Keeper league (w/IDPs) management: Travis Hunter

[DC 10]

 I am a GM of two 12-team keeper leagues, each one starts 5 IDPs.  We are having issues deciding how to manage Travis Hunter.  The decision we make will greatly impact his draft value.

In my league, no matter what position a player is starting, he gets all his points for the day.  For example, if a WR makes a tackle after an INT, he gets the tackle point.  If a big defender is lined up on offense at the goal line and runs the ball in, he gets his running points.  

The issue is whether we should restrict where Travis Hunter can be started in a lineup.  Managers in my leagues seem to want to restrict Hunter to being started as a WR (still getting all his points from both sides of the ball).  They don't want him started in the IDP position because they feel his WR points will make him astronomically the best IDP ever and a unicorn each and every week the GM starts him as an IDP.

But who am I to restrict this?  If he is capable of doing all this, then isn't that his real value?  But is it still better overall to impose this "artificial" restriction just because they don't want one lucky GM to reap the potential benefits?

My leagues have to decide this because it seriously affects his draft value in this keeper league.  If he can be started in an IDP slot, he will likely be 1st player off the board instead of Jeanty.  

I'm conducting a vote in both those leagues now. 

Your advice/opinions would be greatly appreciated.

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

Sounds like you have a bunch of people in your league that are jealous.  LOL

I think the easy solution is to just get rid of defensive scoring for offensive players all together.

[weepaws 3,198]

I think his points should be based on what position he starts, if he starts on offense all his points are only when he on offense, if he starts on def, than they only count on def no matter if he scores points at wr.  

[Maximum Overkill 1,998]

5 hours ago, DC said:

If he can be started in an IDP slot, he will likely be 1st player off the board instead of Jeanty.  

What kind of points would anyone expect out of Hunter as a corner back in IDP? He's not going to warrant the number one pick, even with IDP. 

Cornerbacks don't generate points. Linebackers do 

[JagFan 164]

5 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Sounds like you have a bunch of people in your league that are jealous.  LOL

I think the easy solution is to just get rid of defensive scoring for offensive players all together.

Agree with this because you can’t make a rule change just for one player.  It makes no sense.  You have to keep it as is, or change the rule across the board.  I don’t see Hunter putting up crazy stats on both sides of the ball, but if you do then draft him accordingly.

[DC 10]

2 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:

What kind of points would anyone expect out of Hunter as a corner back in IDP? He's not going to warrant the number one pick, even with IDP. 

Cornerbacks don't generate points. Linebackers do 

True, but his WR points + IDP points will count no matter where he is started.  Starting him as a DB gives that GM a huge edge. 6-7 pts for a reasonable day at DB PLUS another 10 for 4-5 receptions for 50-60yds and perhaps a receiving TD is an unheard of number for a DB on a weekly basis.  We play 1DL, 1LB, 1DB, and 2 defensive flex.   He would instantly become King of the IDPs.  He will get all of his points from both sides no matter where he starts. 

 

[DC 10]

1 hour ago, JagFan said:

Agree with this because you can’t make a rule change just for one player.  It makes no sense.  You have to keep it as is, or change the rule across the board.  I don’t see Hunter putting up crazy stats on both sides of the ball, but if you do then draft him accordingly.

That's my take.  Vote is leaning towards allowing him to start in either spot.  Thankfully!  If he is a unicorn, then so be it.  Good luck to the GM who drafts him.  

[DC 10]

4 hours ago, weepaws said:

I think his points should be based on what position he starts, if he starts on offense all his points are only when he on offense, if he starts on def, than they only count on def no matter if he scores points at wr.  

no host site does that to the best of my knowledge.  The question was always where he was starting in the fantasy lineup... not where he was starting on the Jaguars. No matter if he starts in the WR slot or in the DB slot (or flex for that matter), he will always get all his points from both sides of the ball.  That is not the issue.  Some of the GMs are sore because whoever gets him would likely be assured of a weekly abnormal number for a DB starter.

[Maximum Overkill 1,998]

33 minutes ago, DC said:

True, but his WR points + IDP points will count no matter where he is started.  Starting him as a DB gives that GM a huge edge. 6-7 pts for a reasonable day at DB PLUS another 10 for 4-5 receptions for 50-60yds and perhaps a receiving TD is an unheard of number for a DB on a weekly basis.  We play 1DL, 1LB, 1DB, and 2 defensive flex.   He would instantly become King of the IDPs.  He will get all of his points from both sides no matter where he starts. 

 

I cant see him getting enough defensive snaps to be anything in IDP. They paid him and traded up for him as a WR. 

Even if he played just 50% of the defensive snaps he'd be in a wheelchair by week 8. 

[DC 10]

3 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

I cant see him getting enough defensive snaps to be anything in IDP. They paid him and traded up for him as a WR. 

Even if he played just 50% of the defensive snaps he'd be in a wheelchair by week 8. 

Yep.  Should be interesting to watch what the Jaguars do.  If I were on the clock in a keeper league with IDPs, I'd take Jeanty over Hunter without a doubt.  I've got some GMs who think he will put big numbers up at WR plus avge at DB so they are super high on him.  

[weepaws 3,198]

1 hour ago, DC said:

no host site does that to the best of my knowledge.  The question was always where he was starting in the fantasy lineup... not where he was starting on the Jaguars. No matter if he starts in the WR slot or in the DB slot (or flex for that matter), he will always get all his points from both sides of the ball.  That is not the issue.  Some of the GMs are sore because whoever gets him would likely be assured of a weekly abnormal number for a DB starter.

Right, that’s why he only can score points for one side of the ball, if he starts on def, he doesn’t get credit for his offense ff points, or if he starts at wr ,he gets no points when he’s playing def. 

[Maximum Overkill 1,998]

30 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Right, that’s why he only can score points for one side of the ball, if he starts on def, he doesn’t get credit for his offense ff points, or if he starts at wr ,he gets no points when he’s playing def. 

That's actually a good point. How can you start the same player at 2 different positions? I know we can't in my league. 

[DC 10]

48 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Right, that’s why he only can score points for one side of the ball, if he starts on def, he doesn’t get credit for his offense ff points, or if he starts at wr ,he gets no points when he’s playing def. 

If he is playing in any standard IDP league, most platforms will give him points from both sides of the ball no matter where he starts.  Just like they do for any player.  FOr example, if a WR makes a tackle after an INT, he gets points for that tackle as well as any WR points for the rest of the game.  I've never seen a platform do anything else.  RTS, Yahoo, ESPN are the ones I know. 

[DC 10]

20 minutes ago, Maximum Overkill said:

That's actually a good point. How can you start the same player at 2 different positions? I know we can't in my league. 

he starts in one position.  But he gets points for anything he does in the game.  Like any other player.  See Taysom Hill.  Whether you started him at QB or TE (if you were allowed) you got his points for whatever he did.  And, if it was an IDP league and Taysom Hill made a special teams tackle or a tackle after he got intercepted, you'd get the point for the tackle as well.  A player's points is never limited by the slot you started him in.  At least not on any major platform.

[DC 10]

Well the poll is going well in the league. No phony exceptions for a single dual threat player.  Whoever drafts Hunter will be able to start him wherever Yahoo allows and he's going to get all his points from both sides of the ball.  That's the way it should be IMO.

[weepaws 3,198]

55 minutes ago, DC said:

If he is playing in any standard IDP league, most platforms will give him points from both sides of the ball no matter where he starts.  Just like they do for any player.  FOr example, if a WR makes a tackle after an INT, he gets points for that tackle as well as any WR points for the rest of the game.  I've never seen a platform do anything else.  RTS, Yahoo, ESPN are the ones I know. 

That’s a different issue, I’m in private leagues, so can control things like that, on those platforms it limits your ability to actually control the league.  

[Showboat 256]

The Commish ought to be able to define the position(s) a player is eligible for.  If he plays a few snaps/per game on D he shouldn't be allowed to be started at CB, but if snaps on offense  and defense are comparble, I could see allowing him to start at either position.  I would be careful relying on platform defaults because they don't always get updated in a timely manner.  There have been other past  players such as K.Stewart and more recently Taysom Hill who were elegible as WR or TE on many ff platforms even when they were literally their teams starting QB.  Stuff like that ain't right.

[nobody 2,686]

Whatever your site designates as his position becomes his eligible position would be my take.

Same thing with taysom, and when mfl switched all the 3-4 edge rushers to LB like jackholes a few years ago before switching them back to DE (Danielle Hunter, Joey Boss, etc.).  You just have to live with their stupid decisions and try to be the one to take advantage.

 

[JagFan 164]

13 hours ago, weepaws said:

Right, that’s why he only can score points for one side of the ball, if he starts on def, he doesn’t get credit for his offense ff points, or if he starts at wr ,he gets no points when he’s playing def. 

Not disagreeing with this, but if you do that you have to do it for every player…including that def lineman that might get a 1 yard TD once this season.  Blanket rule change, not a TH rule change.

[polecatt 478]

Where you allow him to be started in the line up is the real issue IMO

It's just like the one that has popped up in recent years with Taysom Hill that let him be started at TE when he was playing QB. 

I would say with regards to that, there is no right or wrong answer. If you decide he's a WR, then he's a WR. If he's IDP, then he's IDP. Just whatever you decide, be consistent with it. Don't let him be a WR one week and then IDP the next. 

As for his points, whatever he does on the football field that is worthy of scoring point for, he should get credit for. Be it special teams, offense, defense, QB, RB, WR, TE, OL, DL, LB, DB, K, etc. 

It's all part of the game, in real life, and in fantasy football.

If that makes Travis Hunter the most valuable player in fantasy football, it makes Travis Hunter the most valuable player in fantasy football. 

If you don't own Travis Hunter, then you have your work cut out for you trying to win, but do the work, build the team, don't try to lawyer ball your way to a championship instead.

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

8 hours ago, nobody said:

Whatever your site designates as his position becomes his eligible position would be my take.

Same thing with taysom, and when mfl switched all the 3-4 edge rushers to LB like jackholes a few years ago before switching them back to DE (Danielle Hunter, Joey Boss, etc.).  You just have to love with their stupid decisions and try to be the one to take advantage.

 

It all stems from people being crybabies.  For example, a number of years ago in a Buccaneers game, Keenan McCardell scored a "defensive" touchdown, while on offense.  It was the MNF game against the Colts where they had a 21-point lead w/5 minutes to go, and lost in overtime.  Brad Johnson threw and Int, on the return, the guy who intercepted it, fumbled.  McCardell picked it up and ran it in for a TD.  The NFL rules are very clear, the team in possession of the ball, is on offense.  Well, after the interception, the Bucs offensive unit became the defense.  So, McCardell's TD is a fumble return for a TD.  The person who had Tampa's defense should get the points for the fumble recovery and defensive TD.  I mean, it's clear and obvious. BUT, you get the Keenan McCardell owners who cry because their guy scored the TD.  But, it doesn't matter.  At that point in time, he was on defense.  The NFL rules CLEARLY stipulate that, so suck it up and deal with it.

So, people in fantasy make rules where "other" or "miscellaneous" or whatever TD's count.  The result is things like this.  People have IDP's, they want their IDP to get a TD if they go on offense.  Well, the only way to do that is to make a rule so that your player gets everything, regardless.  Well, now you have a guy that plays both sides of the ball and now he could destroy your league... now, more crybabies come along and want to restrict that guy... because they don't have him.

[DC 10]

We WANT players to get everything they do on either side of the ball in my leagues.  If my WR makes a tackle after an INT, then he gets that point. Always.  And forever.  If my big fat DL is put on the offense at the goal line as an eligible receiver and catches it... he gets the 6.6 points.  (TD, 1 yard rec, 1 half point rec)     That was never the issue.  That's the way we want it and coincidentally, that's the way Yahoo, ESPN, RTS, and others have it set up as a default.  We like it.  Hunter getting points from both sides was never the issue.  Of course he will as he should.  It's just a matter of what slot you can start him from for us.

Anyway, it is resolved and the vote is in and it was a landslide.  He can be started in either a DB slot or a WR slot or a Flex slot.  Just sent this to the leagues:   

Be advised: Hunter's dual designation is not necessarily permanent. If after his rookie season it appears his usage is limited to one side of the ball, then Yahoo and other platforms will surely change his dual designation into a single one (as they have done in the past). When that happens, the change is made before a new season starts, not in the middle of a season. The GM who drafts Hunter will be accepting that risk. If his designation gets changed, Hunters starting slot will follow it. Of course, like any other player, he will still get all of his points from both sides of the ball.

Thank you everyone for your advice.  I appreciate it.  @weepaws @TBayXXXVII @polecatt @JagFan @Maximum Overkill @Showboat @nobody

[nobody 2,686]

Does Yahoo have him designated as both wr/DB right now?  If so Hunter is probably even more valuable than jeanty on the surface at least.  

[weepaws 3,198]

3 hours ago, DC said:

We WANT players to get everything they do on either side of the ball in my leagues.  If my WR makes a tackle after an INT, then he gets that point. Always.  And forever.  If my big fat DL is put on the offense at the goal line as an eligible receiver and catches it... he gets the 6.6 points.  (TD, 1 yard rec, 1 half point rec)     That was never the issue.  That's the way we want it and coincidentally, that's the way Yahoo, ESPN, RTS, and others have it set up as a default.  We like it.  Hunter getting points from both sides was never the issue.  Of course he will as he should.  It's just a matter of what slot you can start him from for us.

Anyway, it is resolved and the vote is in and it was a landslide.  He can be started in either a DB slot or a WR slot or a Flex slot.  Just sent this to the leagues:   

Be advised: Hunter's dual designation is not necessarily permanent. If after his rookie season it appears his usage is limited to one side of the ball, then Yahoo and other platforms will surely change his dual designation into a single one (as they have done in the past). When that happens, the change is made before a new season starts, not in the middle of a season. The GM who drafts Hunter will be accepting that risk. If his designation gets changed, Hunters starting slot will follow it. Of course, like any other player, he will still get all of his points from both sides of the ball.

Thank you everyone for your advice.  I appreciate it.  @weepaws @TBayXXXVII @polecatt @JagFan @Maximum Overkill @Showboat @nobody

Congrats , issue over. 

[weepaws 3,198]

If you do any mock drafts on espn, they do have Hunter listed wr/cb.  

[DC 10]

On 7/16/2025 at 4:16 PM, nobody said:

Does Yahoo have him designated as both wr/DB right now?  If so Hunter is probably even more valuable than jeanty on the surface at least.  

Yeah...   the guys with the #1 pick in my keeper league (we also start 5 IDPs) are deciding between Jeanty and Hunter.    Those 2 and Hampton will be the firs 3 off the board.  If Hunter can put up 8-12 fantasy points as a WR per game along with a typical 6-8 as a DB, all from starting in the DB slot or Defensive Flex slot,  then he could possibly the #1 point producer in many weeks.

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

On 7/14/2025 at 3:01 PM, Maximum Overkill said:

What kind of points would anyone expect out of Hunter as a corner back in IDP? He's not going to warrant the number one pick, even with IDP. 

Cornerbacks don't generate points. Linebackers do 

if you could read, you would see that in this guys league, IDP's also get points for anything they generate on offense.

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

I see you have already resolved this but my 2 cents was going to be

1. IDP is lame.  In any format (dynasty/keeper or redraft) it's very easy to focus on stacking offensive talent and simply grabbing less talented defenders who happen to play ILB or SS for NFL teams whose defenses will be on the field a lot. Certain top defenders like CB's will never be worth much because they don't get thrown at and there is simply no way to quantify what they do for FF purposes. A few weeks into every season, there will be several new start worthy LB's and Safeties for the season.  Don't need to be that guy reaching for the big names. 

but that wasn't your question

2. My answer would have been to eliminate offensive scoring for IDP and defensive scoring for offensive players. Of course, it sounds like your league desperately wants this so there really is no choice but to let Hunter be that unicorn. He will 100% be started as a DB or IDP flex play. I guess it is similar to when Taysom Hill can be started as a TE but is accumulating QB/RB stats... but this will be on steroids. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

25 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I see you have already resolved this but my 2 cents was going to be

1. IDP is lame.  In any format (dynasty/keeper or redraft) it's very easy to focus on stacking offensive talent and simply grabbing less talented defenders who happen to play ILB or SS for NFL teams whose defenses will be on the field a lot. Certain top defenders like CB's will never be worth much because they don't get thrown at and there is simply no way to quantify what they do for FF purposes. A few weeks into every season, there will be several new start worthy LB's and Safeties for the season.  Don't need to be that guy reaching for the big names. 

but that wasn't your question

2. My answer would have been to eliminate offensive scoring for IDP and defensive scoring for offensive players. Of course, it sounds like your league desperately wants this so there really is no choice but to let Hunter be that unicorn. He will 100% be started as a DB or IDP flex play. I guess it is similar to when Taysom Hill can be started as a TE but is accumulating QB/RB stats... but this will be on steroids. 

I agree with you on IDP, but only because it's not done to the level where it's actually good.  Using D/ST like the way leagues do to this day, is probably more lame than IDP's to the level which they are used.  In IDP leagues, there's a lot of players that would go in the mid-to-late rounds.  In D/ST leagues, they're drafted in either the last or second to last round.  If people actually started IDP's like offensive players, for example: 2 DE's, 2 DT's, 3 OLB, 3 I/MLB, 3 CB's and 3 S's, with more equitable scoring, IDP's would be much more important.  At that point though, fantasy football (w/IDP's), would become more like fantasy baseball.  I think the vast majority like fantasy football because it's easy (the way it currently is).  I don't think they actually want it to be intense.

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I agree with you on IDP, but only because it's not done to the level where it's actually good.  Using D/ST like the way leagues do to this day, is probably more lame than IDP's to the level which they are used.  In IDP leagues, there's a lot of players that would go in the mid-to-late rounds.  In D/ST leagues, they're drafted in either the last or second to last round.  If people actually started IDP's like offensive players, for example: 2 DE's, 2 DT's, 3 OLB, 3 I/MLB, 3 CB's and 3 S's, with more equitable scoring, IDP's would be much more important.  At that point though, fantasy football (w/IDP's), would become more like fantasy baseball.  I think the vast majority like fantasy football because it's easy (the way it currently is).  I don't think they actually want it to be intense.

I disagree in terms of how both are commonly used today. Yes, in IDP leagues you will have people drafting TJ Watt, etc in the mid rounds. But my point was that it's silly. More people have caught on that team DST's can be picked in the last 2 rounds and/or simply streamed from week to week but that doesn't mean IDP's are more important and actually should be drafted in the mid rounds, it just means not as many people have caught on... plus you still usually have that one guy who picks the previous seasons top DST in round 10. 

I do agree that if IDP was properly deployed, kind of as you laid out, where it wasn't just DL, LB, DB... then people would have to pay attention to the best corners, pass rushers, etc rather than just focusing on tackle machines.. but yeah, then it all becomes as complex as a lot of baseball leagues and most people lose interest. Hell, that's why FF went through that phase where people were constantly starting up new dynasty leagues... because the IDEA is fun and the initial draft is a blast but then people quickly get bored and "hey, lets start up a new dynasty! so we can do a fresh draft!"  

[nobody 2,686]

I play IDP and like it better than team defense.  The reason is that there isn't a ton of info out there on IDP, so you actually have to know what's going on to an extent.  It adds an element of skill to the game that I think is valuable since everything isn't spoonfed to the casuals.  

 

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

1 hour ago, nobody said:

I play IDP and like it better than team defense.  The reason is that there isn't a ton of info out there on IDP, so you actually have to know what's going on to an extent.  It adds an element of skill to the game that I think is valuable since everything isn't spoonfed to the casuals.  

 

Meh. There’s a fair amount of idp info out there. Main difference is people will jump at the big names without realizing that middle linebacker you’ve never heard of on the Raiders is going to be an easy weekly starter (Robert Spillane the past two seasons and hopefully again in New England ). In dynasty format I have a never ending supply of DB/flex options because I use my final round rookie pick on one, or add after the draft… Chinn, Winfield, Branch… Emmanwori this year. 

might add an element of fun but not really skill imho. They are all throwaway positions like DST and kicker once you realize it. Paying up for a Roquan Smith is pointless when an undrafted Spillane will be as good or better. I suppose you could argue it’s skill to know about unheralded or quite honestly average players who will be thrust into starting high tackle roles but you don’t really need skill to use Google. 

[Ray_T 753]

14 hours ago, WhiteWonder said:

Meh. There’s a fair amount of idp info out there. Main difference is people will jump at the big names without realizing that middle linebacker you’ve never heard of on the Raiders is going to be an easy weekly starter (Robert Spillane the past two seasons and hopefully again in New England ). In dynasty format I have a never ending supply of DB/flex options because I use my final round rookie pick on one, or add after the draft… Chinn, Winfield, Branch… Emmanwori this year. 

might add an element of fun but not really skill imho. They are all throwaway positions like DST and kicker once you realize it. Paying up for a Roquan Smith is pointless when an undrafted Spillane will be as good or better. I suppose you could argue it’s skill to know about unheralded or quite honestly average players who will be thrust into starting high tackle roles but you don’t really need skill to use Google. 

it also depends on the scoring too.   

In the early days of IDP, I was in one IDP league I had the scoring was tilted towards tackles made.  which actually was counter productive because the better corners dont get thrown to as often and as a result, dont make as many tackles.    so a defender that maybe is good at making the tackle after the catch, but not good at keeping their man from catching the ball could score better than an all star corner who makes a decent number of INT and then dont get thrown to once opposing offenses realize how good they are.

the reality is the better player is the guy who gets the INT and doesnt get thrown to.    but in this scoring format the guy who maybe isnt that good but always makes the tackle shortly after the catch is made would outscore that player.    which really runs counter intuitive to what it should run.

Needless to say.... I thought this was stupid so I quit the league after my first year and have not been in an IDP league since.

this league I was in was in the early early days of IDP so I suspect the rules have evolved and improved since that time but I suspect there is still some of this in play today.

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

32 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

it also depends on the scoring too.   

In the early days of IDP, I was in one IDP league I had the scoring was tilted towards tackles made.  which actually was counter productive because the better corners dont get thrown to as often and as a result, dont make as many tackles.    so a defender that maybe is good at making the tackle after the catch, but not good at keeping their man from catching the ball could score better than an all star corner who makes a decent number of INT and then dont get thrown to once opposing offenses realize how good they are.

the reality is the better player is the guy who gets the INT and doesnt get thrown to.    but in this scoring format the guy who maybe isnt that good but always makes the tackle shortly after the catch is made would outscore that player.    which really runs counter intuitive to what it should run.

Needless to say.... I thought this was stupid so I quit the league after my first year and have not been in an IDP league since.

this league I was in was in the early early days of IDP so I suspect the rules have evolved and improved since that time but I suspect there is still some of this in play today.

There’s no real way to make top level CBs valuable, who don’t get thrown at. Revis was a prime example. 
Inflated points for INTs? Tends to reward the corners who are not “shutdown” but take risks. Give up big plays but make their fair share. 
points for passes defensed? Again, if they don’t get thrown at, won’t matter. 
 

the best thing you can do is require DE,DT,LB,S,CB at the very least, as Tbay mentioned. Won’t help shutdown corners but at least makes some positions viable whereas right now most owners just stack MLB and SS. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,550]

So, listening to the fantasy sports channel today, they were talking about Travis Hunter.  These guys were saying that they wouldn't even draft Travis Hunter early in a redraft or keeper league, even if you got IDP's.  Their contention was that he wouldn't be on the field enough, on either side, to warrant a pick that high.  They were ok with dynasty leagues, because they thought that at some point, Hunter would become exclusive to one side or the other.  That said, they had him 4th in dynasty drafts behind Jeanty, Hampton, and McMillan... even in IDP leagues.  They did say they wouldn't fault someone for taking Hampton over McMillan, but they wouldn't do it.

[weepaws 3,198]

I don’t like His ranking at the wr slot, he’s a mid wr3, I’d rather draft him as a Wr4.  If he’s going to play both def and offense more chances of an Injury, plus he no better than the wr2 on a team Qb by Lawrence.  

[nobody 2,686]

8 hours ago, Ray_T said:

it also depends on the scoring too.   

In the early days of IDP, I was in one IDP league I had the scoring was tilted towards tackles made.  which actually was counter productive because the better corners dont get thrown to as often and as a result, dont make as many tackles.    so a defender that maybe is good at making the tackle after the catch, but not good at keeping their man from catching the ball could score better than an all star corner who makes a decent number of INT and then dont get thrown to once opposing offenses realize how good they are.

the reality is the better player is the guy who gets the INT and doesnt get thrown to.    but in this scoring format the guy who maybe isnt that good but always makes the tackle shortly after the catch is made would outscore that player.    which really runs counter intuitive to what it should run.

Needless to say.... I thought this was stupid so I quit the league after my first year and have not been in an IDP league since.

this league I was in was in the early early days of IDP so I suspect the rules have evolved and improved since that time but I suspect there is still some of this in play today.

Scoring hasn't really evolved much in my experience.  Tackles are still the key stat.

[nobody 2,686]

6 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

So, listening to the fantasy sports channel today, they were talking about Travis Hunter.  These guys were saying that they wouldn't even draft Travis Hunter early in a redraft or keeper league, even if you got IDP's.  Their contention was that he wouldn't be on the field enough, on either side, to warrant a pick that high.  They were ok with dynasty leagues, because they thought that at some point, Hunter would become exclusive to one side or the other.  That said, they had him 4th in dynasty drafts behind Jeanty, Hampton, and McMillan... even in IDP leagues.  They did say they wouldn't fault someone for taking Hampton over McMillan, but they wouldn't do it.

If they had tet higher than hunter in an idp league, it's probably best to never listen to that podcast again.

I get people won't wake up on tet for another year or two, but this is ridiculous.