Ian Allan's Mailbag
Posted Jul. 18 at 01:33 PM
Publisher Ian Allan fields your questions on strategy, how to run your league, player ratings -- and whatever else you think of. Updated every Friday during the season; Tuesdays and Fridays during the last two months of the preseason. You must be registered and signed-in to submit a mailbag question. After you sign in at the top of the page, the link to submit a mailbag question will become visible.
Question 1:
Just read thru your 2008 Fantasy Football Index, and it’s great. Once again, you've proven that you're not the garden variety, cookie-cutter type of publisher. You make bold predictions, and stick with them. My only beef with the magazine is this: you spent a lot of time on "Strength of Schedule", but SOS doesn't appear to matter one bit. In 2004, the five teams with the toughest schedules (Mia, Oak, Cin, Hou, Az) finished with a combined 30-50 W/L record, but the five teams with the easiest schedules that year (Dal, NYG, TB, Den, Phi) finished a combined 40-40. In 2005, the five teams with the easiest records (Det, GB, Az, StL, Min), finished a combined 29-51 W/L. The combined W/L records for the five toughest schedules (Oak, Mia, SD, NE, KC) in 2005 was 42-38. In 2006, we see the same thing pan out: Cin, NYG, NO, TB, Pitt played the five toughest schedules, yet their combined W/L record was 39-41. New Orleans played the 3rd-toughest schedule, yet they were in the NFC Championship game. Of the teams with the five easiest schedules in 2006 (Chi, GB, Sea, Jets, Min), their combined record was 46-31. In 2007 the five teams with the hardest SOS (NE, Oak, Buf, Ind, Tenn) went 50-30. Of the five teams with the easiest schedules (Az, Chi, SF, Atl, StL) went a lousy 27-53. I'm not sure much weight, if any at all, can be put into SOS , especially with the NFL parity that we've seen lately.
Rob Dammers [Morris Plains, N.J.]
A:
I don’t think you’re looking at the numbers in a meaningful way. It appears as if you feel if a team finishes with a losing record, that is proof that it wasn’t helped by an easy schedule. What if the team was garbage? The Dolphins, for example, went 1-15 last year and project to play one of the easiest schedules. If they go 6-10 this year, do you think they were helped or hurt by their easy schedule? They finished with a losing record, but maybe they would have gone 3-13 with a more difficult schedule. And at the other end of the spectrum, take the Colts, who project to play one of the hardest schedules ever. Suppose they go 10-6. That’s a winning record, so you might conclude that they weren’t hurt by their difficult schedule. But I might tend to believe Indianapolis might have gone 14-2 with an easy schedule.
You toss out the observation that New Orleans went to the NFC Championship game with the league’s 3rd-hardest schedule. That’s not entirely true. The Saints projected to play the league’s 3rd-hardest schedule that year. In reality, however, they wound up playing one of the easier schedules. With the Panthers and Bucs falling off dramatically (both went 11-5 in 2005), New Orleans’ opponents went only a combined 112-128 in games against other teams that year.
As part of my study of Strength of Schedule I looked only at teams that the previous year finished within a game of .500 – teams that went 7-9, 8-8 or 9-7. These kind of teams have the potential to either improve or get worse. For just these middle-of-the-pack type teams, I found that the 50 teams that played the easiest schedules won a total of 74 more games. And the 50 teams (and again, this is just in the .500-type group) that played the hardest schedules won a total of 70 fewer games. It seems to me, therefore, that an easy schedule is worth almost a win and a half per season. It’s not going to turn a team into a Super Bowl contender, but it does tend to tilt the odds in their favor.
Question 2:
I am in a 10 team league with standard scoring. Can you please put in order the best draft positions?
Paul Karrmann [CHESTER SPRGS, PA]
A:
I just finished the text and revised rankings for the free internet supplement this morning. If you purchased the magazine, you can access that supplement at the main website. It should be up in minutes, if it’s not posted already. According to those rankings, in a 10-team league, it would be best to draft first. After the first eight rounds (according to my numbers), that team should be 17-plus percent ahead of every other team. After that first spot, there’s not as much spread between the remaining teams, with the next big drop being of the 6 percent variety prior to the final four teams. The worst draft position, according to my numbers, would be the 8th. Other than that, the teams are right in order: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-9-10-8.
Question 3:
I recently made a trade in a keeper league which involved me trading Ryan Grant and picks 1.06 and 1.10 in this years rookie draft for Frank Gore. Essentially, I gave up Grant, Felix Jones and a rookie wide receiver to get Gore. I have been told I was fleeced. Do you agree?
Farhan Hassan [SAINT PAUL, MN]
A:
Maybe it will work out for you. You never know. Grant has been grumbling about his contract -- maybe he will hold out and lose that job to Brandon Jackson. Maybe Mike Martz will turn Frank Gore into another Marshall Faulk. I think Gore will catch plenty of passes, which will be significant in some formats. But I don't see much difference between those running backs. I would rather have Grant and the two draft picks.
Question 4:
I am in a keeper league and trying to upgrade my QB before the rookie/free agent draft. I have Carson Palmer, but have been trying to trade for Tony Romo (because the same guy also owns Tom Brady). He offered Romo for Chad Johnson and Chris Cooley. Do you think this is a good deal for me? QB's get 6 points for TD's, and we have to start a TE. I would be left with Owen Daniels.
David Jung [SAN FRANCISCO, CA]
A:
I don't think it's a knockout deal. I think you could probably get him to throw in something else of value -- maybe his tight end. But it's a deal I would consider. With the scoring system including 6 points for TD passes, I think Romo is a top-10 player. He'd probably be selected 15th-20th if you were to redraft players. And I've got Chad Johnson at about 30th and Chris Cooley at about 60th on my board. So that trade sounds about right. As an added bonus, you could then move Carson Palmer in a trade.
Question 5:
In our fantasy league, we have no byes in the playoffs, and 8 teams make the playoffs. In our postseason, #1 plays #8, #2 plays #7 and so on. Last year, the top three playoff teams were beat in the first round and complaints ensued, particularly from the top two teams that lost. As commissioner, I think a bye in the playoffs is a waste. If you're good enough to be a #1 you already playing the weakest team. What more do you want? To try and get a fresh take on this, I would like to know where you stand on byes in the playoffs for the top two teams.
A.J. EVANS [MILWAUKEE, WI]
A:
I like byes. It mirrors the Mother League, and I think it’s a fair reward for a job well done in the regular season. Without byes, the best teams in the league have little to play for in the second half of the season – they know they’re going to be in the postseason, and there’s not much difference between playing team No. 5 an team No. 7. With the byes, I’ll bet that in most years, at least one of those playoff bye spots will still be up for grabs in the final week of the regular season. And there is a lot of luck involved in fantasy football. I’d rather just put those top 2 teams in the semifinals, rather than having them face about a 25 percent chance of getting upset by a poor club in the first round.
Question 6:
The Steelers ranked No. 26th among NFL teams for fantasy potential? Behind the Chiefs and the Lions? I know they have a brutal schedule, but c'mon. That's a bit low. First, the Rooneys are selling, and now this.
JOHN GRUPP [PITTSBURGH, PA]
A:
I agree. It seems low. But those rankings were for an eight-team league, and what do the Steelers have to offer in that kind of a format? Not a lot. With an eight-team format, I believe Ben Roethlisberger, Santonio Holmes and Heath Miller all project to be lesser starters or good backups. I have no Pittsburgh running back in my top 25. And Hines Ward would be only the 25th-35th receiver on my board. I don't think Jeff Reed has any value. So when I added them up, that's why the Steelers graded out near the bottom, although with their depth, I'll concede that they should perhaps be ahead of Kansas City and Detroit. KC offers a good running back (Larry Johnson) and a Holmes-type wide receiver (Dwayne Bowe). Detroit has the pair of wide receivers (Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams) who could help teams, and their running back (Kevin Smith) is similiar in value, fantasy-wise, to Willie Parker.
Question 7:
I am in a keeper league. First keeper is free, the next two cost you your first and second round picks. We start 2 RB's, 2 WR, 1 TE, and a floater. I plan on keeping Marion Barber, Clinton Portis, and Steven Jackson. My other options are Drew Brees, Chad Johnson, Anquan Boldin, or keeping my draft picks. Would you keep the three players that I am leaning towards?
Keith Dorcsis [Chesapeake, VA]
A:
I'd rather have Brees than Portis. On my board, Portis is the No. 11 running back. I'd rather have the No. 3 quarterback. Brees is very good; over the last two years, he's averaged 15 more passing yards per game than any other quarterback. I think he'll provide a statistical edge over the quarterbacks selected outside the top 4.
Readers' Comments
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.
Question 5: In our fantasy league, we...
Posted by L DALE GANDER | Jul. 18 at 04:50 PM
I agree with Ian. In our league, we have two 'divisions', the winner of each getting a bye. Two years ago, I lost to someone in my division, giving us the same record (him holding the tiebreaker), with about 4 regular season games yet to play. Even though we were the top two teams in the league, we knew only one of us would get a bye. We fought tooth and nail all the way to the last game - both of us won out, so I was forced to play in the Wildcard game. It was the only weekend during the playoffs I did not lead the league in scoring - lost the game and what would have been the Championship. It created a lot of drama where otherwise there wouldn't have been any. (Incidentally, the regular season game that I lost, thus losing my bye, was caused because of Randy Moss - still in Oakland - garbage yards in the last 40 seconds of a blowout MNF game. Still gets under my skin, LOL.)