There's a great article about Fantasy Football and the beginning of "the madness."

The game is part hobby, part office pool, part "I can't believe Hal in accounting's girlfriend beat me this week!"

Think Dungeons & Dragons on Miller Lite.

Link

I don't know about all that, but I do know that I love fantasy football.

I'm somewhat of a fantasy success story; two years ago, I had zero interest or knowledge in NFL when a co-worker invited me into his pool. I was reluctant, until he mentioned that there was money and math involved. I ended up coming second that year.

If you've never tried fantasy football, I strongly recommend it. It requires a fair amount of research and analysis into the numbers and stats, but really very little fundamental knowledge of NFL. And it somehow manages to be incredibly fun if you're into things involving numbers, odds, money and trash-talking. I suspect most people who read this site fit into that category.

For those of you who do know something about fantasy football, one of my leagues had our draft tonight. I was in position #1 of 10 teams, and I've gotten a little bit of flack for my third pick - the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (after LaDainian Tomlinson and Stephen Davis).

I actually think it was one of the best picks I made all draft, and here's why.

I drafted the Bucs in 21st position. ESPN's draft results shows that the Bucs have averaged 47th position. I felt 47th was outrageously low for the Bucs, and that they were bound to go before that -- backed up by the fact that the Eagles ended up going 30th. My next draft pick was not until 40th position.

The Bucs' stats are significantly above the other defenses. In fantasy, having "bonus points" in any roster spot is how you win. I estimate that the Bucs will have 15-40 points on the Dolphins and Eagles, and 50+ points on the rest of the field. That's better separation than exists in any other position: better than I expect LaDainian Tomlinson to have over the 4th-rated RB, Marvin Harrison over the 4th-rated WR, McNabb over the 4th-rated QB, and so on.

Data point: last year in my league the Bucs (#1 D) had 49 points more than the Eagles (#2 D). There's only one #1/#2 matchup that beat that: Priest Holmes' superhuman 70 points over Ricky Williams. But look at the other 2002 leaders: Gannon's 27 points over Culpepper, Harrison's 15 points over T.O., Heap's 11 points over Gonzalez, Feely's 5 points over Akers and hopefully you start to see the value of the Bucs when it comes to getting points into slots on your team.

The Bucs are a banner defense. Now let's look at who I could have picked up in 21st position instead of the Bucs, and a reasonable substitute who ended up going in 40th place or lower in my draft.

QB: Rich Gannon. Projected: 337. Substitute from 40th+: Aaron Brooks (43rd), projected: 302. Differential: 35.

RB: Tiki Barber, Corey Dillon, Fred Taylor. My average projection: 232. Substitute from 40th or lower: Trung Canidate (48th), projected: 173. Differential: 49. Bear in mind I already had 2 RB's at this point, so even if this was a massive difference it's unlikely I would have gone for it.

WR: Eric Moulds. Projected: 192. Substitute from 40th+: Chad Johnson (42nd), Laveraneus Coles (40th), average projected: 171. Differential: 21.

TE: Jeremy Shockey. Projected: 109. Substitute from 40th+: Tony Gonzalez (41st), projected: 106. Differential: 3.

So compared to these, the Bucs looked like:

DT: Bucs. Projected: 285. I predicted that both the Eagles and Dolphins would go within 20 picks of the Bucs, leaving a substitute of Carolina or Baltimore, average projected: 232. Differential: 53.

As it turned out, the Dolphins were still available at the 40th pick -- which I think was a mistake on the part of my fellow owners, given the separation that the Dolphins' D should show above the rest of the remaining pack (I estimate 20-30 points). Had I known for sure that the Dolphins were going to go that late, I would have picked up a QB or a WR, but when that type of value is on the table you can't let it pass. I still think it was one of the best draft moves I made.

I think you over value defense. I think you'd be suprised if you went back and compared the preseason defensive rankings to the postseason rankings from year's past. It's a position that can flucuate greatly, especially depending on the opponents faced that year. Besides, the Eagles are the best defense :-)

I've always believed that depth at your skill positions will benefit you more in the long run than taking a defense early. In my ESPN draft tonight, the first defense went 51st. I think you may have been able to get Tampa at your next pick, and gotten much better value at 21.

I'll be blogging about my multiple draft results soon. :-)

Posted by: CJ on August 28, 2003 01:50 AM

I tried the differential method a couple years ago and it bit me in the ass. It works great if everyone else in your league plays along, but if you draft a DT in round 3 and nobody else gets ones until the much later rounds no amount of differential is going to make up for you wasting a pick in round 3.

I posted my draft from last weekend on Monday. I got Vick in round 6, that's value.

Posted by: Jim on August 28, 2003 09:54 AM

We'll see what happens. One of my buddies just told me that in both of his leagues the Bucs went in the third round also. I still like the pick because I'm sure the Bucs would not have been available at my next pick, and the difference I hope to gain from them will be decisive if they come through.

CJ -- I understand what you're saying, but I think you're under-ranking D's. I need to look at the stats, but I suspect that preseason-postseason differentials in the top N defenses will actually be less than differentials in the top N RB's.

Greater than the Bucs, though, I am extremely happy with my draft. Analyzing all the starting lineups, I like mine the best, and I have over 100 projected total points on the next team; after my team all teams with the exception of two have less than 20 points separating them.

Of course my analysis is based on my cheat sheets and projections, so generally such an analysis will be self-favoring, but in the past I've never had a team that according to my projections was so much better than the field. Last year, my analysis had my lineup as over 100 points inferior to the best team, who ended up having an amazing start until Faulk went down.

I'm going to post my draft methodology some time soon, because I think it is a sound system that I've not seen touted around the place.

Posted by: jeremy on August 28, 2003 11:26 AM

See my entry from last night for follow-up analysis.

Posted by: jeremy on August 29, 2003 01:43 PM

with all due respect, i treat DEF almost on par with K--and occasionally TEs. picking any one 3rd round is unconscionable to me.

i would have picked up ANOTHER RB. why, with your already 2 stud backs? because RBs have trade value like no other position. you could have had corey dillon , fred taylor, etc. trust me, by week 3, you'll have other owners bugging you already for a trade.

for TE, i'd opt for todd heap or kellen winslow after shockey and TGonz are taken.
for DEF, i'd just take one in the last 3 rounds. IND may be a sleeper.
for QB, i'd wait until the 7th+ and pick up either Trent Green , Hasselback, or Pennington.
i personally think WRs are a dime a dozen, better off picking them after round 4. plus, if you find you need a stud WR by midseason, you can always trade one of your stuf RBs for probably a stud AND midlevel WR.

an interesting philosophy is contrarian: avoid RBs since everyone is going for one like mad. instead you can pick primo WRs , TEs and QBs instead and hope to get lucky or limp by with average RBs--or steal some injury 'luck' by tabbing a few backup RBs to stud RBs. i've seen this risky philosophy work. a longshot i've heard quite a bit about is taking a shot at Ricky WIlliams, hoping he'd come back. interesting, but not sure where to value such a longshot, maybe even 10th?

bon chance!

pete

Posted by: Pete on August 24, 2004 02:42 AM

First -- just please note that the above article is about the 2003 season, just so you know. My only real rebuttal to your comments is my record -- in my highly competitive, big-money league, this draft strategy yielded a team which came second, and first in the "breakdown" standings (which IMO are the best representation of team power). I also came second in total points scored, but as a measure of how relatively meaningless that stat is, the team who came 1st in points scored ended the season in 6th place (out of 10)!

By the same token, though, the guy who won it all (and came second in breakdown third in points scored, and tied 2-4 in record), followed a more traditional draft strategy.

Posted by: jeremy on August 24, 2004 10:41 PM

i am an idiot and i am lead by richard simmons

Posted by: idiot on January 5, 2006 08:41 PM

i am an idiot and i am lead by richard simmons

Posted by: idiot on January 5, 2006 08:57 PM