Now that the fantasy season has largely concluded, this is the time of year where I typically evaluate my fantasy teams. I'm not going to bore you with this analysis.
When I did that analysis, what did come to my mind was the idea of drafting relative value and various drafting methodologies. The newest sabermetric method that is being employed is VBD (Value Based Drafting) which is something I employ. Others who are more skilled have discussed this at length so I won't do this here. Others go off the top of their head, or mood, or the league site or some expert. The question came into my mind of how much success would one have if they let the market make their decisions? Every league scoring system is relative which shifts positional values, but what if you just simply followed what others had paid for a player within position and only purchased (drafted) players who had slipped below market value?
After my 14 team league drafted, I posted a list for the first 8 rounds, by team, of players who had paid premiums and/or gotten a value for their players - that is bought them on the cheap. This was defined by taking a player greater than +/-2 spots above/below what the market was taking them within their position. Again, positional scoring fluctuates by league, so positional value will vary. That's why any draft analysis must value and evaluate choices by position. Now, let's evaluate whether those players were hits or busts - and if following the market can yield fantasy success.
Our criteria:
Evaluating RBs/WRs:
Any player who finishes within 5 spots of their draft position will be considered a hit. Any player who finishes in the top 3 of their position overall will be a major hit. Any player who exceeds their draft position by 10 or more spots will be considered a major hit. Any player who finishes 5 spots or more outside of their draft rank will be considered a bust; 10 spots or more will be considered a major bust.
Evaluating QB/TE/Defense (in leagues where the top defense will average > 15 fantasy points per game; otherwise, we'll ignore them here):
The top point gainer at the position will be considered a major hit no matter what.
If a player finishes within 2 spots of their draft position, they will be considered a hit - if they finish 5 spots or more above their draft position, they will be considered a major hit. Falling 3 spots below the draft position will be considered a bust. Falling 6 or more spots below draft position will be considered a major bust.
If a player is drafted as a non-starter (take the number of teams multiplied by the number of players who start at that position. In a 14 team league that starts 2 running backs, that means there are 28 starting running backs. Split the flex position evenly amongst the number of positions (i.e. - a rb/wr flex in a ten team league means that we assume 5 spots are running backs and 5 are wrs):
Hit: Finishes as starter.
Major Hit: Finishes in top of half as starters. There will be no bust points here.
Hits/Busts are worth +/-1 while major hits/busts are worth +/-3.
Here's the 'why's' behind the logic above:
-Teams rarely win their fantasy league in the first round, but they can lose it in the first round. How did Jamal Charles owners do in your leagues this year?
-Late in the draft your panning for gold.
-When you're drafting starter quality but not top tier guys, landing fair value is a success.
Evaluating the players who a 'premium' was paid for:
In the first 8 rounds of this 14 team league, there were 28 players whom a premium was paid for - which should represent a significant buying opportunity if 1/4 of the players in the first 8 round, players are paying more than the market.
Amongst that group, there was 1 bust, 16 major busts, 7 hits and 3 major hits, with one non-starter drafted in that group. That means 10/27 players could be considered successful picks; the total points awarded were -33; that equates to the average player being a bust.
How did the value group fare? There were 32 players who were purchased at a value, or at least a fair amount below market value. There were 5 busts, 10 major busts, 8 hits and 9 major hits amongst this group; that means 17/32 players in this group could be considered successful picks and the total score was 2.
What conclusions can be taken from this?
The sample size is just one league, but because of the nature of the game, unless someone was in a league full of experts, who knew which players to avoid and which ones to pay a premium for, it's reasonable to expect such results.
The delta between the two groups is about a 16% success rate in terms of finding a reasonable successful player with the pick.
The implication is that out of the first 120 or so picks, 19 would be swayed by taking a 'value player' over a premium player. That's worth about 2 key picks per league if you payed a premium for your players as opposed to getting them at a discount. Given the crap-shoot nature of fantasy football - it's a strategy worth considering - or at least weaving it into your draft strategy.
The main caveat is that at the top of your draft, players will likely not be dropping at a discount. This strategy may not give you an obvious pick in round 1 (and potentially round 2).
However, used properly, it can boost a team from average to contender. Turning a major bust of a pick into a home-run, can swing a team, or potentially a league.
Happy bargain hunting!
No comments:
Post a Comment