2014 DynaBowl Post Season Performance Analysis – Part 2

So last time I looked at scores and consistency. This time, I wanted to kick things off by examing a league of two halves.

The DynaBowl is something new for all of us and had a steep learning curve. While our overall season performance may have been greatly defined by the players bought at auction, in theory each team could have used the waiver wire and trades to improve their team. Granted, injuries may have scuppered some performances so we shouldn’t necessarily expect improvement, but improvement would be good.

So, starting with the overall figures, let’s split the league into the first 8 and last 8 games of the year and see who got better and who got worse…

First 8 Games Last 8 Games Change % Change
DynaForOne Firebirds 173.794 214.472 40.678 23.4%
Dynablaster Bombermen 170.827 184.841 14.014 8.2%
Champions of the Sun 180.165 193.558 13.393 7.4%
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 154.278 163.758 9.480 6.1%
East Flanders Flahutes 155.222 161.123 5.901 3.8%
Here Comes The Brees 166.783 168.378 1.594 1.0%
Dynasore Losers 188.170 188.431 0.261 0.1%
Dyna Hard 184.674 180.620 -4.054 -2.2%
Tamworth Two 180.094 170.903 -9.192 -5.1%
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 195.506 181.791 -13.714 -7.0%

It’s no surprise, after what was looked at last time, to see DFO at the top of the list. A 40 point per game improvement from one half of the year to the next is pretty extraordinary and shows how the title was won.

It’s interesting how the next 4 teams are not playoff teams though. You could argue that they had the most improving to do, but Champions of the Sun improved from the 4th highest scoring team across the first half of the year to the 2nd highest scoring team in the second half and still failed to make the leap.

One team that leapt out to me, precisely because they look so anonymous here, is Here Comes The Brees, who registered a 1% rise in scoring despite the majority of their team being the victim of Billy Cole, the running back in Last Boy Scout.

On the flip side, some serious questions may need to be asked in the owners offices at the Tamworth Two and Kelkowski.

Kelkowski and Dynasore Losers are in the bottom 4 and lost in the first round of the playoffs. Coincidence? Maybe.

So now, of course, it’s time to see where the gains and losses were made. Let’s start on offence:

First 8 Games Last 8 Games Change % Change
DynaForOne Firebirds 106.825 124.025 17.200 16.1%
Tamworth Two 84.435 95.791 11.356 13.4%
Champions of the Sun 91.846 100.754 8.908 9.7%
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 79.972 86.633 6.661 8.3%
East Flanders Flahutes 79.819 80.945 1.126 1.4%
Here Comes The Brees 80.974 77.884 -3.090 -3.8%
Dynablaster Bombermen 94.343 87.516 -6.826 -7.2%
Dynasore Losers 106.049 98.144 -7.905 -7.5%
Dyna Hard 96.099 85.695 -10.404 -10.8%
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 117.528 99.366 -18.161 -15.5%

So pick your own team out and tell the story. That’s what I’m going to do.

I know that the Bombermen suffered injuries to Ellington, Bernard and AJ Green, while also trading FHTWMIJ to Kelkowski and so the reduction in average points is explicable. And given we were second in terms of increased performance through the year, we must have hit big on defence. Unless it was on special teams. But seriously, it was on defence…

First 8 Games Last 8 Games Change % Change
DynaForOne Firebirds 55.456 77.150 21.694 39.1%
Dynablaster Bombermen 63.994 84.919 20.925 32.7%
Dynasore Losers 68.463 79.250 10.788 15.8%
East Flanders Flahutes 62.606 67.569 4.962 7.9%
Here Comes The Brees 70.750 75.494 4.744 6.7%
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 66.988 69.225 2.238 3.3%
Dyna Hard 76.575 78.738 2.162 2.8%
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 61.431 63.147 1.716 2.8%
Champions of the Sun 78.144 79.681 1.538 2.0%
Tamworth Two 83.444 64.200 -19.244 -23.1%

Everybody got better on defense! Well done everyone.

No, wait. Who’s that down the bottom? The Tamworth Two. They had the second highest increase in offensive performance, gaining 11 points per game in the second half of the season, but then giving away nearly 20 on the defensive side. Tamworth sprinted out to a 2-0 start and looked like the team to beat. Or one of them. But it’s not difficult to see where things went wrong.

On the other side, I am very happy with the improvement on the defence. I drafted the defence really badly, but Dan and I made some really solid moves through the year to gain more than 20 points per game from the unit. Over the second half of the year, the Bombermen defence scored more than 5 points per game more than any other defence, and that was without a JJ Watt, Justin Houston or Cameron Wake defensive star to do the majority of the damage. It turned into a really good all round unit.

Now, special teams. Probably nothing to see here, right?

First 8 Games Last 8 Games Change % Change
Dyna Hard 12.000 16.188 4.188 34.9%
Champions of the Sun 10.175 13.122 2.947 29.0%
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 10.991 13.200 2.209 20.1%
DynaForOne Firebirds 11.513 13.297 1.784 15.5%
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 12.875 13.978 1.103 8.6%
Here Comes The Brees 15.059 15.000 -0.059 -0.4%
Dynablaster Bombermen 12.491 12.406 -0.084 -0.7%
East Flanders Flahutes 12.797 12.609 -0.187 -1.5%
Tamworth Two 12.216 10.911 -1.304 -10.7%
Dynasore Losers 13.659 11.038 -2.621 -19.2%

To be honest, while that setup might have seemed like I was going to have some shocking revelation, I really don’t. There are some numbers up there. The percentages get high, but does that tell us much about special teams? You decide…

Now as a teaser for what’s to come, here’s the same information presented in this and the last post, but for QBs only… First, total points scored:

Max Score Min Score Regular Season Total Playoff Total Full Season Total
Here Comes The Brees 32.800 0.360 311.460 39.100 350.560
Tamworth Two 36.600 6.100 300.760 48.700 349.460
DynaForOne Firebirds 37.120 8.700 267.400 77.100 344.500
Dynasore Losers 30.960 2.720 301.460 28.180 329.640
East Flanders Flahutes 30.280 11.320 257.740 50.520 308.260
Dynablaster Bombermen 31.420 10.040 220.440 69.980 290.420
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 29.420 3.860 205.680 68.020 273.700
Champions of the Sun 26.540 7.200 218.140 54.140 272.280
Dyna Hard 30.040 4.640 199.960 40.480 240.440
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 19.060 0.000 126.920 52.320 179.240

It’s interesting that only two teams had a minimum score of at least 10, and neither made the playoffs, while 3 of the top 4 QBs made the playoffs. Coincidence? Yes.

So how about QB consistancy? Well…

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency Total Points
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 125.50 0.89 5.24 179.24
East Flanders Flahutes 121.30 0.06 5.59 308.26
Champions of the Sun 96.38 0.02 5.87 272.28
Dynablaster Bombermen 176.06 0.33 6.14 290.42
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 175.46 0.00 6.42 273.7
Dynasore Losers 319.78 0.34 7.42 329.64
Dyna Hard 225.38 0.35 7.50 240.44
Tamworth Two 247.79 4.33 8.06 349.46
Here Comes The Brees 464.40 1.51 8.13 350.56
DynaForOne Firebirds 243.01 0.24 8.91 344.5

Inconsistent QBs made the playoffs. Must be a boom or bust type thing, I guess.

Finally, a league of 2 halves:

First 8 Games Last 8 Games Change % Change
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 9.100 13.305 4.205 46.2%
East Flanders Flahutes 18.525 20.008 1.483 8.0%
Dynablaster Bombermen 17.518 18.785 1.268 7.2%
Tamworth Two 21.360 22.323 0.962 4.5%
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 17.403 16.810 -0.593 -3.4%
Champions of the Sun 18.753 15.283 -3.470 -18.5%
DynaForOne Firebirds 23.363 19.700 -3.663 -15.7%
Dyna Hard 16.893 13.163 -3.730 -22.1%
Here Comes The Brees 24.955 18.865 -6.090 -24.4%
Dynasore Losers 24.243 16.963 -7.280 -30.0%

Only 4 teams saw an improvement in the second half of the season. Interesting. Obviously the Dynasty of Sadness was helped by Cam getting his mojo back. Unless he didn’t start Cammy-Cam. I don’t know. I know Cam was benched for a bit. Did the Dynasty get the big scoring performances at the end of the season, or was it that he played Cam early in the season when he scored nothing?

Especially interesting that those inconsistent QBs for the playoff teams all regressed in the second half of the year. Obviously couldn’t bring their A game when it mattered and had to be dug out of it by the rest of the team…

2014 DynaBowl Post Season Performance Analysis – Part 1

I’ve been having a look at all the performance data from all meaningful weeks of the DynaBowl season for all players on the main rosters (so not including IR or taxi squads).

It’s not really that meaningful to look at the total points of players not started as some of those will be classified as out, while others will specifically be back-ups (see Jimmy Garropolo) so wouldn’t be expected to score anything.

PLOB isn’t looked at, but is examined on the MFL website in the Power Ranking data. There might be something that can be done with the raw data and I’ll hand that over to anyone else who wants to have a go.

I’m looking at scoring by position groups, consistency of scoring, and high scoring performances that were left on the bench (many of which are just unlucky because they come from players you wouldn’t think of starting – not all of them though). There may be a few other bits and pieces that get included as I follow some loose ends…

So, to start off, a couple of tables of data that have kind of been covered in the awards. All of these are sorted by the full season total points. First up, total points for all positions:

Max Score Min Score Regular Season Total Playoff Total Full Season Total
DynaForOne Firebirds 288.010 125.265 2397.800 708.325 3106.125
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 262.585 136.100 2494.355 524.020 3018.375
Dynasore Losers 245.325 151.545 2478.930 533.880 3012.810
Champions of the Sun 269.140 134.390 2392.665 597.115 2989.780
Dyna Hard 255.375 139.140 2396.135 526.215 2922.350
Dynablaster Bombermen 238.910 140.265 2297.190 548.155 2845.345
Tamworth Two 247.890 126.985 2388.085 419.890 2807.975
Here Comes The Brees 224.050 109.585 2258.885 422.400 2681.285
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 207.300 104.220 2008.795 535.495 2544.290
East Flanders Flahutes 206.280 123.100 2138.915 391.845 2530.760

Next up, the same again, but for offense only:

Max Score Min Score Regular Season Total Playoff Total Full Season Total
DynaForOne Firebirds 150.660 77.480 1435.300 411.500 1846.800
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 145.685 84.050 1405.580 329.570 1735.150
Dynasore Losers 162.430 57.670 1376.835 256.705 1633.540
Champions of the Sun 140.365 64.900 1248.565 292.240 1540.805
Dynablaster Bombermen 126.420 61.940 1177.490 277.380 1454.870
Dyna Hard 134.485 54.440 1214.635 239.715 1454.350
Tamworth Two 136.440 68.200 1188.360 253.450 1441.810
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 134.150 42.845 1035.420 297.420 1332.840
East Flanders Flahutes 120.380 51.050 1083.290 202.820 1286.110
Here Comes The Brees 106.920 51.280 1065.560 205.300 1270.860

Now defence:

Max Score Min Score Regular Season Total Playoff Total Full Season Total
Champions of the Sun 129.250 30.000 1012.150 250.450 1262.600
Dyna Hard 113.500 33.750 1006.150 236.350 1242.500
Dynablaster Bombermen 130.950 47.900 956.200 235.100 1191.300
Dynasore Losers 117.300 54.500 932.650 249.050 1181.700
Tamworth Two 111.300 27.000 1043.150 138.000 1181.150
Here Comes The Brees 124.450 39.850 996.850 173.100 1169.950
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 143.600 36.500 935.950 153.750 1089.700
DynaForOne Firebirds 126.550 26.750 808.350 252.500 1060.850
East Flanders Flahutes 94.250 32.250 871.300 170.100 1041.400
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 84.950 35.000 797.575 199.050 996.625

And finally special teams (punters and kickers only):

Max Score Min Score Regular Season Total Playoff Total Full Season Total
Here Comes The Brees 21.200 9.575 196.475 44.000 240.475
Dyna Hard 21.300 7.900 175.350 50.150 225.500
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 22.725 6.000 175.800 39.025 214.825
East Flanders Flahutes 20.475 1.650 184.325 18.925 203.250
Dynablaster Bombermen 18.225 4.700 163.500 35.675 199.175
DynaForOne Firebirds 18.025 4.000 154.150 44.325 198.475
Dynasore Losers 18.100 3.300 169.445 28.125 197.570
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 19.675 4.900 152.825 40.700 193.525
Champions of the Sun 19.975 3.950 131.950 54.425 186.375
Tamworth Two 18.400 6.940 156.575 28.440 185.015

I’ve not really got anything to say about that. I suppose the key thing is how Neil pulled out all the stops in the playoffs, destroying everything in his path.

What I find interesting, though, is the amount of variation from one week to the next. I mean, we know there’s a fair amount of variation in fantasy football, but only 3 teams had less than 100 points between their max and min scores during the 16 weeks. That seems massive.

So how do we rate consistency? I’m going to bastardise a method of statistical evaluation to try to provide a suitable indicator. What I’ve done is look at each team’s weekly score and take the difference between that and their average score. This number is then squared, which means that the higher the difference from the average, the number generated is exponentially higher.

Make sense? No? OK, an example – in week one DynaForOne scored 125.265 points. The season average was 194.133 so the difference is 68.868. 68.868 squared is 4742.78. That is a high consistency score because the weekly score was a long way from the average score.

Of course, consistency is not always bad. The same calculation for week 16 shows DynaForOne (DFO) have a consistency score of 8812.93. That week DFO scored the highest score of any team in any week of the season.

Funnily enough, these two performance, week 1 and week 16 for DFO, are the 1st and 6th least consistent performances of the season (ie with the greatest variation from the team’s weekly average). DFO also has the 7th least consistent score (week 4, another low score).

What I have done to rank the consistency is take the average of all the weeks consistency ratings and square root them. This gives us a number which probably has little meaning beyond “the lower the number the more consistent the team was over the season”.

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency Total Points
East Flanders Flahutes 2314.33 0.20 23.72 2530.76
Dynasore Losers 3251.78 0.85 24.84 3012.81
Dyna Hard 5289.38 0.03 26.60 2922.35
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 5466.62 4.62 28.26 3018.38
Dynablaster Bombermen 3730.27 14.30 29.90 2845.35
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 3002.83 5.39 30.79 2544.29
Here Comes The Brees 3363.46 2.58 30.99 2681.29
Tamworth Two 5240.54 1.90 34.64 2807.98
Champions of the Sun 6769.79 0.86 39.28 2989.78
DynaForOne Firebirds 8812.93 1.67 39.34 3106.13

So what’s the value in consistency? I have no idea. The top two most consistent teams are the least successful and the third most successful (by total points) so it’s difficult to say you do or don’t want to be consistent. The least consistent team won the league.

However, let’s look at DFO more closely. After week 4, DFO only scored below 190 points once. Those first 4 weeks really seemed to come from a different team. Let’s also ignore week 16, because that massive haul of 288 points was a real outlier. So, for weeks 5-15, how consistent was DFO?

For those 11 weeks, this is what those stats look like:

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency
DynaForOne Firebirds 1643.38 7.14 17.57

From least consistent to most.

I think the main thing is that if you score a lot of points, it’s really handy if you can do it consistently. Not that it helped Dyna Hard, of course.

So, given we’ve established that it’s pretty meaningless, it’s time to look at it in a bit more depth…

Offensive consistency!

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency Total Points
Here Comes The Brees 792.35 1.06 16.83 1270.86
East Flanders Flahutes 1599.85 0.25 17.07 1286.11
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 1386.68 2.18 17.70 1735.15
Champions of the Sun 1941.70 0.00 17.95 1540.81
Dynablaster Bombermen 1259.58 3.50 18.11 1454.87
Tamworth Two 2146.18 5.89 19.80 1441.81
DynaForOne Firebirds 1439.82 0.50 21.41 1846.8
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 2585.47 0.58 22.27 1332.84
Dyna Hard 1899.92 2.38 23.39 1454.35
Dynasore Losers 3640.16 0.08 29.59 1633.54

What I find interesting is that Dynasore Losers and Dyna Hard were 2nd and 3rd in overall consistency but are 9th and 10th in offensive consistency. We’ll look at defensive consistency in a moment, but this suggests (to me) that they will be low there too, and that the overall consistency may be down to chance (mismatching high and low offensive and defensive scoring).

As for DFO… for those 11 weeks, there again jumped to the top of the consistency rankings, though it’s not quite as clear cut…

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency
DynaForOne Firebirds 485.20 536.72 16.46

Now to defense!

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency Total Points
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 744.69 0.40 13.03 996.625
Dynasore Losers 1887.36 1.94 15.22 1181.7
East Flanders Flahutes 1078.30 14.16 19.78 1041.4
Here Comes The Brees 2634.58 3.53 21.45 1169.95
Tamworth Two 2192.29 0.10 21.95 1181.15
Dyna Hard 1927.76 3.63 22.42 1242.5
DynaForOne Firebirds 3629.69 4.19 22.93 1060.85
Dynablaster Bombermen 3191.54 1.67 22.95 1191.3
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 5699.31 1.94 24.15 1089.7
Champions of the Sun 2533.86 90.49 29.78 1262.6

I was wrong! Dynasore Losers had the second most consistent defence. Well done them. Dyna Hard were mid-table.

And DFO? Again, for those 11 weeks, they shot to the top of the charts…

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency
DynaForOne Firebirds 241.03 505.13 12.25

What’s that? Special teams? You want to look at special teams consistency? OK. It’s widely thought of as the most random of all areas, though because it’s only 2 players and not much scoring, the numbers should all be much lower. Let’s see what those numbers say…

Team Max Consistency Score Min Consistency Score Season (Root Ave) Consistency Total Points
Dynablaster Bombermen 60.04 0.03 3.24 199.175
Dynasore Losers 81.87 0.07 3.29 197.57
Dyna Hard 51.93 0.32 3.53 225.5
The 4th Dynmension: Dynasty of Sadness 86.46 0.00 3.60 214.825
Tamworth Two 46.74 0.13 3.70 185.015
DynaForOne Firebirds 70.64 0.91 3.71 198.475
Here Comes The Brees 38.07 0.94 4.12 240.475
Kelkowski Don’t Play By No Dyna Rules 57.45 1.45 4.58 193.525
Champions of the Sun 69.33 0.39 4.87 186.375
East Flanders Flahutes 122.17 0.01 5.07 203.25

I’m not looking at DFO for that 11 week period. It’s meaningless. MEANINGLESS I tell you.

Still, at least the Bombermen finished at the top of one of these…

Now, I promised you a look at scoring by position and high scoring players on the bench… those will follow in a a future post (or posts). This is enough to start with, isn’t it?

Proposed Scoring Changes for 2015

Mr Maxwell H Cubberley has contributed a suggestion for amendments to the scoring for the DynaBowl Fantasy Football Championships 2015 onwards. If you would care to read his words, they will follow shortly.

Now, in fact.

Binning the Big Plays: Proposed Scoring Changes for 2015

Big Plays

As anyone who has been on the receiving end of an 80 yard pick 6 or a double strip-sack game from a DE will likely tell you about (at length) the Dynabowl IDP game is currently dominated by big plays.    Each INT or FF is worth 10 points, each defensive TD is worth 6 points and all return yards on fumbles and interceptions are valued at 0.1 per 1 [NB – only INT yards are counted – ed].  The aforementioned 80 yard pick 6 currently nets your CB 24 points for that one play.  This is particularly painful as INTs are often quite random and not much to do with particularly good play from a CB or S.  Meanwhile, a strip-sack is worth 15 points (16 if you’re a DT) and that’s not including the possibility of your strip-sacker recovering it (3 more points) and returning it for a TD.  Somewhere lurking out there is a 34 point strip-sack, 100 yard fumble recovery TD.  Probably for JJ Watt.  I’m surprised he hasn’t done it already.

Bearing this in mind there have been several solutions proposed to try and even out some of the scoring.  Below are the proposed rule changes for 2015:

  1. The point return for INTs and FFs to be reduced from 10 to 6 for all players
  2. The points for INT and FF recovery yards to be reduced to the same as punt return yards (0.05 per 1 rather than 0.1 per 1)
  3. The points for passes defended (possibly a more accurate gauge of defensive backs’ skills) to be increased from 2 to 3 for CBs and Ss and 1 to 2 for everyone else.

Evening Out the Linebackers

Anyone who based their pre-draft rankings of LBs on those suggested by popular IDP sites might be slightly confused as to why their LB corps isn’t producing as expected.  This is because most IDP leagues are tackle-based, giving plenty of points for tackles and less for sacks, FFs and INTs.  Our league is a big play league, focussed on those game-changing moments and the players who make them.  For all that there seems to be too much of a disparity between middle linebackers (those players for whom tackling is their bread-and-butter) and outside linebackers (more of the edge rushers looking to hit the QB in the backfield).  With the tackle points as low as they are it’s difficult for all but the most elite MLBs to compete with their outside compatriots.

With that in mind, a second rule change has been proposed, to slightly increase the points scored by solo tackles.  The idea is not to swing the league from a big play league to a tackle-heavy league, but just to allow a few more MLBs to ease towards the top of the LB rankings and even the distribution out a little.  The proposed change is:

  1. Points for solo tackles (not assists) to be increased from 0.5 points per tackle to 0.75 points per tackle.

Over the course of a 100 solo tackle season (a very good but not outstanding season) that equates to 25 more points.

The Difference

To try and illustrate what difference this would make I’ve crunched it all into MFL and can present the difference as it would have pertained to the 2013 season.  I’ll compare both the new points system and the old points system to look for the difference.

Top 100 Breakdown

Here is a breakdown of the top 100 scorers in 2013 by position.  This should show how the points changes affect the make-up of the top bracket of scorers.

Position Top 100 Players – Old Points Top 100 Players – New Points
QB 26 26
RB 20 19
WR 21 20
TE 3 3
PK 0 0
PN 0 0
DT 4 4
DE 4 3
LB 16 20
CB 3 2
S 3 3

This indicates a very slight increase in the value of LBs (though 2 of the additional 4 were numbers 99 and 100 in the top 100).

To look at the IDP players in more detail, I’ll breakdown just the top 100 defensive players.

Position Top 100 IDPs – Old Points Top 100 IDPs – New Points
DT 11 10
DE 18 16
LB 38 39
CB 17 21
S 16 14

Again, the changes seem fairly minimal in terms of the split amongst the positions.  Going deeper, CBs receive a bit of a boost and Ss a small hit (presumably due to a higher number of pass defence opportunities than Ss) but the broad make up is the same.

The indication is that these changes don’t make a huge difference to the proportional make-up of the overall top 100 and the IDP top 100.  They shouldn’t cause one position to become more valuable going forward than it was at the draft.

Specific Player Value

There are still two checks to make.  The first is specific player value.  Sure, maybe CBs as a whole aren’t more valuable but what if the top 10 CBs under the new points are 10 completely different players?  What if the #1 DT is now the #10?  Below is the top 10 at each defensive position under the new points and the old.  Their position in the opposite points scoring system is also included for reference.

Defensive Tackle Position – Old Pts Position – New Pts Shift
Kyle Williams, BUF 1 (204.5) 1 (212) = (+7.5)
Gerald McCoy, TBB 2 (180.25) 2 (193.6) = (+13.35)
Nick Fairley, DET 3 (172) 3 (171.2) = (-0.8)
Ndamukong Suh, DET 4 (152) 4 (163) = (+11)
Marcell Dareus, BUF 5 (134) 5 (144.25) = (+10.25)
Cullen Jenkins, NYG 6 (122) 10 (120.25) -4 (-1.75)
Sen’Derrick Marks, JAX 7 (118.25) 6 (126) +1 (+7.75)
Jared Odrick, MIA 7 (118.25) 7 (124.75) = (+6.5)
Clinton McDonald, SEA 9 (115.8) 11 (118.4) -2 (+2.6)
Michael Brockers, STL 10 (115) 9 (120.5) +1 (+5.5)
Kendall Langford, STL 12 (109.25) 8 (122.25) +4 (+13)

No huge changes here which would be expected as DTs don’t have as many FFs as LBs and DEs and rarely catch INTs.  Any loss of points from FFs seems to have been compensated for with the tackle bump with most coming out a few points better over the course of the season.  Although Cullen Jenkins drops 4 places in the ranks he actually only ends up 1.75 points down under the new points.

Defensive End Position – Old Pts Position – New Pts Shift
Robert Quinn, STL 1 (250.75) 1 (237.9) = (-12.85)
JJ Watt, HOU 2 (191.75) 2 (199) = (+7.25)
Justin Tuck, NYG 3 (145) 4 (147.15) -1 (+2.15)
Greg Hardy, CAR 4 (144.5) 3 (151.25) +1 (+6.75)
Muhammed Wilkerson, NYJ 5 (138.85) 8 (140.3) -3 (+1.45)
Cameron Jordan, NOS 6 (138) 7 (142.55) -1 (+4.55)
Chandler Jones, NEP 7 (137.25) 6 (143.25) +1 (+6)
Calais Campbell, ARI 8 (133.5) 5 (146.85) +3 (+13.35)
Carlos Dunlap, CIN 9 (132.75) 10 (134.6) -1 (+1.85)
Jared Allen, MIN 10 (130.75) 9 (137) +1 (+6.25)

Like DT, DE doesn’t show too many major shifts here.  The same 10 players make up the top 10 under both the new and the old systems and although there is some shuffling of positions (Wilkerson and Campbell particularly) the actual season ending point totals don’t shift drastically with most seeing an increase of 1 to 7 and only sack-machine Robert Quinn seeing a reduction.

Because we all start 3 or 4 LBs I’ll compare the top 20 at this position.  I’ve also noted (where I can) when the player is an MLB or an OLB (we should be looking for MLBs to move up the rankings in the new points).

Linebacker Position – Old Pts Position – New Pts Shift
Robert Mathis, IND – OLB 1 (242) 3 (221.75) -2 (-20.25)
Lavonte David, TBB – MLB 2 (232.95) 1 (235.85) +1 (+1.9)
Karlos Dansby, ARI – MLB 3 (199.05) 2 (223.65) +1 (+24.6)
Navorro Bowman, SF – MLB 4 (198.55) 4 (208.4) = (+9.85)
Jerell Freeman, IND – MLB 5 (185.05) 5 (180.35) = (-4.7)
Alec Ogletree, STL – OLB 6 (173.55) 8 (173.4) -2 (-0.15)
Tamba Hali, KCC – OLB 7 (167.75) 12 (158.3) -5 (-9.45)
Daryl Smith, BAL – MLB 8 (165.1) 6 (176.3) +2 (+11.2)
Kiko Alonso, BUF – MLB 9 (158.3) 10 (163.8) -1 (+5.5)
John Abraham, ARI – OLB 10 (155.5) 18 (150.25) -8 (-5.25)
DeAndre Levy, DET – MLB 11 (155.1) 11 (163.55) = (+8.45)
Paul Posluszny, JAX – MLB 12 (152.4) 7 (176.2) +5 (+23.8)
Mychal Kendricks, PHI – MLB 13 (152.25) 13 (156.55) = (+4.3)
Danny Trevathan, DEN – MLB 14 (149.9) 15 (155.45) -1 (+5.55)
Vontaze Burfict, CIN – MLB 15 (144.95) 9 (173.25) +6 (+23.3)
Nick Roach, OAK – OLB 16 (144.75) 20 (148.25) -4 (+3.5)
Ryan Kerrigan, WAS – OLB 17 (143.75) 22 (142.5) -5 (-1.25)
Luke Kuechly, CAR – MLB 18 (142.55) 16 (155.15) +2 (+12.6)
Brian Orakpo, WAS – OLB 19 (136.65) 21 (145.95) -2 (+9.3)
Thomas Davis, CAR – OLB 20 (136) 17 (153.15) +3 (+17.15)
Derrick Johnson, KCC – MLB 21 (134.4) 14 (155.5) +7 (+21.1)
DeMeco Ryans, PHI – MLB 25 (126.85) 19 (149.05) +6 (+22.2)

The change to the points can clearly be seen here with OLBs that rack up pressures and FFs (e.g. Mathis, Hali, Abraham) taking a hit and prime tacklers (e.g. Posluszny, Dansby, Burfict) getting a significant boost.  Although this was the desired effect the fact that, even in the old system, 12 of the top 20 LBs were MLBs already does seem to call into question the need for this change.  The 2014 stats paint a picture of a system that heavily favours OLBs but that could be a result of the number of injuries to or change in situations of big scoring MLBs.

I’ll show the CB and S tables back to back as I would expect both to be affected similarly by this change.

Corner Back Position – Old Pts Position – New Pts Shift
Brandon Boykin, PHI 1 (159.475) 3 (147.675) -2 (-11.8)
DeAngelo Hall, WAS 2 (157.65) 1 (158.2) +1 (+1.55)
Richard Sherman, SEA 3 (151.95) 5 (139.2) -2 (-12.75)
Alterraun Verner, TEN 4 (142.275) 2 (154.575) +2 (+12.3)
Tim Jennings, CHI 5 (138.1) 8 (133.55) -3 (-4.55)
Tramon Williams, GBP 6 (135.5) 4 (141.25) +2 (+5.75)
Captain Munnerlyn, CAR 7 (130.85) 6 (138.55) +1 (+7.7)
Corey Graham, BUF 8 (121.55) 14 (124.9) -6 (+3.35)
Logan Ryan, NEP 9 (119.7) 32 (108.85) -23 (-10.85)
Adam Jones, CIN 10 (118.9) 12 (126.8) -2 (+7.9)
Lardarius Webb, BAL 19 (106.8) 7 (136.6) +12 (+29.8)
Leodis McKelvin, BUF 26 (101.6) 9 (128.35) +17 (+26.75)
Joe Haden, CLE 12 (115.95) 10 (127.85) +2 (+11.9)
Safety Position – Old Pts Position – New Pts Shift
Eric Berry, KCC 1 (165.65) 1 (170.65) = (+5)
Troy Polamalu, PIT 2 (161.35) 3 (155.05) -1 (-6.3)
Antrel Rolle, NYG 3 (160.8) 2 (163) +1 (+2.2)
Michael Mitchell, CAR 4 (141.55) 9 (135.9) -5 (-5.65)
William Moore, ATL 5 (139.35) 7 (138.05) -2 (+1.3)
Tashaun Gipson, CLE 6 (137.55) 6 (138.15) = (+0.6)
Earl Thomas, SEA 7 (130.85) 11 (128.95) -4 (-1.9)
TJ Ward. CLE 8 (126.95) 4 (144.4) +4 (+17.45)
Barry Church, DAL 9 (126.5) 5 (144.1) +4 (+17.6)
James Ihedigbo, BAL 10 (123.15) 10 (130.7) = (+7.55)
Eric Weddle, SDC 12 (118.75) 8 (136.55) +4 (+17.8)

As you can see the changes are much more impactful on the CB position than the S position.  At CB there are big positive swings for the likes of Webb (2 INT, 23 passes defended) and McKelvin (1 INT and 20 PD) and big negative swings for such as Sherman (8 INT and 6 PD) and Ryan (5 INT and 10 PD).  This is what you’d expect from the rules.  It’s also worth noting that although Logan Ryan lost 23 ranks, he actually only scored 10.85 points less under the new points.  In general, the points seem to bunch CBs a bit more towards the top which I think reflects the reduced wild-card factor of INTs over steady pass defending.

It is worth mentioning, at this point, that CB is an incredibly volatile position from year-to-year anyway.  None of last year’s top 10 CBs are in this year’s current top 10 CBs.  In fact, only Adam Jones and Alterraun Verner are even in this year’s top 32 CBs.

Oddly, at Safety the changes are nowhere near as large.  Possibly this is a result of Safeties having more all-round play capability or maybe it’s a reflection of the fact that Safety interceptions are more skill-based.  At any rate, there are a few changes, notably bumps for TJ Ward and Barry Church (both had a notably higher number of solo tackles than those around them), but nothing too major.

Summary of Findings

It’s noticeable, looking through the week-by-week performances of players, that these changes, overall, raise the floor and lower the ceiling of IDP production.  What was a 40 point game is often now a 30 point game and what was a 3 point game is now a 5 point game.  The average points per game and total season points, in general, trends slightly upwards with the bottom-end of players brought a bit closer to the top-end whilst still keeping elite levels of performance for top players.

Some players whose games are built around big plays have taken something of a hit but, in most cases, this is not hugely significant and shows more in comparative score rankings than in actual point production.  The reduction of big plays and increase in passes defended seems to have had the desired effect, reducing scoring ceilings but not overall scores and not reducing the CB and S points-scoring.  Although the big changes at CB look scary, as mentioned above, the position tends to turn over a lot from year-to-year anyway.  If anything, these new changes may make the position more reliable as tackle numbers and pass defence numbers are more consistent year to year than INTs and FFs.

The question of the increase in points for tackles is hazier.  The proportion of MLBs and OLBs in the top ranks of the position could be a natural seasonal fluctuation.  It doesn’t make a massive difference to the overall points-scoring at the LB position (with only the same small upward trend seen in every position).  The new system produces a better balance between very steady LBs with big tackle production and those who get sacks, FFs and INTs.  In the current system, a player has to make 10 solo tackles to score the equivalent of a sack.  In the new system they have to make 7.  The latter seems more in line to me with what one would consider a ‘good game’ but everyone can make their own mind up.

If you want me to produce more information to look at this just ask.

Replacement Level: Week 9

So this week, Chris Braithwaite, GM of the Dyna Hards, has taken on the baton of The Replacements, and a bang up job he’s done too. Except for not having scored David’s efforts from week 7. Of course, you could lay that all on Neil Hawke of the DynaForOne Firebirds who failed to produce anything for week 8. But hey, Chris is here now, so let’s blame him eh? Anyway… on with Chris’ Replacements…

Player Projection
QB Mike Glennon 14.560
HB Donald Brown 3.925
HB Roy Helu 6.000
WR Stevie Johnson 4.200
WR Jarius Wright 4.200
WR Jacoby Jones 3.375
WR Philly Brown 3.200
TE Chase Ford 3.425
TE Jacob Tamme 1.400
K Cairo Santos 7.400
P Brad Wing 0
DT Ian Williams 0.500
DE Ray McDonald 1
DE Jason Hatcher 1
LB Perry Riley 2.5
LB Bruce Irvin 1.5
LB Jabaal Sheard 0.5
LB Vincent Rey 2
CB Adam Jones 5.575
CB Sean Smith 3.550
S Dashon Goldson 2
S Husain Abdullah 4.025
Total 75.835

 

QB

The options are Mike Glennon or no one. Hey Lovie, now I know how you feel. Honestly, what I’d give for Kyle Orton or something.

 

RB

Donald Brown has a chance to be sneaky effective as the steady veteran hand behind Branden Oliver, so he could grab a bit of yardage on receptions and as a change of pace (that change being down to “no pace”.)

 

Roy Helu has been good for about 40 to 50 yards a game combined for most of the season, and there’s always a chance for a TD I guess, so he’s option 2. The Vikings D is mediocre against the run and terrible defending passes to RBs, so he might be able to break a couple of mediocre plays.

 

I’d normally play 3 RBs, but honestly there are absolutely no other options.

 

WR

Alas, pickings are still fairly slim at WR. Stevie Johnson is a must play. Washington has been pretty dreadful against the pass most weeks, so Jarius Wright is a potentially good play, so he can slot in. Football Outsiders reckons that Pittsburgh have been pretty dreadful against #3 WRs, so Jacoby Jones might be able to take advantage there. Maybe it’ll be another shootout. And for my number 4, I fancy a girl called Philly, so I’m taking Philly Brown of the Panthers. Look, that can’t be any worse logic than any of the other picks.

 

TE

The pickings at RB are so ridiculously slim I have to drop down to TEs and hope for some short TDs. Let’s go back to the “Washington sucks” well (it is a deep well) and grab Chase Ford of the Vikings as my #1 guy, despite his injury. He looks like the only chap with a chance at being actually useful, so the other guy is gonna have to be a hope for a 1 catch, 1 yard, 1 TD line. That is Jacob Tamme’s career, so yep, that’s happening.

 

K

Cairo Santos. Look, he’s Brazilian, his name is a capital city and he’s playing the Jets at home. Lets not overthink this.

 

P

Where MFL doesn’t even bother to make projections. My rule has always been “pick the guy with the worst offence against the best defence”, hence Dyna Hard’s roster having the punters for the Jags and Raiders. Which takes my two best options away here. The best option seems to be to hope that the Steelers used up most of their aerial attack last week, with the only person capable of doing anything in the air being P Brad Wing. Yep, a pun will work.

 

DT

The Rams OL managed to lose Scott Wells, Rodger Saffold and Jake Long to injury, moving Greg Robinson to LT. So its now weaker at 4 positions, and gave up a tonne of sacks last week anyway. Williams should be able to get a tackle for loss or two at a minimum.

 

DE

The logic above also holds for Ray McDonald of the 49ers. The Vikings OL isn’t great shakes either, and Jason Hatcher isn’t a bad bet to grab a sack.

 

LB

A theme is likely to emerge on this defence: some teams suck, lets hope they suck towards specific players. The Vikings aren’t very good, so Perry Riley isn’t a bad start. Bruce Irvin grabbed a couple of sacks against the Panthers last week on consecutive plays, and he gets to play against the Raiders this week. He should be able to grab one. The Bucs aren’t great, and Jabaal Sheard is due a sack or two, so maybe this is his week. And Vinny Rey is good for a big play every few weeks and gets to play the Jags, so a Bortles pick or fumble or whatever seems to be decent odds.

 

CB

1: Highlight “Bortles pick or fumble or whatever seems to be decent odds.” 2: CTRL+C. 3: CTRL+V. 4: Type Adam Jones. It’s extremely tempting to double down and pick one of Terence Newman or Leon Hall, but for the sake of variety lets remember that the Jets are playing and Sean Smith exists. He might have a decent chance at a pick if the Jets have a QB who can throw it close enough to him.

 

S

I have heard of Dashon Goldson and the Brian Hoyer train is slowly falling off the tracks, so he might have a chance to do something or other quite decent. Beyond that, safety options are very limited. And just in case Vick’s passes don’t get close enough to Sean Smith, lets give Husain Abdullah the chance to grab one or two.