FANTASY FOOTBALL ARTICLES

Point-per-reception (PPR) leagues get mixed reviews from the masses.  Some people love it, some people hate it and there are of course those that are indifferent.  It is undeniable that PPR scoring is far from perfect and that it has some definite pros and cons.  Frankly, there are numerous reasons why fantasy football participants could find themselves in favor of PPR or opposed to it.  Strangely, many of the arguments made for each side, at least those that I have heard/read and given consideration to, have at least a small amount of merit to them.

Among the chief concerns of much of the PPR format’s opposition is that it inflates the values of players with specific skill sets, namely those with high reception totals.  Players that wrack up numerous receptions without necessarily posting huge or even significant yardage totals have the most to gain in this format.  Deep threat receivers with high yard per catch averages stand to lose significant value, as due grind-it-out RBs that catch few passes and QBs (since they typically catch no passes).  All of this begs the question, is PPR a fair scoring system?  This is a difficult, if not impossible question to answer, particularly when looking at its impact on individual players or even small pools of players that have a similar skill set (i.e. WRs that have an uncommonly high YPC average).

So instead of delving into the dicey business of determining the “fairness” of the impact of PPR on specific players, I thought it would be interesting, as well as telling, to examine how PPR affects the relative value of each of the positions compared to one another (QB, RB, WR and TE).  Which position gains the most in a PPR league and which loses the most?  And is the gain or loss significant?  Does the PPR format usher in improved balance in positional scoring?  Answering these sorts of questions will provide us a much better understanding about how PPR can impact a league.

There are probably 1,000 different ways one could analyze this situation and address the aforementioned questions, but here is the approach I decided to take:

- Using standard scoring at The Huddle (Non-PPR), I created my data sample consisting of the top-scoring 24 QBs, 48 RBs, 72 WRs and 24 TEs from 2007 (168 total players).  This is exactly double the amount of players at each position that are required to start in a basic 12-team head-to-head league (assuming starting requirements of 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs and 1 TE per team). 

- After generating this list of 168 players, each of them was assigned a ranking based upon total points scored (#1 was the highest scorer and #168 was the lowest). 

- Next, each player's ranking was recalculated with a change in the scoring system to include one point awarded for each reception recorded. 

- Each player's ranking change from Non-PPR to PPR was then calculated. 

- For analysis purposes, players were then broken into tiers at their respective position.  Tier 1 consisted of the top quartile (25%) of scorers at the position within the data sample (using Non-PPR scoring).  These players can basically be considered studs.  Tier 2 would be the next 25% of players at each respective position and were great starters or borderline studs in 2007.  The third tier is made up of the next quartile of scorers and is primarily players that were marginal starters in a typical 12-team league.  The final group of 25% at each position consisted mostly of spot starters and fill-in type guys that only occasionally made it off of most benches. 

- For all four positions, their average net change in point ranking from Non PPR to PPR was calculated.  The same was done for each tier within every position.  This average net change in ranking serves as a quantifiable impact of PPR on each of the positions relative to one another, as well as each of the tiers.  If a given position's or tier's average net change in point ranking substantially increases (shown via positive figures), then we'll know that the shift to PPR was a favorable shift for this group.  Conversely, if a position or tier experiences a significant average net change in point ranking decrease (shown via negative figures), then we'll know that moving from Non-PPR to PPR was harmful to the group's relative value.

The results of this study are quite interesting and provide us a real look at how PPR can impact positional values in a basic head-to-head league.  Let’s take a look at the table below…

Positional Observations

The elite (Tier 1) QBs are not nearly as impacted as the later tiers at the position.  As would be expected, the deeper into the QB position you go, the more they are adversely impacted on the points ranking board by the implementation of PPR.

RBs lose some relative value in the PPR format.  The first tier at the position hold value the best in the switch from Non PPR to PPR.

Tier 2 and Tier 3 WRs fly up the rankings board in PPR leagues.  This position gained the most overall, which is very much intuitive.

The first two tiers of TEs also climb dramatically up the rankings board in PPR leagues.  Upward movement in later tiers at the position is far less significant.

General Observations

In the Non PPR scoring format, Tier 1 and Tier 2 RBs both rank better than Tier 1 and Tier 2 WRs, on average.  This completely changes in PPR and WRs in the first two tiers rank higher than their RB counterparts.  Overall, the average ranking for RBs and WRs tracks much more closely together in all tiers when PPR is used.

Tier 1 TEs are brought much more closely into line with other positions in PPR.  In Non PPR scoring, they were far inferior to the first tier of all other positions in this study.

Tier 4 QBs lose a huge amount of ground on the points ranking board when switching to PPR.  However, Tier 4 as whole becomes much more balanced from a positional standpoint when PPR is used.  The variation in PPR Avg Rank among the positions is much less than that of Non PPR Avg Rank in Tier 4.

Conclusion

While using the data set from only the 2007 season is not definitive in any manner, this study has used real seasonal data to exhibit a quantifiable difference on the value of the given positions in a Non-PPR vs. a PPR league.  There are definitely drawbacks to implementing the PPR format, but there is also the significant and quite likely trumping gain of increased balance among the value of the different positions.  This is not to say that PPR is superior necessarily, but this study helps make the case that PPR generally increases positional scoring balance; and most should readily accept that this is a positive thing for a league.

Here is the ultimate take away from this study -- Hopefully when you are deciding what type of league to join, or even create, you now have a better understanding about how the PPR scoring format could impact your league.  And further, if you are drafting in a PPR league and are relatively new to it, this study may provide you with an edge on draft day, assisting you in appropriately tweaking your player rankings or perhaps helping you devise an improved draft strategy to employ.

COMMENTS (page 1 of 2)

Your Name:


Image verification:



Message:

 

texascaesar

Posted Jun 25, 2008 3:30am EDT

DMD is wrong and Fred B. has it right... The problem is not the system. It never is. Why is it that the same fantasy owners consistantly find themselves in the playoffs and winning championships??? Answer: They know the system that they are in.

I've been playing fantasy football for 10 years. I play in two leagues each season. I have only missed the playoffs twice in 10 years. In 5 of those 10 years both of my teams made the playoffs. In 2 of those years both of my teams won the superbowl. I'm not bragging... I'm stating a point. Draft prepartion is the key to fantasy success. It doesn't matter what rules you play under... you still have to preare for your draft. The next thing is being able to read the waiver wire better than everybody else. In other words... Do you know your football???

PPR is another attempt to get less than stellar fantasy players a chance to win. I'm talking about those fantasy players that don't want to take the time analyze and strategize. They show up at the draft with a cheat sheet and follow it to a "T". Good fantasy players set up their own fantasy draft boards.

I'm in 2 leagues for 2008. One is a dynasty league... 2007 was our first year. The other is a 4 player keeper league. 10 great owners... highly competitive. In the 5 years of the league we have never had a repeat winner. The owners come to win. They know who their drafting in order to helpm their teams.

In the league that I quit in 2006 I won 2 times and another guy won twice in a 5 year period. Our opponents didn't stand a chance against our preparation.

To conclude... PPR is for weak players and to level the playing field against stud players...
Fantasy Football - Old School is for the studs.

hurricanesurfers

Posted Jun 22, 2008 11:51pm EDT

Agree that PPR is better. Excellent point - that without PPR those drafting in the high spots get the stud RBs while those drafting 9th-12th for example get much weaker RBs. Last year I know someone who picked a top WR with pick 11 and another top WR with pick 14. He did very well. The league I'm in does 0.5 PPR for RB, 0.75 PPR for WR and 1.0 PPR for TE which seems pretty good to me.

Javier

Posted Jun 22, 2008 2:23pm EDT

My league introduced PPR about three years ago. It was a great equalizer for the WRs and TEs at that time and it really gave depth at draft time. Nevertheless, last year stats have shown a deep degrading on the RB position stats. Maybe last year was not a fair comparison, I think I would like to see this analysis made with 2005 results and compared to last year (2007). It would be quite revealing how RB have been falling compared to WRs

Fred B.

Posted Jun 22, 2008 11:13am EDT

I have been in Fantasy Football since 1989. To me, the PPR is a scoring system thought up by players who are bored with the "basic" system. I have seen many times when Commish's try to tweek things just to make it interesting and the PPR is an example of that. Why not give the RB a point per rushing attempt or a QB a point per completion? That would be equivalent to the PPR. Fantasy Football players were generally ADHD when they grew up and are now OCD, it just bodes well to change things to keep our attention. We just need to respect Fantasy Football for what it is and not try to mold it into something it shouldn't be. Commish's need to bow down to the "Fantasy God's" and KISS them (keep it simple stupid). Otherwise we will keep changing things for the sake of change and never be satisfied.

Warren J

Posted Jun 18, 2008 11:26am EDT

I think the pertinent question, here, is not "do I like PPR?" Rather, it is, "if I'm in a PPR league, how do I change my draft strategy from the standard published FFL rankings?" This article helps. Thanks, Matt.

I'm in a PPR league with 1 pt per reception for QB, RB, WR, and 2 pts for TE, so reception points factor big in my league. I always end up with a pair of top 5 receivers and usually THE top TE because of this - the rest of my league undervalues these players, but I think I know better. Now, if I can just convert that information into a championship someday... :)

-Warren.

Big Country

Posted Jun 18, 2008 12:47am EDT

The only major flaw I see in this method is that it used points scored as the benchmark, not a value score to truly see how the addition of PPR affects the relative values of the positions. In most systems QBs score more points, but that does not make them more valuable as generally speaking, the scoring curve from the 1st to the 12th QB is fairly flat. Looking at the numbers above, the Avg Rank column seems to imply that in non-PPR, QBs down to the 3rd tier, in this case the 13th through 18th overall QB are as valuable as Tier 1 RBs, or, basically says backup QBs are as valuable as the top 12 RBs.

SteeltownD

Posted Jun 17, 2008 5:23pm EDT

I agree with DMD, I love PPR leagues. It evens the playing field in respect to serpentine drafts and makes the league more competitive. IMO.

Lionel

Posted Jun 17, 2008 3:45pm EDT

Good stuff! Thank you. It would be good if the huddle did some stats for us on the impact on the different positions and tiers for 1 point per 3 receptions, and 2 points per 3 receptions (Hint hint).

The league I participate in is turning into a PPR league this year, and the commish wants to know how to set it.

Wolfpax

Posted Jun 17, 2008 1:48pm EDT

We do 2 points for every 3 receptions and it works out well. With a well setup scoring system using PPR no one position has any more or less weight than another, except kickers.

Chuck

Posted Jun 17, 2008 1:36pm EDT

the league i've participated in for a few years now has done 3rec = 1pt. when i started my league last year, i adopted the same tactic. i like that. it just seems that 1pt per rec. is too much, whereas giving bonuses at every 5 recs is, IMO, not enough.

Lionel

Posted Jun 17, 2008 12:09pm EDT

I've heard PPR leagues that do up to 1 point per 8 receptions.
What are the ideal or fair receptions per point?

DMD

Posted Jun 17, 2008 11:32am EDT

I love PPR leagues - they are really the great equalizer and make drafts much more deep in fantasy talent and diminish the impact of having a top 3 RB on your team - others have a better chance at building a great team without the annual stud RB that most can never reach in a draft.

<21>