Winds of change: Fixing the mess that is ppr scoring.

[James Rustler]

Maybe a little over a decade ago this thing called ppr was introduced and it changed the game. At that time, runningbacks were the vogue and stud receivers werenot as effect in roster management. With today's state of the NFL, with more backfields by committee and 4000 yard passing seasons are becoming the norm. PPR is becoming a hot topic. I want to begin a discussion about what can be done to create more value for the QB, TE and RB positions.

The discussion needs to begin with the utility of PPR, as I feel it is far to useful of a stat to complely abolish. It helps establish scoring value for lower end WR, passing down backs and tight ends. Completely removing it would severly devalue these types of players.

1. To start, we need to normalize reception points. One idea I've been toying with id .5 PPR for WR and 1 PPR for backs and tight ends.

2. I think the best way to do this is to increase the scoring value higher tier players have across the board. This puts a premium on high end production at every position. I think the simplest way to do so is by establishing tiered bonuses for reaching certain milestones. Here's some examples.

.QB: completion bonuses at 25, 30, 35+ completions. Yardage bonuses at 300, 400, 450+ yards

RB: Bonuses at 20, 25 and 30 attempts. Yardage bonuses at 100, 200, 250+

TE: reception bonuses at 5, 7 and 9 receptions, similar yardage bonuses as backs.

WR: reception bonuses as 7, 9, 12+ and similar yardage bonuses.

To increase the value of the RB and TE position you can establish the bonuses to be worth 2x more than WR AND QB. Since less players tend to hit those totals.

3. I like the idea of big play bonuses as logic dictates that the high end producers should (in general) generate more big plays in a given season than lower scoring individuals. IE. Long scoring plays.

4. First down bonuses. New to MFL this year you can grant bonuses for first downs. Again this should put a premium on higher tier players.



If anyone has any other ideas I would love to hear them. Thanks for any feedback.

[jordanzs]

Here's an easy idea. Try the math on your league stats from last year, you'll see:

.5 points per reception
.5 points per first down

I'm trying to get some redraft leagues to adopt this, but they're hesitant. If I start up another dynasty league, I would use these scoring perameters.

[jordanzs]

And in the leagues that I commission, I give QBs the following scoring kicker:

.125 points per completion
-.125 per incompletion

Oftentimes it's a wash. But which QB do you think deserves more points?......

QB1: 20 for 26, 320 yards, 3 touchdowns
QB2: 15 for 40, 320 yards, 3 touchdowns

You can take this more aggressive and go .2 per completion, -.2 per incompletion

[jordanzs]

Also, I give bonuses (plus 2 points) for 20 yard rushes & 40 yard receptions.

[James Rustler]

Here's an easy idea. Try the math on your league stats from last year, you'll see:

.5 points per reception
.5 points per first down

I'm trying to get some redraft leagues to adopt this, but they're hesitant. If I start up another dynasty league, I would use these scoring perameters.

I forgot about 1st down bonuses. I do like .5 ppr, although I want to put a premium on RB and TE receptions.

[jordanzs]

Here's an easy idea. Try the math on your league stats from last year, you'll see:

.5 points per reception
.5 points per first down

I'm trying to get some redraft leagues to adopt this, but they're hesitant. If I start up another dynasty league, I would use these scoring perameters.

I forgot about 1st down bonuses. I do like .5 ppr, although I want to put a premium on RB and TE receptions.

.5 points per first down gives a big premium to RBs.

And also chain moving TEs.

[Friction]

I actually don't like the ppr for rbs, or the idea of increasing it at least. So many teams seem to implement the strategy of just dump it off in the back field for the whole second half when behind. Meaningless plays. I know the same could be said for certain wrs too, and I agree with that also. I think .5 ppr is a good start.

[EMFox]

Did a draft for a league with some interesting scoring settings that have really leveled the playing field (based on overall scorers last year).

1 PPR, 1.5 PPR for TEs, .25 points per carry (RB only)

There is just about an even split between WRs and RBs as you move down the rankings. TEs also get a healthy bump (Walker was the #21 overall scorer in this format last year).

I like maintaining PPR because it gives a benefit to 3rd down packs like Sims and Riddick, as well as maintaining WR value. The notion of adding .25 PPC is to give a bump to the 2 down backs who's value has been suffering.

I am in no way a fan of bonuses. If your player is already having a good day, benefiting your team, I don't believe in giving them a bonus to make that already good day even better.

[ArrylT]

One of the best things about fantasy football is how many different variations there can be. You can go full PPR, Non-PPR, Yardage Heavy, etc. A great example is that there seems to be a rise of SuperFlex leagues. I do agree, for the sake of communal dynasty rankings/adp that there should be some consideration as to whether or not 1.0 PPR should be the standard bearer, and feel that some of the ideas mentioned here likely have merit. Whether or not any of them will catch on with the general dynasty community is a different topic all together though.

Maybe there is a website out there that has a rankings scheme for multiple formats (although DLF does a good job by having 2 QB Rankings & IDP rankings).

[mjbaum]

What about simply making rushing yards 10 yards per point and receiving yards 20 yards per point while maintaining a full 1.0 PPR?

My leagues (2 QBs, always) have run this way for years and I feel it has kept stud RBs and stud WRs on a nearly even playing field.

The high volume pass catchers who tend to be very valuable in real life as chain movers (think Edelman) retain value on the basis of their gaudy reception totals, even though their yardage tends to be lower due to lower YPC. The lower volume WRs who rely on the big play (think DeSean Jackson) take a small hit because their yardage isn't worth as much. The RBs who catch passes gain ground on the WR field because even though their YPC is low, the reception itself is worth more than the yardage (for RBs). The RBs who don't catch passes aren't penalized quite as much because receiving yardage is worth half as much as a regular 10 yards per pt setup.

I chose this scoring format years ago for my leagues without knowing that WRs would take over the way they have, and I think it's been really successful at creating balance.

[skip]

It is an exercise in futility. There is no perfect system so don't try to find one. All that matters is understanding your league scoring and manging your roster accordingly.

Personal opinion, but I detest big play bonuses. I don't care much for any arbitrary bonuses for reaching certain plateaus either. Your top players are already scoring the most points. This just creates more disparity that is unwarranted.

[bigchiefbc]

I've been tempted to try out a league that ditches PPR altogether and uses PPFD instead. That's actually relatively balanced between RBs and WRs. You'd still need to do something to add value to TEs though. The running QBs gain a lot of value in this format.

[theone]

Lots of easy ways to add value to other positions than WR so I will mention a couple, many of them mentioned already. 1. Vary scoring rules by position. For example, change PPR or vary the yardage points awarded or vary TD points and so on. 2. Change starting requirements and league size (2QB/2TE/2WR, 20 teams, ...).

Not a fan of yardage tiers/big play bonuses as it just makes the large value differences even worse.

[heyfeefellskee]

I'm very hesitant to advocate awarding points per first down. There are far too many times a team will run the ball on 3rd and 1. It's a slippery slope to say that the player that got the 1 yard and resulting first down "did more" than the guy that caught the ball for 9 yards.

The 1st down marker is just a line. Advancing the ball--in any way--should be rewarded. Crossing any other line other than the 0-yard line should NOT be rewarded, because it's arbitrary.

Catching the ball should continue to be rewarded, because guys that can't catch are generally more limited in their role.

[heyfeefellskee]

Almost all your points are dead on. Your conclusion is faulting.
The bottom line? PPR SUCKS! Ditch it. You don't need it anymore for all the reasons you gave.

Jarvis Landry and Golden Tate shouldn't be on par with Hopkins, Fitz, Marshall, Thomas, OBJ. And that is EXACTLY what PPR does.
Your rankings are better with Landry/Tate much lower then the other guys mentioned.

Drop PPR, go Point Per First Down. It's that simple.

So instead of giving points to guys that catch a lot of balls (and are very involved in the game), you end up valuing backs like Mike Tolbert who just pounds the ball when they only have a couple of yards to get a 1st down/TD but is otherwise not involved ... sounds flawed.

Mike Tolbert stats: from 2011 - 2013:
2011 120 attempts for 492 yards and 8 TDs
2012 54 attempts for 183 yards and 7 TDs
2013 101 attempts and 361 yards and 5 TDs