Issues with Standard Scoring

[dlf_erich]

I know it might be blasphemous, but I really don't understand the allure of standard scoring. I just can't get past the scoring ratio between scoring TD's and gaining yards. For example, why would a six-inch FB dive into the end zone be equivalent to 60-69 yards rushing? Moreover, if you get into PPR, the ratio gets even more distorted. 1 point per reception equals 10 yards receiving, no matter how long the reception is for? All of a sudden a screen pass which goes for 2 yards still gets you a (very coveted) point? I dunno, seems weird to me...

I play with a very non-standard scoring system, which is much more geared towards gaining yards than scoring TD's.

2 points per 10 yards rushing/receiving
1 PPR
2 points per 20 yards passing
6 points per TD (5 points per passing TD)
Various bonuses for going over 100 yards rushing/receiving (300 passing), as well as bonuses for 50+ yard TD's

This system definitely minimizes TD scoring, but not such that it's negligible. For example, 100 yards rushing would be worth 23 points in our system (2 points x 10 yards rushing, + 3 points for the 100 yard bonus), so a TD (6 points) would be worth roughly a quarter of those points. Compare that to standard scoring, where it would be worth 60% of what you'd get for rushing for 100 yards! That just seems way too skewed towards scoring plays...

I've never played in any other scoring system, so perhaps you could say "don't knock it til you try it." So I'll ask, what is the allure of standard scoring to everyone? Do you think it takes more skill? Is it just what you're used to?

[ericanadian]

The main allure of standard scoring imo is that it makes it easier to research the value of players and communicate with other fantasy players. For casual fantasy footballers, it's all about convenience.

[ccj]

I'm not a huge fan of standard scoring because it is a bit boring and TD centric. However I can't stand bonuses for long TDs and yardage milestones... I mean the dude just hit a 50 yard TD, that's big points in yardage and the TD, why does there need to be a bonus? Hitting milestones or long TDs are rewarded by definition of them being high milestones or long TDs.

Personally, if you want to devalue TDs in favor of performance I might look to implement scoring for average passing, rushing, receiving. So like 4 yards per carry is 3 pt bonus, 4.5 is 4, 5+ is 5. Minimum say 10 carries prorated (which is to say 9 carries gets bonus times .9).

[standard_variance]

The argument of yards being more important than TD's is solely opinion. And in my opinion its unrealistic, not as exciting, and extremely disproportionate. At the end of the day points are the most important thing in actual football....not yards. Thus yards are much easier to come by because give or take some at the end of the day teams know that they are not as important as points. Because of this yards have a lesser significance nowadays moreso than ever because of this passing age. So why should you get more points for something that is already favored more in quantity?


In 2011 there were
59,972 rush yards = 5997 points in a standard scoring system
and 400 rush TD's = 2400 points in a standard scoring system

in your scoring system it would be
11,994 points vs 2,400.....

yards went from from being 2.5 times as significant as TD's to almost 5 times as significant as TD's....



125,336 receiving yards = 12,533 points in standard scoring system
and 745 receiving TD's = 4470 points in standard scoring system

in your scoring system it would be

25,066 points vs 4470....

yards here went from being about 3 times as significant to close to 6 times as significant. How, and why is that necessary, fun, or realistic? You may as well play in a no TD league.

Look at most players TD points some score and compare it to their yardage points....chances are the yardage is where most players gain the meat of their points ALREADY.....why should yards in quality be more important than they already are? There is no need for yards to have a higher priority. At the end of a game in garbage time a RB or WR could rack up all of these garbage time yards...and that could skew the scoring in a big way. Why should 30 garbage time yards = a TD when the nature of the game isnt to prevent yards as much as it is preventing points? Is it easier to get a touchdown or 30 yards? The evidence shows its easier to get yards.....standard scoring is perfectly fine. The only tweak that I could see you arguing for PPR is making it .5 points. But dont thinker with the fundamentals.

[dlf_erich]

The argument of yards being more important than TD's is solely opinion. And in my opinion its unrealistic, not as exciting, and extremely disproportionate. At the end of the day points are the most important thing in actual football....not yards. Thus yards are much easier to come by because give or take some at the end of the day teams know that they are not as important as points. Because of this yards have a lesser significance nowadays moreso than ever because of this passing age. So why should you get more points for something that is already favored more in quantity?


In 2011 there were
59,972 rush yards = 5997 points in a standard scoring system
and 400 rush TD's = 2400 points in a standard scoring system

in your scoring system it would be
11,994 points vs 2,400.....

yards went from from being 2.5 times as significant as TD's to almost 5 times as significant as TD's....



125,336 receiving yards = 12,533 points in standard scoring system
and 745 receiving TD's = 4470 points in standard scoring system

in your scoring system it would be

25,066 points vs 4470....

yards here went from being about 3 times as significant to close to 6 times as significant. How, and why is that necessary, fun, or realistic? You may as well play in a no TD league.

Look at most players TD points some score and compare it to their yardage points....chances are the yardage is where most players gain the meat of their points ALREADY.....why should yards in quality be more important than they already are? There is no need for yards to have a higher priority. At the end of a game in garbage time a RB or WR could rack up all of these garbage time yards...and that could skew the scoring in a big way. Why should 30 garbage time yards = a TD when the nature of the game isnt to prevent yards as much as it is preventing points? Is it easier to get a touchdown or 30 yards? The evidence shows its easier to get yards.....standard scoring is perfectly fine. The only tweak that I could see you arguing for PPR is making it .5 points. But dont thinker with the fundamentals.

I respect your argument, but I still don't agree with it. Firstly (and I'm not saying it would make a huge difference), the points would be less than what you're saying they'd be. How many 65 or 71 or 47 yard games are getting thrown in there, where you wouldn't be getting the points for the next "10-yard barrier?" Obviously that's unknowable, but it hinders your point a little bit. Secondly, and more importantly, how many of those yards came from guys who have absolutely no fantasy relevance? Perfect examples are Marcel Reece (413 total yards last year) and Danny Woodhead (508 total yards). There are tons of gadget/gimmick/better-real-life-than-fantasy football players who likely aren't even on the deepest of rosters, but they ARE gaining yards and scoring points. Now, my GUESS is that there would be a higher percentage of yards coming from these "bit players" than would be the percentage of TD's. Obviously, I'm not going to do the research, but my guess is the guys who are scoring more TD's are probably in people's lineups, regardless of format. So really, I don't think the point ratio becomes as skewed as you make it out to be, when you put it in terms of players who are actually relevant to fantasy football.

As for your garbage time argument, I can't really get behind that either, because odds are TD's are being scored in garbage time as well as yards are being gained. Just look at the Patriots -- gave up an average of almost 21 ppg, and had 8 wins of 10+ points. How many garbage time points do you think were scored there? Not just yards, but TD's. So I'm guessing that all evens out as well.

Finally, I stand by my "hypothetical scenario" situation. A fullback (or Jerome Bettis, at the end of his career) could rumble in for 3 TD's on 8 yards, and that would be worth more than a 179-yard rushing game with no TD's. I'm just not seeing it...

[standard_variance]

Secondly, and more importantly, how many of those yards came from guys who have absolutely no fantasy relevance? Perfect examples are Marcel Reece (413 total yards last year) and Danny Woodhead (508 total yards).

There are tons of gadget/gimmick/better-real-life-than-fantasy football players who likely aren't even on the deepest of rosters, but they ARE gaining yards and scoring points.

Now, my GUESS is that there would be a higher percentage of yards coming from these "bit players" than would be the percentage of TD's.

Obviously there is a higher percentage of yards coming from those guys than TD's coming from those guys...which is why you saying Marcel Reese scoring 3 TD's for 8 yards is a stupid example for why the scoring should be altered...... it doesnt happen, and when it does players like that are on the bench. :neener: I dont understand whats the point of changing it...

Obviously, I'm not going to do the research, but my guess is the guys who are scoring more TD's are probably in people's lineups

So then why are you worried about Marcel Reese scoring 3 TD's for 8 yards....is that not what this is about? I would like more detail as to what the POINT is. Because as it stands right now...what you are saying is that rewarding more for yards than TD's would increase the relevance of non relevant players....like Marcel Reese and Danny Woodhead. Is that what you want?


Im sorry but thats just the tip of the iceberg as far as why I find this to be (in my opinion) an absurd way of "balancing" the scoring....Im sorry but 2 points per 10 yards doesnt fix anything. Ithink it actually makes it worse.....Im researching more right now.

[TheOracle]

At the end of the day points are the most important thing in actual football....not yards.

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Nobody says that yards are the most important thing in actual football. That's not the point that's being made, so please don't represent it as such. The point that's being made is that yards are a better way to evaluate skill, and ideally scoring would reflect player skill more closely. Perfect example- Jonathan Stewart and BJGE. They're virtually identical in fantasy points, but I think we can all agree that Stewart is definitely the better football player. If you look at the numbers, Stewart earned 117.4 from yards and 30 from TDs; BJGE earned 82.6 from yards and 66 from TDs.

[standard_variance]

At the end of the day points are the most important thing in actual football....not yards.

http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Nobody says that yards are the most important thing in actual football. That's not the point that's being made, so please don't represent it as such. The point that's being made is that yards are a better way to evaluate skill, and ideally scoring would reflect player skill more closely. Perfect example- Jonathan Stewart and BJGE. They're virtually identical in fantasy points, but I think we can all agree that Stewart is definitely the better football player. If you look at the numbers, Stewart earned 117.4 from yards and 30 from TDs; BJGE earned 82.6 from yards and 66 from TDs.

So you want a system that reflects how things SHOULD BE....instead of how they actually are...........................

I never said anybody said yards are the most important thing. But what Im saying is that TD's are harder to come by....which is why they should be awarded at a higher rate. Simple. Saying that yards should be awarded at a higher rate than TD's would insinuate that they are harder to come by and thus should be rewarded at a much more favorable rate. If thats not what the point is....then what is the point?

[dlf_erich]

Secondly, and more importantly, how many of those yards came from guys who have absolutely no fantasy relevance? Perfect examples are Marcel Reece (413 total yards last year) and Danny Woodhead (508 total yards).

There are tons of gadget/gimmick/better-real-life-than-fantasy football players who likely aren't even on the deepest of rosters, but they ARE gaining yards and scoring points.

Now, my GUESS is that there would be a higher percentage of yards coming from these "bit players" than would be the percentage of TD's.

Obviously there is a higher percentage of yards coming from those guys than TD's coming from those guys...which is why you saying Marcel Reese scoring 3 TD's for 8 yards is a stupid example...... it doesnt happen. And when it does they are on the bench. :neener:

Obviously, I'm not going to do the research, but my guess is the guys who are scoring more TD's are probably in people's lineups

So then why are you worried about Marcel Reese scoring 3 TD's for 8 yards....is that not what this is about? I would like more detail as to what the POINT is. Because as it stands right now...what you are saying is that rewarding more for yards than TD's would increase the relevance of non relevant players....like Marcel Reese and Danny Woodhead. Is that what you want?


Im sorry but thats just the tip of the iceberg as far as why I find this to be (in my opinion) an absurd way of "balancing" the scoring....Im sorry but 2 points per 10 yards doesnt fix anything. Ithink it actually makes it worse.....Im researching more right now.

Well, as for the Marcel Reece thing, I specifically referenced Jerome Bettis, because he actually DID have a game like that (5 carries, 1 yard, 3 TD's).

And as for wanting to increase the relevance of non-relevant players, well yes, that's exactly what I want to do! Think about it for a second. Danny Woodhead is an integral part of the Patriots offense, so why shouldn't his stats be reflected as such?

But it certainly works for dynasty heavyweights as well. Take Matt Forte. He had 1487 total yards last year, which would equate to 149 points in standard scoring. I'll round down to 144 points, since odds are he didn't eclipse the "10-yard barrier" on many of those games. However, Forte only had 4 TD's last year (24 points), bringing his point total to 168. In standard scoring, Forte's TD's account for 14% of his scoring. In my leagues system, Forte would've had the following points:

288 points from rushing/receiving yards
52 points from receptions
24 points from TD's
(I'm excluding bonus points for simplicity)

In this case, his TD's would account for 6.6% of his scoring, which makes sense, since he scored TD's on 1.6% of his touches (52 catches + 203 carries). Even if you take out the 1 PPR, the TD's only account for 7.7% of his points. Seems a lot more reasonable to me, given that Forte's season was HIGHLY predicated on gaining yards and not scoring TD's...

Again, it all comes down to preference...

[TheOracle]

Once again, nobody is insinuating that yards are harder to come by than points. 60 Yard field goals are harder to come by than touchdowns. Should they be worth 10 points? The idea that TDs should be worth more because they are harder to come by is logically bankrupt.

As for how things should be vs. how they actually are, that doesn't make any sense and you appear to have missed the point entirely. Yards are a more accurate way to evaluate who is better at football. Some of us would prefer for fantasy scoring to more accurately reflect which players are good and which players are bad.

[standard_variance]

59,972 rush yards = 599 football fields compared to 400 rush TD's

125,336 receiving yards = 1,253 football fields compared to 745 rush TD's

so for every 3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 rush TD's (12 points)

and for every 3.3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 receiving TD's (12 points)

So since the yards are being accumulated at a higher rate, thus leading to them already being rewarded at a higher rate...why would you want to compound that in hopes that it would "balance" things out? The truth is it doesnt balance ANYTHING out........

top 10 NFL rushers
MJD - 1606 (160 points) - 8 TD's (48 points)
Ray Rice 1364 (136 points) - 12 TD's (72 points)
Turner 1340 (134 points)- 11 (66 points)
McCoy 1304 (130 points)- 17 (102 points) not even the guy who scored the most TD's last year had more points from TD's than yards.....
Foster 1224 (122 points)- 10 (60 points)
Gore 1211 (121 points) - 8 (48 points)
Lynch 1204 (120 points) - 12 (72 points)
McGahee 1199 (119 points) - 4 (24 points)
SJ 1145 (114 points) - 5 (30 points)
Mathews 1091 (109 points) - 6 (36 points)

the yards already outscore the points....what the reason to weigh it more in favor for yards?

[standard_variance]

As for how things should be vs. how they actually are, that doesn't make any sense

I was saying this in terms of JStew vs BJGE comparison....it made perfect sense in response to that point specifically.

[dlf_erich]

59,972 rush yards = 599 football fields compared to 400 rush TD's

125,336 receiving yards = 1,253 football fields compared to 745 rush TD's

so for every 3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 rush TD's (12 points)

and for every 3.3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 receiving TD's (12 points)

So since the yards are being accumulated at a higher rate, thus leading to them already being rewarded at a higher rate...why would you want to compound that in hopes that it would "balance" things out? The truth is it doesnt balance ANYTHING out........

top 10 NFL rushers
MJD - 1606 (160 points) - 8 TD's (48 points)
Ray Rice 1364 (136 points) - 12 TD's (72 points)
Turner 1340 (134 points)- 11 (66 points)
McCoy 1304 (130 points)- 17 (102 points)
Foster 1224 (122 points)- 10 (60 points)
Gore 1211 (121 points) - 8 (48 points)
Lynch 1204 (120 points) - 12 (72 points)
McGahee 1199 (119 points) - 4 (24 points)
SJ 1145 (114 points) - 5 (30 points)
Mathews 1091 (109 points) - 6 (36 points)

the yards already outscore the points....what the reason to weigh it more in favor for yards?

MJD - 343 carries - TD's on 2.3% of carries - TD's count for 23% of rushing scoring in standard scoring systems
Rice - 291 carries - TD's on 4.1% of carries - 35%
McCoy - 273 carries - TD's on 6.2% of carries - 44%
Foster - 278 carries - TD's on 3.6% of carries - 33%
......

I think you get the point. In standard scoring, TD's count for a TON of points relative to the frequency that the TD's actually occur. Doesn't that seem odd?

[TheOracle]

As for how things should be vs. how they actually are, that doesn't make any sense

I was saying this in terms of JStew vs BJGE comparison....it made perfect sense in response to that point specifically.

So you want a system that reflects how things SHOULD BE....instead of how they actually are..........................

Stewart actually is better at football than BJGE. A system that reflected that would reflect how things actually are, not "how they should be" or whatever that even means. Please stop.

[standard_variance]

59,972 rush yards = 599 football fields compared to 400 rush TD's

125,336 receiving yards = 1,253 football fields compared to 745 rush TD's

so for every 3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 rush TD's (12 points)

and for every 3.3 times a team drove 100 yards (10 points) there were 2 receiving TD's (12 points)

So since the yards are being accumulated at a higher rate, thus leading to them already being rewarded at a higher rate...why would you want to compound that in hopes that it would "balance" things out? The truth is it doesnt balance ANYTHING out........

top 10 NFL rushers
MJD - 1606 (160 points) - 8 TD's (48 points)
Ray Rice 1364 (136 points) - 12 TD's (72 points)
Turner 1340 (134 points)- 11 (66 points)
McCoy 1304 (130 points)- 17 (102 points)
Foster 1224 (122 points)- 10 (60 points)
Gore 1211 (121 points) - 8 (48 points)
Lynch 1204 (120 points) - 12 (72 points)
McGahee 1199 (119 points) - 4 (24 points)
SJ 1145 (114 points) - 5 (30 points)
Mathews 1091 (109 points) - 6 (36 points)

the yards already outscore the points....what the reason to weigh it more in favor for yards?

MJD - 343 carries - TD's on 2.3% of carries - TD's count for 23% of rushing scoring in standard scoring systems
Rice - 291 carries - TD's on 4.1% of carries - 35%
McCoy - 273 carries - TD's on 6.2% of carries - 44%
Foster - 278 carries - TD's on 3.6% of carries - 33%
......

I think you get the point. In standard scoring, TD's count for a TON of points relative to the frequency that the TD's actually occur. Doesn't that seem odd?

Yea it seems extremely odd that something that happens LESS frequently carries MORE value ....you are right....that is AWFULLY strange. What was I thinking?