Fantasy Team Expectations

[5wide]

From elite players...

 

Quarterbacks

• 25+ is what I want
  
• 20-24 is acceptable
  
• Under 20 is a disappointment
  

Running Backs & Wide Receivers

• 15+ is what I want
  
• 8-14 is acceptable
  
• Under 8 is a disappointment
  

Tight Ends

• 12+
  
• 6-11
  
• Under 6
  

Kickers and Defense

• 10+
  
• 5-9
  
• Under 5
  

I think it's the nature of fantasy football to have to sacrifice something to get something else you want. Of course, that depends on the league size. In the BGP league with 16 teams, 2-3 elite players is all you can get. I sacrificed WR this season to draft RB's. I kept Vick and MJD, then drafted Bradshaw. My first WR pick was Crabtree, which turned out to be a bust. My best WR pick was Jordy Nelson who has been very good. But, going into a draft, you don't say to yourself, "I hope I can get Jordy Nelson as my #1 WR." It all depends on your league size.

 

In a standard 10-team league, I think you can get an elite (or upper tier) player at every position if you choose to do so.

[DragonFire]

At the end of the year they even out. The difference won't be much more than 1-2 points a game. Kickers are pointless. You can get one on waivers pretty much every week that will be just as good as what you have.

 

What sort of scoring does your league have for FGs based on distance? If a 50 yard FG counts the same as a 30 yarder, then we agree. If not, then I'd say someone like Janikowski would've made a pretty significant impact for you this year. He's 8/9 on FGs of longer than 40 yards, 5/6 over 50. He's been a big help to my team.

[PurplePride92]

You expect to score 120 a week in a standard league?

 

No. Those are my standards for 'elite' players. Any team with more than 4 elite players on it is playing in a pretty crappy league, IMO.

[PurplePride92]

What sort of scoring does your league have for FGs based on distance? If a 50 yard FG counts the same as a 30 yarder, then we agree. If not, then I'd say someone like Janikowski would've made a pretty significant impact for you this year. He's 8/9 on FGs of longer than 40 yards, 5/6 over 50. He's been a big help to my team.

 

There are quite a few who make 50+ fg's regularly. I'm not one to waste time on a kicker. Janikowski could just as easily kick four XP's as he could kick four 50 yarders. And he's injured right now.

[woodsrider]

From elite players...

 

Quarterbacks

• 25+ is what I want
  
• 20-24 is acceptable
  
• Under 20 is a disappointment
  

Running Backs & Wide Receivers

• 15+ is what I want
  
• 8-14 is acceptable
  
• Under 8 is a disappointment
  

Tight Ends

• 12+
  
• 6-11
  
• Under 6
  

Kickers and Defense

• 10+
  
• 5-9
  
• Under 5
  

I think it's the nature of fantasy football to have to sacrifice something to get something else you want. Of course, that depends on the league size. In the BGP league with 16 teams, 2-3 elite players is all you can get. I sacrificed WR this season to draft RB's. I kept Vick and MJD, then drafted Bradshaw. My first WR pick was Crabtree, which turned out to be a bust. My best WR pick was Jordy Nelson who has been very good. But, going into a draft, you don't say to yourself, "I hope I can get Jordy Nelson as my #1 WR." It all depends on your league size.

 

In a standard 10-team league, I think you can get an elite (or upper tier) player at every position if you choose to do so.

This.

[PurplePride92]

I think he was just saying that's the kind of production he expects from Elite players in the NFL. Not that he necessarily has a team of all Elite players.

 

This is correct. Didn't see this before I posted.

[PurplePride92]

You expect to score 120 a week in a standard league?

 

On second thought...yes. I expect to dominate every Sunday with my elite and non elite players. :lol: We play to win the game(Herm Edwards voice)

 

 

I also don't play in many standard leagues at all anymore. My money league is by far my favorite and the scoring is anything but standard. It is like a Loyola Marymount version of fantasy football.

[woodsrider]

For those that don't care about kickers consider this...

 

I took the top 3 scoring kickers in our league. Totals points scored were 77, 75, & 73. Looking at RB's, WR's, TE's, and DST they fall like this...

 

WR - There are only 8 WR's with more points then the top 3 kickers and 1 WR with 73 points.

RB - 15 have more points

TE - Only 1 has scored more

DST - 3 with more points

[DragonFire]

There are quite a few who make 50+ fg's regularly. I'm not one to waste time on a kicker. Janikowski could just as easily kick four XP's as he could kick four 50 yarders. And he's injured right now.

 

I'm not saying lose sleep over it or spend a high pick on one, but there are kickers that can make a difference. Janikowski has attempted more 50+ FGs than anyone else this year. Him and Josh Scobee have made five apiece, more than any other kicker has even attempted. Only three other kickers have made even three 50+ FGs. Also, the Janikowski only missed one game and the Raiders just waived his replacement - he'll be back next week after the bye.

 

All I'm saying is it depends on the scoring. If your league has bonuses for distance kicks, then it is not the worst idea in the world to look at what kickers get more attempts from distance and make them. In the leagues I'm in, a FG under 40 yards gets you 3 points. A FG over 50 yards gets you 10 points. It adds up.

[PurplePride92]

I'm not saying lose sleep over it or spend a high pick on one, but there are kickers that can make a difference. Janikowski has attempted more 50+ FGs than anyone else this year. Him and Josh Scobee have made five apiece, more than any other kicker has even attempted. Only three other kickers have made even three 50+ FGs. Also, the Janikowski only missed one game and the Raiders just waived his replacement - he'll be back next week after the bye.

 

All I'm saying is it depends on the scoring. If your league has bonuses for distance kicks, then it is not the worst idea in the world to look at what kickers get more attempts from distance and make them. In the leagues I'm in, a FG under 40 yards gets you 3 points. A FG over 50 yards gets you 10 points. It adds up.

 

10 points for 50 yarders makes a huge difference. In my league you get 5 so the difference isn't much at all.

[PurplePride92]

For those that don't care about kickers consider this...

 

I took the top 3 scoring kickers in our league. Totals points scored were 77, 75, & 73. Looking at RB's, WR's, TE's, and DST they fall like this...

 

WR - There are only 8 WR's with more points then the top 3 kickers and 1 WR with 73 points.

RB - 15 have more points

TE - Only 1 has scored more

DST - 3 with more points

 

 

That's not a good way to look at it. Kickers routinely score more points than non elite players at their respective positions. Look at the top ranked kicker through the #20 kicker. In my league it is a 26 point separation. Top ranked QB in my league is 176 points away from the #20 QB. The top ranked RB is 76 points away from the #20 RB. The top ranked WR is 78 away from the #20 WR. It is much easier to find a kicker to give you points than it is to find a QB, RB or WR regardless of how many points the kicker scores compared to the other positions.

[MJAlltheWay24]

That's not a good way to look at it. Kickers routinely score more points than non elite players at their respective positions. Look at the top ranked kicker through the #20 kicker. In my league it is a 26 point separation. Top ranked QB in my league is 176 points away from the #20 QB. The top ranked RB is 76 points away from the #20 RB. The top ranked WR is 78 away from the #20 WR. It is much easier to find a kicker to give you points than it is to find a QB, RB or WR regardless of how many points the kicker scores compared to the other positions.

 

And this is the key reason they shouldn't be drafted early. The separation, which PP92 has shown very well.

[woodsrider]

That's not a good way to look at it. Kickers routinely score more points than non elite players at their respective positions. Look at the top ranked kicker through the #20 kicker. In my league it is a 26 point separation. Top ranked QB in my league is 176 points away from the #20 QB. The top ranked RB is 76 points away from the #20 RB. The top ranked WR is 78 away from the #20 WR. It is much easier to find a kicker to give you points than it is to find a QB, RB or WR regardless of how many points the kicker scores compared to the other positions.

Actually I think it is. You want the most points at the end of the day and when you compare the #20 WR to the #40 WR there is about 10 points total difference. Meaning instead of picking up your 3rd receiver in round 6 you take an elite kicker instead because you can pick up another WR in the next round or 2 that won't be that much different then the guy you past on.

 

And this is the key reason they shouldn't be drafted early. The separation, which PP92 has shown very well.

I guess it depends on what you mean by early. If you look at all positions by scoring then the top 3 kickers would all fall right around 50th. To completely dismiss kickers as not important is a mistake. Now that doesn't mean all Ks are but the top few definitely.

 

I don't want you guys thinking I believe a K should be taken in the 2nd round or even 4th round. But to pass on an elite K to pick up a bench player may not be the smartest move.

[MJAlltheWay24]

I don't want you guys thinking I believe a K should be taken in the 2nd round or even 4th round. But to pass on an elite K to pick up a bench player may not be the smartest move.

 

I understand what you are saying. I just rather have the depth at a position like RB. I picked my 4th RB in a flex league before a TE, K, DEF, and before my third WR. I'm not saying it works in all cases, but it has paid off for me big time.

 

It's is big if injuries happen to your players, but also good for trade bait. I was able to deal my 4th RB, a guy who would have only played for me on bye weeks or injuries and a much lower WR, for what is probably my best WR now.

 

But all scenarios are different and all owners have different tastes, plus it depends on whose available. To me, there really is no "This is how you win fantasy football" as much as some like to believe.

[PurplePride92]

I understand what you are saying. I just rather have the depth at a position like RB. I picked my 4th RB in a flex league before a TE, K, DEF, and before my third WR. I'm not saying it works in all cases, but it has paid off for me big time.

 

It's is big if injuries happen to your players, but also good for trade bait. I was able to deal my 4th RB, a guy who would have only played for me on bye weeks or injuries and a much lower WR, for what is probably my best WR now.

 

But all scenarios are different and all owners have different tastes, plus it depends on whose available. To me, there really is no "This is how you win fantasy football" as much as some like to believe.

 

 

This. I like quality depth as well. I have never finished the season with the kicker I drafted. He gets traded in when his bye week comes for one who has had a bye already.