A couple weeks ago I posted a column on positional scoring gaps:
www.fantasyfootballforwinners.com/2018/07/how-to-make-sense-of-league-scoring.html
I believe so much in applying positional scoring gaps in draft prep, that I want to take a couple minutes to reinforce -- especially through visuals -- why this is critically important. Not a fan of hyperbole. Most of what can be known about fantasy football has long been known. But this is one of the most valuable draft tools in my toolbox.
I pulled data on the top 15 fantasy scorers for each main position (QB, RB, WR, TE, K, DST) for each of the past five seasons. As shared a couple weeks ago, the overarching takeaway is that, based on "normal" PPR scoring (default ESPN settings), the points gap between the #1 QB and #5 QB is greater than the gap between the #5 and #10 QB, as well as the #10 and #15 QB. The same is true for the other five positions, to varying degrees.
So we care about two things here. (1) Elite positional players are exponentially more valuable to a fantasy team than lesser talent, and (2) varying positional gaps demonstrate that elite players at some positions are more valuable than elite players at other positions.
How do we apply this on draft day? Any number of ways. Over the past five years, the gap between the #1 and #5 best player at each of the six positions is 52 points. That average scoring gap drops to 29 points when evaluating #5-thru-#10 positional players, and only 19 points for #10-thru-#15 positional players. So if you draft an RB who finishes the season at #1, recent history shows you've earned the biggest scoring advantage possible (99 points) when considering all 1-thru-5 positional players. Similarly, the #5 RB has averaged more points over the #10 RB (51) than any other position's 5-thru-10. But #1 QBs average 79 more points than the #5 QB.
So -- and this is the critical part -- if you miss out on the top RBs in the first round, you'll earn a greater weekly scoring advantage picking the #1 QB than, say, the #8 RB . . . or even the #1 WR, who on average scores only 48 more points than the #5 WR.
Of course, in most leagues QBs aren't going off the board until the third round or later. So you should be able to get away with snagging, say, two top-5 WRs in the late first and early second rounds. But understand elite WR advantages pale in comparison to elite QB advantages. If you time it wrong and miss out on a top-2 QB, you'll score (assuming everything plays out as expected) less than if you'd gone elite-WR / elite-QB in the first two rounds.
A couple other interesting applications of the data:
-- The gap between the #1 and #5 TE is greater than the gap between the #5 and #10 WR. That doesn't necessarily mean we draft Travis Kelce or Gronk over someone like A.J. Green, especially if you're in a league where the best TEs aren't going that early. But last year Kelce and Gronk both outscored Green, meaning having one of those elite TEs not only would have given you more points, but also a bigger positional scoring advantage.
-- The gap between the #1 and #5 DST is modest, while the gap between the #1 and #5 kicker is mostly negligible. That said, you're better off drafting the Jags DST than settling for a top 10-15 QB like Philip Rivers -- or even (yes, look at the numbers) an RB2 like Alex Collins. Just like above, you should be able to wait on DST like most other people. But if you time it wrong, know that losing out on the #1 DST is far more costly than losing out on a top 11-15 QB. Many will argue that DSTs should be streamed regardless. I would say that, yes, most DSTs are match-up based. But so are most QBs outside the top 6-8. Better to have the #1 DST you can start most weeks than a back-end QB1 with a minimal competitive advantage.
This is just scratching the surface. A deeper dive into this data -- and examining additional numbers beyond the top 15 positional players -- can help prepare us for draft day in a way that straight-up rankings can't. Understanding positional gaps means in each round you'll know precisely which player -- if he performs as expected -- will give you the greatest positional advantage over all remaining players.
Later this month I'll share some final thoughts on this highly undervalued topic.
www.fantasyfootballforwinners.com/2018/07/how-to-make-sense-of-league-scoring.html
I believe so much in applying positional scoring gaps in draft prep, that I want to take a couple minutes to reinforce -- especially through visuals -- why this is critically important. Not a fan of hyperbole. Most of what can be known about fantasy football has long been known. But this is one of the most valuable draft tools in my toolbox.
I pulled data on the top 15 fantasy scorers for each main position (QB, RB, WR, TE, K, DST) for each of the past five seasons. As shared a couple weeks ago, the overarching takeaway is that, based on "normal" PPR scoring (default ESPN settings), the points gap between the #1 QB and #5 QB is greater than the gap between the #5 and #10 QB, as well as the #10 and #15 QB. The same is true for the other five positions, to varying degrees.
So we care about two things here. (1) Elite positional players are exponentially more valuable to a fantasy team than lesser talent, and (2) varying positional gaps demonstrate that elite players at some positions are more valuable than elite players at other positions.
How do we apply this on draft day? Any number of ways. Over the past five years, the gap between the #1 and #5 best player at each of the six positions is 52 points. That average scoring gap drops to 29 points when evaluating #5-thru-#10 positional players, and only 19 points for #10-thru-#15 positional players. So if you draft an RB who finishes the season at #1, recent history shows you've earned the biggest scoring advantage possible (99 points) when considering all 1-thru-5 positional players. Similarly, the #5 RB has averaged more points over the #10 RB (51) than any other position's 5-thru-10. But #1 QBs average 79 more points than the #5 QB.
So -- and this is the critical part -- if you miss out on the top RBs in the first round, you'll earn a greater weekly scoring advantage picking the #1 QB than, say, the #8 RB . . . or even the #1 WR, who on average scores only 48 more points than the #5 WR.
Of course, in most leagues QBs aren't going off the board until the third round or later. So you should be able to get away with snagging, say, two top-5 WRs in the late first and early second rounds. But understand elite WR advantages pale in comparison to elite QB advantages. If you time it wrong and miss out on a top-2 QB, you'll score (assuming everything plays out as expected) less than if you'd gone elite-WR / elite-QB in the first two rounds.
A couple other interesting applications of the data:
-- The gap between the #1 and #5 TE is greater than the gap between the #5 and #10 WR. That doesn't necessarily mean we draft Travis Kelce or Gronk over someone like A.J. Green, especially if you're in a league where the best TEs aren't going that early. But last year Kelce and Gronk both outscored Green, meaning having one of those elite TEs not only would have given you more points, but also a bigger positional scoring advantage.
-- The gap between the #1 and #5 DST is modest, while the gap between the #1 and #5 kicker is mostly negligible. That said, you're better off drafting the Jags DST than settling for a top 10-15 QB like Philip Rivers -- or even (yes, look at the numbers) an RB2 like Alex Collins. Just like above, you should be able to wait on DST like most other people. But if you time it wrong, know that losing out on the #1 DST is far more costly than losing out on a top 11-15 QB. Many will argue that DSTs should be streamed regardless. I would say that, yes, most DSTs are match-up based. But so are most QBs outside the top 6-8. Better to have the #1 DST you can start most weeks than a back-end QB1 with a minimal competitive advantage.
This is just scratching the surface. A deeper dive into this data -- and examining additional numbers beyond the top 15 positional players -- can help prepare us for draft day in a way that straight-up rankings can't. Understanding positional gaps means in each round you'll know precisely which player -- if he performs as expected -- will give you the greatest positional advantage over all remaining players.
Later this month I'll share some final thoughts on this highly undervalued topic.
