread.

 

My .05. Good topic.

[king41 0]

Great topic....

 

i looked at our 12 man league......

 

The guy in our league with the worst point total for defenses still is getting 12 points a game from a defense (Kansas City)

 

Which to me is ridiculously high.

I plan next year on grabbing Chicago in round 4 (seriously). Why not? They average 20+ a game...thats more than just about any rb or wr.

 

Especially when you consider how many WR's get 1000 yds and 7 tds......

 

So for example since ill be drafting 11th next year (most likely).

 

Westbrook, FWP, Palmer, Chicago def

 

Through 4 rounds? That guarantees me right there 60 points a game in a 6pt td league.

 

A team in my league drafted Chicago's D 3rd Round! I thought he was an idiot for it since this was his 1st year of FF--Well, Chicago has been a monster for him in regards to points and finished thie season in 2nd and has advanced to the 2nd round of the playoffs---

 

As commish of the league, as a whole D scoring has been a pretty big topic based on how much the D has changed games in our league---Next year, we are taking a vote on how the scoring should be determined for defense. Most agree that someone's defense should not dictate a large %age of how games are won. I feel your pain and we will be adjusting our league based on votes.

[cheeseboy 0]

IIMHO, would I pick a DEF that early? H3LL NO!

 

Using the FFT Cheatsheet, I'm sitting at the draft looking at projected points scored and I realize by the 4th round that any choice I make from then on is going to score me less than picking the Chicago D. I put it off until the 6th round, but in our PPR league my #1 scorer is Peyton's @ 495, then Chicago D @ 214, and Holt @ 183.

 

I'd never draft a DEF #2, but only because no one else would either, but if the top 4 picks in my draft turned out to be my top 4 point scorers in the season, I'd be satisfied.

 

And at 11-3, top seed, #2 in points, Chicago D in the 6th has won me more games than Payton. If I had Marc Bulger I'd still be 11-3, but if I had DEF by weekly matchup I'd be .500 at best. I'm not saying draft your D high, but when there's that much difference between #1-2 and #4, it's a huge advantage...

 

What I like about the thread though, is the question of...should it? All scoring's arbitrary in this pretend game we play, and the DEF scoring "too much" really is someone saying that it scores more than they thought it would. If you have a breakdown at draft time that shows where your points are going to come from, then you should know better than drafting a D in the 12th. Even though most "experts" and magazines dismiss it. It all depends on the scoring system I guess, but you should know it going in.

 

I can see how any position scoring way more than the others at that position gives a competitive disadvantage, but it's not just DEF that's true for, but with DEF there's only one starting slot available so there's no balance. The guy with LT in our league has Fred Taylor as his #2, so his RB's are scoring 443 for the year and my RB's are scoring only about 60 points less. With DEF it's one slot for everyone and no way to balance it out. If we had one RB, he'd be killing me in points, but I have two good guys, and he's got one great guy and one ok guy. On the otherhand I'm outscoring his D by like 90 points, and there's nothing he can do about it. If you make me start 2 DEF (NOT SAYING IT'S A GOOD IDEA!!), he'd have a much better chance.

 

Interesting though, I realized there was an imbalance, but never thought much about it...thanks!

[redwolf 0]

the interesting about this posting is that we have been getting lots of well thought out opinions and discussions. it has also started a partly healthy debate in my home league. point is not alot of discusion is spent on defenses and it should. thanks for being open minded. if anyone else has something to add please post it. i'm very interested......

[philssteelers200 0]

In my league (as commish) we have 20 points for a shutout, 13 points for 1-6 points, 10 pts. for 7-13 and so-on. We decided to put much more stock in a shutout than other categories. 2pts. for ints., fr, 1 pt. for sack....

It ends up, most Ds get around 10 points. There will always be that 35+ team, but also sometimes Ds get slammed and get negative points.

I see that as fair. Reward teams with good performances, like the rest of the roster.

Sure, a D can dominate in our league, but that's like with any other player.

I've had no complaints (save one from the owner going with the D against Oak. D a few weeks ago when they had what 10-11 sacks, forget which team, complained we reduced sacks from 2-1 pt.

The point is... if it's uniform for the whole league, why is it unfair?

[NorthDalAl 0]

My league has gone through the same thing this year as I suggested and sold the idea of increasing DEF scoring this year. We only make changes at the Pre-draft rules meeting in August, ---another good rule to follow.

We also had a first timer draft Chicago early (6th round) with chuckling in the room.

 

A year ago we bumped up all scoring to make games average about a 120-100 score, this makes our league far more fair as we have less one hit wonder game winners as the high scoring forces a team to have a good performance by several players to win.

 

Now we have some of the losers complaining.

 

The Chicago and BAL DEF owners both made the playoffs the NYG, NE and PITT owners all had to use the WW to improve their DEF teams despite the pre-season ranking of those DEF teams. This is as it should be.

 

DEF/ST team choice should be as important as QB, RB and WR choices and having the average scoring of the DEF fit into the middle average of the other positions is fair and challenging.

 

WRs are very inconsisitant, RBs are more consistant but injury prone and there are only 21-22 fulltime 3 down starters, QBs are abundant (there are 32 fulltime starters, sometimes a QB playing from behind will light it up) so each position except K has its own set of variables that can effect the outcome and so should DEF/ST that's our logic.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Both sides of the Defensive scoring helped me into the playoffs. San Diego's Merriman stripped the ball from Cutler and recovered the fumble = +4 combined with opponent's Baltimore giving up garbage time TD to K.C. = -5 points for a 9 point swing. It would have been a moot point had I played Miami's D for the whopping 30+ they put up.

 

The guy that had Chicago's D looked like he would get a goose egg by letting St. Louis put up alot of points but those two TD returns by Hester + sacks/interception still got them 20 points.

 

Scoping up players off the waiver wire is a huge part of FF and is a skill in and of itself. If you're just sticking with the guys you drafted, you're focked!