JediDefender Fantasy Football 2004

[Scott]

I just turned on Fractional Scoring

This may be what we have to do, it gives fractional points for yards instead of just reaching milestones for each point

Last Year

Holmes RB 221
Green RB 203
Tomlinson RB 199
Moss WR 155
Culpepper QB 148
Manning QB 141
Alexander RB 140
Lewis RB 123
Holt WR 117
McAllister RB 113
Williams RB 113
Owens WR 100
Bulger QB 99
McNabb QB 98
Johnson WR 97
Taylor RB 96
Harrison WR 94

Fantasy Football is always dominated by Running Backs in scoring, that is why they are always the #1 picks and usually dominate the first round.  The list above shows QB's are just as important to a teams success.  The reason they aren't drafted high is because they are more of a crap shoot and they tend to all clump together point wise (no big drop off in talent) the same cannot be said for RB where the TD chances start to dwindle as the talent goes down

[Jeff]

I just turned on Fractional Scoring

There goes the need to worry about Tie-Breakers. 

Thanks for the extra 0.88 points, chief!

 

[Rob]

Right on.  I was only curious and trying to make sure I know what's going on - none of what I mentioned above was meant to sound like complaining.

[Holographic Elvis]

So explain to me 2 things:

1) Why have an 18 round draft, and still have 2 empty spots on our roster, if we aren't going to have 3 WRs and a flex/utility position?  You don't need nearly that many spots on your roster if you're only going with the # of starters that we have.  It's pointless. 

2) How would adding a flex/utility position detract from someone's draft strategy and/or help 1 team specifically if every one of us was so focused on getting quality picks and sleepers in the late rounds? 

Sorry, but I don't get why we have so few starting spots and why the scoring is so screwy.  Why didn't we just go with the default setting? 

[chuckles]

How would adding a flex/utility position detract from someone's draft strategy and/or help 1 team specifically if every one of us was so focused on getting quality picks and sleepers in the late rounds?

Well, I think if we were going with that extra flex position from the start, some people may have held off a round or two in picking up their K or defense (for those that filled out their starting roster before any bench players), while instead picking up another RB or WR to fill that flex spot.

So you could be talking about someone now having to fill in a player they took in the mid to late rounds for the flex spot, instead of using say, a 5th or 6th round pick, where they took a K or DEF instead, and that is probably a pretty big difference in quality of player.

Quite frankly, I would be all for using a flex spot due the fact that I think my bench is pretty deep (I would have used Branch this week had it been implemented) but don't necessarily think it's fair to everyone to make that kind of change after the draft, and actually after the season, has already started.

[Scott]

I'm not adding a flex position

[Holographic Elvis]

I'm not adding a flex position

I think we should vote as a league.  Every football league I've ever played in, including my other 3 this year have at least a flex spot (2 of my 3 have an extra WR spot as well.)  I disagree with the statement of taking a K or a DEF instead of another WR or RB.  There are 14 teams in this league and most everyone admitted that's the most they've ever had in a league they participated in.  Not taking a K or DEF would have really left them thin.  Let's face it, there are more quality RBs and WRs (especially WRs) then there are DEFs or K who can be the difference in a win or loss for a given week. 

I say we vote and I vote add the flex for next week.  I think everyone who takes a long look at what I'm saying will agree that with as many players as we have on our rosters, it doesn't make sense to not have the flex spot. 

[Jeff]

OK, let's vote then.

I vote that we do what Scott says (no flex spot) because he's the commish (and it doesn't matter to me).

 

No Flex:
Scott
Jeff

Yes Flex
HoloE

Add your vote as appropriate...

Jeff

[Nicklab]

I'm in favor of a flex player as well.

[Rob]

Sure it might have effected some people's drafting order, but we all drafted under the same conditions and adding a player now would still mean the same conditions for everyone.

I vote Yes.

[Morgbug]

I vote nay, rules were presented up front with the scoring.  Prolly won't change much, still, I knew what was what up front.  For us rookie idiots, changing those rules could hamper our chances.

[Holographic Elvis]

I vote nay, rules were presented up front with the scoring.  Prolly won't change much, still, I knew what was what up front.  For us rookie idiots, changing those rules could hamper our chances.

I'm sorry, but someone is going to have to explain to me how having an extra player in your lineup every week to score points and help you defeat your opponent is a bad thing.

[Dressel Rebel]

I vote nay, rules were presented up front with the scoring.  Prolly won't change much, still, I knew what was what up front.  For us rookie idiots, changing those rules could hamper our chances.

I'm sorry, but someone is going to have to explain to me how having an extra player in your lineup every week to score points and help you defeat your opponent is a bad thing.

I'm never for changing rules after the fact and after games have started, and I don't even think this is an official vote, but just incase it is, I've voting with the commish's "nay."  For me in particular, I have like 5 offensive players out one particular bye week and did NOT draft enough good players to cover an extra position being added after my draft strategy was developed and executed using the rules we all agreed to play by at the start of the draft.  I, for one, would have definitely drafted another starting running back or wide receiver before taking a defense or kicker to cover an extra starting position.  It changes everything.  To be very precise here, if we had an extra flex position for WR/RB at the outset of the draft, I would have drafted Chris Chambers instead of Plaxico Burress because Hines Ward, Andre Johnson, and Plaxico Burress will ALL be out the same week, and I could have had Chris Chambers in the "flex" position rather than having to go find a free agent  starting offensive player to fill a position that some people just decided they wanted after the season started.  And that's just one example, just to show you what we mean.

I'm sticking with commish.

[chuckles]

So why is this just now, after the season has already started, becoming a topic of discussion? We've known for at least 3 weeks what the rules were, what the roster size was and what a starting lineup was going to consist of, so why bring it up now?

Sure it might have effected some people's drafting order

And there lies the reason as to why I'm not crazy about a major rule change such as this, after the draft. I personally don't have a problem if it were to be added, but it just doesn't seem fair to those who used their first 8 draft spots to fill in their starting roster. Outside of a couple DEFs and Ks, there is no reason to be drafting a DEF or K before filling in that flex position with another top RB or WR and that would put those people at a disadvantage who's drafting strategy was to fill in their starting 8 before drafting bench players.

[Dressel Rebel]

Sure it might have effected some people's drafting order, but we all drafted under the same conditions and adding a player now would still mean the same conditions for everyone.

I vote Yes.

No, that's totally incorrect Zod.  Some people drafted starting WR's and RB's who will all be out the same bye week and didn't think it would matter when they checked the season schedule because a "flex" position didn't exist at the outset of the draft and when we executed our draft strategy.  Additionally, like Chuckles just said, only an idiot would take a kicker (other than maybe the top 3) before another good starting RB or WR to fill the flex.

I'm all for this rule change, but for NEXT year.  I know Scott just said he's not adding a flex position, and I don't think he'd further preside over this now that we're halfway through the "vote" and at least 5 of us have already protested this.  But I don't think it's cool at all that a few of you are trying to put others at a disadvantage just because you see that your season schedules and your bye week stuff works out in your favor to sneak an extra good starting player into your lineup every week.  That's really bogus.  Or maybe you three truly just don't understand.  I don't know which it is.