#1 By: RotoViz, January 5th, 2017 11:05
Originally published at: http://rotoviz.com/2017/01/the-ff-industry-is-drawing-all-the-wrong-conclusions-about-the-2016-season/
Throughout the offseason, I wrote a series of articles focused on league-level trends. My interpretation of the impact they would have on the 2016 season was flat wrong. Naturally, I’ve been curious to understand why. My curiosity has piqued with the season over and, with it, a rush of opinions on Twitter and elsewhere about…
#2 By: iamjacks, January 5th, 2017 12:14
Excellent article; thanks for the great work this season. Data pointing to variance is the best news for Zero RB drafters in 2017.
Do you know if there much change in the average bust rates between RBs/WRs this year?
#3 By: Dennis, January 5th, 2017 13:46
Really awesome stuff! And yeah, the variance exhibited is making me want to double down on ZeroRB. @FF_Contrarian suggested I allocate about 20-30 of my 200 auction bucks for HPPR on a couple guys like Melvin Gordon, J. Hill, T coleman, and spend the rest on WRs. that was great advice. Ben, your podcasts with @RotoDoc down the stretch were unbelievble for daily picks, you and he must've done pretty well. thanks and congrats.
im curious...totally an eyeball hypothesis from watching lots of redzone...but could defensive penalty's inside the 5 have helped these RB tds and might that not necessarily be going away? maybe DB's are learning to take the flag and live to fight another play
#4 By: Allan Basso, January 5th, 2017 16:14
Considering a had a sucessful MFL10 season with my "kind of" Zero RB strategy (1 RB in first 4-5picks and at least 3 by pick 8), I am really lookin forward for the WR bargains I'll get next season.
#5 By: Eric, January 6th, 2017 01:04
Great article Ben. As somebody who had a bunch of WR heavy teams with little success in 2016 it's nice to know that things have a chance to look up next year. Maybe as owners switch to a more RB heavy approach I can take advantage of the swing draft strategy.
#6 By: Genghis Khan, January 7th, 2017 12:58
What about rushing attempts from inside the 5 yard line? Did those attempts increase? Could "variance" be mistaken for intent? What I'm saying is that from a psychological standpoint, it's better to jam it down someone's throat than to throw a fade to the corner. Both are worth 6 points on the board. But psychologically, you just owned the other team.
#7 By: kennel15, January 8th, 2017 12:51
Great article. A couple of points....
So rushing TDs are up as compared to receiving TDs? I have to wonder if rushing TDs from the 1-yard line SPECIFICALLY are up at all. DPI isn't going away. Teams lob it up to covered receivers in the end zone all the time and get bogus PI penalties when the receiver stops to come back to the poorly thrown pass. I would assume that PI calls in the end zone are trending upward, and I wonder if that explains the rise in rushing TDs compared to receiving. This may well be a trend and not simple variance, IMO. I wish the NFL would fix the way DPI is called, personally, but that's a different conversation.
Something weird happened this year with the decrease in targets to primary receivers and increase to #2's and #3's, and that something crippled Zero RB. I have no idea if this a trend or an aberration. In past seasons, our Zero RB teams were all built upon the premise of purchasing targets, and filling our lineups with as many targets as possible. The targets simply weren't there this year. The article lists this as reason #3 for the failure of Zero RB, behind variance and touchdowns, but my armchair common sense opinion is that it was reason #1. Not only did our lineups lack the distinct advantage at WR provided by target hogging receivers, but our opponents' lower-tier options were more viable starters. I didn't feel like I was losing FF games this season because of my opponents' RBs, but I was losing because I had no real advantage at WR despite the heavy draft investment. Is this because defenses adjusted to being repeatedly butchered by the AB's and Julios of the world? Or did offensive coordinators decide they needed more balance/spreading the ball around in their attacks? I have no idea, but this shift IMO is what went wrong with Zero RB this year. It was completely aberrant to the trend of the last few seasons. Whether this is a new trend or merely one weird year for some reason is what will determine the success of Zero RB in future seasons.
#8 By: Jason, January 8th, 2017 23:16
This was the first year I played DFS, but I noticed pretty early on that it seemed like in certain favorable matchups, #2 WRs or slot guys went off.
I largely went with a strategy of drafting one workhorse back and then going with about 5-6 straight WRs the next rounds.
Next year I'll probably try to snag 2 elite, high TD upside WRs in the first 2 rounds, take one workhorse type back that falls in the Rd 3-5 range and fill out the rest of my WR core with high variance guys who have crazy splits.
I know Baldwin and Cooks have crazy home/away splits but do any other QBs and WRs have notable splits to the point where a mid round WR will have the potential to be a WR1 in certain weeks?
#9 By: Matt, January 9th, 2017 09:14
I agree that the fairly dramatic decrease in targets for the top WR was pretty concerning to me. It's not targets but if you look at the graph on WR PPR PPG Scoring by Year, you can see that the gap between WR 10 and WR 40 dramatically shrank this year. WR 40 has been on a steady rise the last several years, while WR 10 had been fairly steady until last year. Even looking at last year, it appeared that scoring was on a steady rise for pretty much all WR, making it look like drafting WR was the way to go. Even though this was my first year of doing 0 RB, I'm pretty much undeterred due to the decreased bust rate and decreased injury risk of WR, as well as the fact that people are likely to draft RB earlier because of what happened in 2016. Would love to see more analysis of this year and what we can learn from it.