Fantasy Football Analysis 2017
Fantasy Football Rankings. Dynasty and Redraft League Information
Computational Methods for Fantasy Football Analysis.
Winning at Fantasy Football. Fantasy Football Sleepers.
Hot Fantasy Football Rankings.
PHD Level Data Analysis with a commonsense viewpoint.
Subscribe to this blog
Follow by Email
2016 ADP (180th ADP or Less) Sept 2016 vs End of Season Fantasy Points Scored
I analyzed the relationship of the QB, RB, TE, and WR players
ranked by their pre-season ADP (PS-ADP to about the 180th player
number – total position except DEF and K) and their end-of-season long PPR
points scored (ES PPR) to determine how strong the finish was for each position
PS-ADP vs. the ES-PPR. The first figure of this data of the PS-ADP vs. ES-PPR from the years 2016 is
presented in Figure 36.
The first quest was to determine what was the differences in the
players on an ADP draft list 180th or less or players greater than a
180th ADP level. (ADP 2016 and
earlier historical data is available free at several websites, I randomly picked
one and used it through the chapter)
In Figure 36 in the top table, each position is listed,
grouped into players at the EOS, and the average of their PF calculated. The
EOS PF data was normalized on a scale of 0 to 100.
The QB position showed that
QBs on the PS ADP list in 2016 averaged a EOS PF of 54.2 while those not
drafted in Sept had an average of 34.3. The overall EOS PF was 47.1. The scaled
column took the PF scoring average and subtracted the grand average of 47.1,
Those QBs drafted in the PS were on average 7.1 above positional average and
those QB not drafted in PS were -12.8 below the EOS positional average.
go through the other positions as well.
Looking into the scaled numbers of each position, certain
conclusions can be drawn from the 2016 data and figure 36 top and bottom.
1)As an average, the RB players not drafted as
shown by the ADP PS list did not do very well in the EOS PF. The RB ADP Yes vs. NO calculation shown in the
bottom of the figure and was 2.4. That means that RBs which were in the top 180 or less of all position ADP 2016 did 2.4 times better vs. the RBs not within the 180 ADP
2016 List. Few surprise bargains. When
in doubt do not draft an unranked (>180 ish ADP) RB player.
2)In 2016, the QB, TE and WR positions were very
similar in +-180 ADP range. TE Yes vs No were at 1.9 as much, WR were 1.7 as much
and QB was 1.6 times as much. So more bargains to be had at >180 ADP QBs than all
3) High ADP WRs were also a source of bargains. The TEs were
better than RBs but not as good as WR/QB. This suggest on average looking for a
deep sleeper will be ordered from Best to Worst. QB>WR>>TE>>RBs.
You have better chances at finding surprises in QB and WR! Remember on Draft day in the Summer!
These data tables will give a look at the current MFL10 ADP and Risk .
I wrote about using my MFL 10 data in a post last year.
See this link MFL Data Past Post Read Me
The Next 6 Charts show QB, RB, TE and WR Data from the current MFL10 ADPs see Pos Num = ADP of the Player within their position ADP Num = ADP within all 150 Players looked at Player, Team, and Position. Scaled Public Ranking from 100 to 0 (Best - Green and Worst -Red) Very Early Risk Number (My Risk Analysis from 0 no Risk to 100 Highest Risk). I try to incorporate, elements for the player and team. I will fold in SOS and injury history data later
A landscape view of the current MFL10 ADPs by position. Red circle marks the end of the 12th TE or QBRed Arrows mark the RBs rounds of 12Yellow Arrows mark the WR rounds of 12The first 12 TEs are off the board on average in round 10 The first 12 QBs are drafted on average by round 10 as well.The first 12 RBs at round 3, next 12 at round 6 and next 12 RBs by round 9.The f…
Working my Chapter X1 Data in my Textbook on Drafting. Shooting for the 2017 First Edition in May on Amazon. Drafting Textbook Data Figures.
In these tables, I looked at the Running Backs and their 2016 Passing Targets and Rushing Attempts.
I calculated a Scaled Scoring System for 0 to 100 and assigned the players their numbers of Rushing vs Passing.
I also calculated a Rushing to Passing Ratio Stat and assigned each player an R/P number
Finally, all of the 2016 active Running Backs were sorted by their R/P number and their biases determined.
Passing Biased - RBs that had a Passing Score higher than their Rushing Score.
Rushing Biased - RBs that had a Rushing Score Higher than their Passing Score
Balanced - RBs whose 2 Scores were close to each other.
6/2/16 RB Report, Current Predicted Role in the Team, Risk Analysis, Sleepers vs Anti-Sleepers, and My RB Ranks vs the Public
Table 1__Player_Team_Risk (Green Low vs Red is High Risk),
My Rankings Scaled to the Average, The Current Public Ranks Scaled to the Average,
Sleeper (Green) Anti-Sleeper (Red) About Rights (Non-Color)
Team View with the Current RB Role Defined with Risk Analysis and Public's Ranks (Grand Total).
Roles are Clear RB1, Clear RB2, Clear RB3, RB1/2 (Team Fight for Top), RB2/3 (Team Fight for Second Spot), RB 3/4 (Team Fight for Third Spot)
RBs Grouped by Role Defined
RBs Defined by Role and RB Tiers (RB1 , RB 2 ...RB6th) With Risk and Public Ranks. Chart Below each GroupVisualize the Risk and Public's Thoughts Currently.
Current Sleepers and Anti-Sleepers 6/3/16
==================================== Updated 2nd Edition with Current Ranking 6/2016 data (I added 145 pages of new goodness)My Textbook for Winning Fantasy Football Drafting is now for Sale on Kindle.