|
I must keep my fantasy football activities secret from my wife, so that I can delay for as long as possible the moment when she gapes at me with that wide-eyed, hurt look, hugging the TV, and cries: "It's football season again already ??" She was out of town this weekend while I had the draft on the whole time, heh heh. She suspects nothing.
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
I'm very curious to see where Julius Thomas winds up. Also, whether Vernon Davis' massive, massive regression last year signals the end of his career, or if he's going to have something of a resurgence this year. Especially with new coaches, new OL, new plays, and a significant drop in WR talent available to the passer.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Here's the 2015 strength of schedule for each NFL team (Combined 2014 record of all 16 opponents, combined winning percentage), taken from this article: 1. Pittsburgh Steelers: 147-107-2, .579 2. Cincinnati Bengals: 144-112, .563 3. San Francisco 49ers: 143-112-1, .561 4. Seattle Seahawks: 142-112-2, .559 5. Arizona Cardinals:142-113-1, .557 6. St. Louis Rams: 141-114-1, .553 T-7. Oakland Raiders: 139-116-1, .545 T-7. Kansas City Chiefs: 139-116-1, .545 9. Cleveland Browns: 138-116-2, .543 10. Denver Broncos: 138-117-1, .541 11. Baltimore Ravens: 137-117-2, .539 12. Minnesota Vikings: 138-118, .539 13. Chicago Bears: 136-120, .531 14. Green Bay Packers: 135-120-1, .529 15. Detroit Lions: 135-121, .527 16. San Diego Chargers: 132-123-1, .518 17. Miami Dolphins: 126-130, .492 18. New York Jets: 125-131, .488 19. Buffalo Bills: 124-131-1, .486 T-20. Washington Redskins: 122-133-1, .478 T-20. New York Giants: 122-133-1, .478 22. New England Patriots: 122-134, .477 23. Philadelphia Eagles: 121-134-1, .475 24. Dallas Cowboys: 119-136-1, .467 25. Jacksonville Jaguars: 118-137-1, .463 26. Tennessee Titans: 111-144-1, .435 27. Carolina Panthers: 111-145, .434 28. New Orleans Saints: 109-145-2, .429 29. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 108-146-2, .425 30. Houston Texans: 106-148-2, .417 31. Indianapolis Colts: 106-149-1, .417 32. Atlanta Falcons: 104-150-2, .409 quote:Based on 2014 records, the Falcons will play the easiest schedule in the NFL next season. Of the 16 regular season games Atlanta will play in 2015, only four of those will come against opponents who finished 2014 with a winning record. Matt Ryan and friends should have an easier time of it this year. What really stands out to me, though, is the Colts. When your opponents are this garbage, makes me wonder how often Andrew Luck will sit out the fourth quarter of blowout games. Could that actually negatively effect his numbers? Meanwhile, the Steelers, Bengals, and Niners are all teams to avoid. Of course, you can't read too much into SoS: quote:The Jets weren't helped by their strength of schedule either. Going into the 2014 season, New York was supposed to have the ninth toughest schedule based on their opponents' 2013 records, but after all the the games were played, the Jets played the second toughest schedule in the NFL. The Jets went from 8-8 in 2013 to 4-12 in 2014.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
AE in the 11th is an amazing bargain. He's a starting RB with talent. Any starting RB with talent will be gone by the sixth round. Are you allowed to trade guys you kept as keepers?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
If he's not the starter, they're a pack of idiots. His performance last year completely rescued the team, after Peyton fell apart.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
LmaoTheKid posted:Nope, no keeper trades otherwise I'd be packaging Hill and anyone of my Keepers for Luck in the 5th (6pts passing, 5 point bonus at 325yds). Oh. In that case, Ellington is really risky. He's being worked too hard, he's small and fragile, and he's likely to get hurt. I don't know anything about Bryant, but if others are right I guess he's a better keeper. You can definitely pass on Big Ben. He's not that great anyway and the steelers have the worst schedule in the NFL this year.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Maybe one of Peyton, Brady, Cam, Ryan, or Brees? How tired and done do we think Peyton is now? Is Cam going to be healthy this season? Is Ryan a sneaky stealth pick?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
I think there's a tendency to draw conclusions based on the draft that aren't always warranted. There area lot of UDFAs that get signed and while most of them will wash, there's some that will work out; and of course, there's still plenty of time for trading. And on the flip side, a lot of drafted guys will not be ready as starters at the beginning of the season. That said, Ryan does get hit a lot. Re: Big Ben, the steelers have (on paper) the toughest schedule in the NFL this year. Roethlisburger is a survivor, and not a bad choice for QB if you're taking a QB late, but I don't think he's in contention for #3 or even #4 or 5. There's a resounding silence ITT regarding Brady...
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:Pre-season SOS is as close to irrelevant as an NFL stat gets. Ehhhh. I mean, yes, there's bound to be teams that were great last year and not great this year, and vice-versa. But you still can't look at this schedule: http://www.steelers.com/schedule-and-events/season-schedule.html And not think "hmm, there's kind of a parade of good teams there." RCarr posted:Where should Victor Cruz be drafted this year and what are we expecting from him? I'm gonna go with "nobody knows." Will he be his former self? Will he be a crippled third-rate WR? Will he get re-injured? He's a big gamble with a big upside, and I always struggle to figure out where to draft someone like that. I think it depends on your draft strategy. If you've got some other guys on your team who are very solid but not high upside players, Cruz is a good option. If you're already gambling with some other picks, maybe avoid him. Either way... dunno what his ADP will be. If I had to guess, I'd say he's a ~4th rounder in a typical 10-12 team format.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Here is another page of QB discussion that completely passes over the guy who won the superbowl. Does nobody want to draft Brady? Shouldn't he at least be part of the discussion?
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
What happens to Gronk's value if Brady gets suspended?
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Gronk isn't going to miss four games. He's going to play four games with a not-as-good QB, no doubt, but when you're that not-as-good QB, are you going to funsling the ball at your deep wideouts? Or are you going to go for quick short passes to your super-reliable guys? I think Gronk's production for those four games could very well be similar to the rest of the season, and if not, it's just four games out of sixteen. I mean, who else is going in the first round? A handful of RBs - maybe the top five. Maybe Odell. Maybe Luck? And then who? Jimmy Graham? He's a Seahawk now, he's still Jimmy Graham but he's getting older and nobody really knows how he'll be used there yet. Rodgers maybe? Sure, especially in -2pt interception formats, since he's a relatively safe thrower. Demaryius? Megatron? If you have like 10 or 12 teams in your league, I can see Gronk going end of the first round, easy. There's just such a steep falloff of talent between early first-rounders and the rest of the NFL.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:I think if you're a not-as-good QB in a Bill Belichick offense that changes weekly you get the ball taken out of your hands. Also you've never started a game before and are taking over for one of the best in the game. That offense is going to lose a ton of passing opportunities. Oh yeah, 15 is more normal yes. I'm not saying gronk is definitely going to perform normally during that first 4 weeks, only that his best performance is a ceiling and that yes the floor is a big fat zero, but the most likely scenario is somewhere in between those two so it's not like the situation last year where people were drafting Josh Gordon on the assumption he'd be playing at 100% the second half of the season and just accepting zeros from him until then.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Anyone who takes DMC in the first four rounds is an idiot, and you can tell them I said so. That's in any format. e. Fantasy Sharks puts him as the #38th running back on their cheat sheet right now in a standard format. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 00:59 on May 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 13, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Time to gently caress up the ADPs on ESPN by drafting blake bortles in the first round over and over and over. Come on, guys. You know this is his time. Bortles is gonna break out and shine.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Cordarelle Patterson was massively disappointing last year. Do we think he's going to have a better year (as in, they'll actually figure out how to make use of his talents)?
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Your first round pick should be:
All of these, together, make for a first round pick. If any of them aren't there, it's probably not the guy you should draft. For me, that means avoiding players with questionable play status (suspended or likely to be), or who I actively hate as people (AP), or who are in positionally-rich positions (QB), or who are in team situations where it's unclear how they'll be used (Graham), or a hot-hand RB situation, or an RB on a team with a questionable OL, etc. I think a fantasy football team should represent not only the players you think can win you a championship, but also the players that will attract and hold your attention and interest all season. You want to feel happy when they do well, and that's hard to do if they play on the team you hate. If you're like me, you're going to try to watch at least the highlights if not the entire games for all of your important fantasy players; you want to be watching good enjoyable football and having a good time, not watching bad football or rooting for a player to earn you points on a team you actually want to lose games. I know when there's money on the line, or if you're indifferent to who wins or loses, that may not be a concern. But god, if you're indifferent to football, why are you doing this? There are easier and more profitable ways to make money, if that's the only concern.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:gently caress that your first round pick should be Charles Sims Well I mean, obviously Charles Sims fits all of my criteria, so...?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Cervixalot posted:Anthony Davis just announced his retirement, so Carlos Hyde takes a hit in value. What the gently caress is going on with the 49ers. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/05/49ers-anthony-davis-retires-at-age-25/ Concussion awareness. He got rattled pretty bad last year, and is probably taking a cue from Chris Borland retiring based primarily on concerns about brain damage. This is gonna be a rebuilding year for the niners regardless, so if Davis wants a year or two off, it's not a terrible time to take it now; it's not like he's potentially costing the team or missing out on a championship.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Benne posted:Patriots waived Tim Wright He barely got to play. The team has Gronk, they're going to throw to Gronk, and Gronk got through the season unhurt. I'm sure there's going to be a fight for him on the waiver wire. Meanwhile, the Pats dropped Garrett Gilbert, and picked up Matt Flynn. I bet around the Flynn household they are all tired of people calling up Matt's answering machine to yell "wooo! In like Flynn! Hahaha GET IT?" Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
My best trades last year:quote:Thu, Oct 9 quote:Wed, Oct 15 followed by my worst trade last year: quote:Wed, Oct 22  ...but I won my league anyway! 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
BeerSheets helped me win my league last year. I wasn't sure you were gonna do them again after that whole reddit debacle. Really happy you're still putting those together Beer!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Dandy Kaiser posted:I liked the bigger roster because it made me feel like you were actually putting together a full defensive unit instead of just starting a few guys without positions really mattering. It made it so that people needed to have DTs and CBs, which are normally not very productive IDP positions. That said, I'm up for discussing whatever changes should be made to make it better. Last year was pretty much a beta test anyway. Yeah. I wound up wanting a bigger bench, but otherwise I was pretty happy with the mix.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Dandy Kaiser posted:I think I liked JoeRules' proposal: The trouble with the shallow bench is more than just being forced to move guys for bye weeks. IDP players get injured a lot; with just 5 slots, any injured guy in a non-LB slot you basically *have* to drop in order to keep a full team on the field. And that really sucks when you're dropping a guy who is only going to miss two weeks. If you stick to five bench slots, I'd encourage you to add one or two injury slots too. I agree about dumping FAAB. I'd like regular waivers, though: not everyone is up at midnight tuesday morning to jump on the latest standout guy. Also: Chris Borland
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 21:08
|
|
Normally, I would hate that, but I think that big IDP performances tend to go under the radar and anyone watching games on Sunday would probably have just as much of a chance to be the first in on the "next big thing" as anyone else. Might be a more fun wrinkle that way? Who knows
|
Yeah and Crabtree is gone so he's probably the #1 in SF, and Kaep is probably going to have another season of being poorly protected on the OL, and he loves to dump the ball off to Boldin when he's hurried. The problem though is that Boldin is now the guy to double cover. I've got this nasty suspicion that he's going to see some targets evaporate due to savvy cover schemes. And Kaep may or may not get horribly mangled from either a porous OL hanging him out to dry, or his instinct to run at the first sign of trouble finally catching up to him. I'd grab Boldin earlier than his ADP but probably still not till like round 7.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Label your axes!  Is that uh... points on the Y axis, and... rank on the X? The dots shouldn't be connected with lines, because that implies this is a chart showing a series (a value changing over time). I have strong opinions about infographics
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
What's E/S/P? I feel like I should remember this, but I don't.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Ah, thanks. Yeah I just jumped to the link and mashed things as fast as possible to get to the downloads so that's on me for not reading.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
89 posted:That's gotta be from last year. Honestly, that was the general opinion on most of those guys before the season started. The trouble with this advice isn't that it's against the mainstream; it's that it's identical to the mainstream. Why would you pay for assessments that are both well-aligned with what you can get for free, and clearly no more accurate (that is, generally only slightly better than guessing)?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
RisqueBarber posted:Who would you guys take here (Red are players taken)? To me its between Blount and Boldin. Holy crap. Your next six picks have to be WRs, because you're going to have to hope for someone to have a huge breakout, and also probably do a lot of horse trading and scouring the waiver wire every week. It's cool you got Luck, and Romo as a backup is crazy good, but you're only going to get points from one or the other every week. I can't fathom drafting Yeldon before a WR1.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
As an SF homer, I can say dump that defense for sure. The SF defense has been absolutely gutted during the offseason, and it wasn't exactly performing great last year anyway. Antone Smith is coming off a broken leg, and is the Falcon's RB3 at best. He's a total crapshoot for relevant production this year, so I'd say he's dumpable. Dennis Pitta is also coming off of serious hip injury and isn't exactly a star TE in the first place. I'd drop him too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Alright, weeks ago I told somebody I would make a more sophisticated zero-rb strategy to plug into my draft simulator and run against a few thousand 2014 drafts. I know it's a lot of work so I wouldn't blame you for not wanting to do it, but: I don't think you can draw any conclusions from any of this if you're only simulating how it worked out with a single year's drafts. We have no idea if, using this method, 2014 was typical or an outlier. If the data's available, I'd want to see it run against at least ten years of drafts, and even then I'd guess that it's highly possible that 2015 won't fit the average of the previous ten years. Just as an example, in 2014 AP's suspension blew a gigantic hole in the top of the draft. We need to know if drafting a RB at 1.1 or 1.2 who will produce no points whatsoever is typical or very rare. Another issue I see is that you're simply adding up total points for the year, and using that as a rank. But most fantasy formats don't start all of their drafted players every week. I'd like to see a deeper simulation, and then some accounting for the tendency to swap players in and out. Any player who got a season-ending injury should be assumed to get swapped for a free agent who would produce nonzero points in that slot the rest of the year, for example. Are WRs more injury prone than RBs, or less? Either answer will skew the results. Finally, I'd like to thank you again for all the work you're doing here. "Is 0RB a better strategy" is an interesting question to ask the data, but now that you've build the simulations to ask that question, you have the architecture to ask a lot of other interesting questions.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Hmm. In order to compare different drafted teams, maybe it would be useful to have a handful of broad categories, and just report how many players on each team fit those categories. Something like: -Player massively underperformed despite being uninjured -Player got injured early -Player moderately underperformed or was injured late -Player performed as expected -Player moderately overperformed and was never injured -Player greately overperformed Where "underperformed" and "overperformed" are based on ADP vs. points earned over the season. So if you then showed each team with how many players fit each category, you might have one team that went: "1 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1" and another that went "2 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 1" and we could compare these and say hmm, the second team wound up marginally better, even if the two teams' points-totals at the end of the year wound up very close to each other.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:Yeah, I think I can concoct a scenario where those age curves are true and there is still a sophomore slump. Rookies enter at age 20, 21, or 22. Assume younger rookies tend to do more poorly their first year, older rookies tend to do better their first year, and everyone experiences a sophomore slump that is some 20% regression or whatever. Compared to age 20 as a baseline, age 21 will mix in 21 year old sophomores doing worse and 21 year old rookies that will do better, so the net effect could be an increase in performance of 21 year olds over 20 year olds. Anyway, thanks for looking these up Don't forget to account for survivor bias. Every rookie who totally washes out after one or two years won't be contributing to the stats for rookies that actually last three+ years.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2015 19:48
|
|
I'll keep an eye out for anything else more definitive. I just think it's a really interesting question whether probability of sophomores regression is any larger than probability of regression in general, especially this year since so many of the 2014 rookie WRs did so well.
|
Doltos posted:I need a name for my team that involves JPP's finger but I'm coming up blank. The New York Firecrackers?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Prophecy120 posted:As someone who is pretty dead-set on waiting as long as possible on QBs, can anyone talk me out of drafting Eli Manning or Ryan Tannehill? 4 point passing league. Are you in an ESPN league? Remember that ESPN standard is -2 points for interceptions, while Yahoo and others do -1. If you're in ESPN I think that marginally devalues Eli, because he's interception-prone.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
I want to join a dynasty league. Is anyone thinking of setting up a new goon dynasty league? Something maybe in the 12-14 team range?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:I'd be down for one more dynasty league as well if it didn't have kickers or dst. Metapod posted:I too would be down Gyshall posted:Also in if we're doing auction and FAAB Cervixalot posted:I was trying to cut down on my leagues this year, but that is seeming more and more unlikely as the season gets closer. I'd probably join too. So, an auction style dynasty league with no kickers. Can we do IDP? I did an IDP-only league last year and it was hella fun. Dynasty IDP sounds interesting. FAAB was kind of stupid in the IDP-only league, which is the only time I've used it, but maybe it works out better in a standard auction league? I'm open to it. Do you guys want a paid league, or just for funsies?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Didn't mean to suggest IDP-only Dynasty, sorry. That does sound pretty crazy but I don't want to make a multi-year commitment to it. Is $50 a pretty typical buy-in for a dynasty fantasy football league? Also, of the various loving terrible choices, I find ESPN to be the least terrible fantasy football interface to live with. I don't think I can tolerate Yahoo again. Should I just make a thread?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 11:50 |
|
|
New league recruitment thread is up: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3734106
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2015 00:08
|
|