Fantasy Index

Scheduletron

February 16, 2014

Are easy schedules really easy (part 2)

Looking at past teams with projected easy schedules

On paper, the Colts, Titans and Texans project to play the easiest schedules in 2014, but does that mean anything? Should we be trying to draft players from those teams in our fantasy drafts? Ian Allan explores.

Let me dip back into strength of schedule for a moment. I posted something on this on Friday afternoon. Joe Savitsky wrote in with some followup questions.

Below is the same kind of chart, only built around wins and losses.

With this one, I pulled out all teams who projected to play a schedule with a winning percentage of .450 or lower. That’s based on how teams played in the previous season (like Indianapolis, Tennessee and Houston for the upcoming season). If a team’s opponents the previous year went 115-141 or worse, they’re on this list.

Those numbers show to the left of each team.

How the schedule actually turned out, that’s at the right of each team.

The teams are in order, 1 thru 37, based on expected easiness. Top of the list, for example, are the 2008 Patriots. Even though they went 16-0 in 2007, they projected to play the easiest schedule of the century the next year, with their opponents having gone a combined 99-157 the previous year. Looking to the right of the 2008 Patriots, you can see those 16 opponents actually went a combined 118-122 – so while the schedule was below .500, it wasn’t a super easy creampuff.

Note that 99 + 157 = 256, while 118 + 122 = 240. There are 16 fewer games in the “actual” SOS numbers. This is because I’ve pulled out each team’s own 16 games. This is to reduce the impact of the team’s own results poisoning the results. With a 118-122 record, for example, that appears to be a little better than average. If a 4-12 team played that schedule, then it turns into 130-126 (seemingly a little tougher than average schedule). For the 2008 Patriots, they went 11-5, so that schedule turns into 123-133 – making it look easier than it actually was.

A book-keeping note. In 2002, the Houston joined the league. Looking at how Carolina, Jacksonville and Cleveland did in their first seasons, I projected the Texans to finish with a record of 4-12 (which affects the SOS of the Browns, Steelers and Bengals that year).

Ultimately, there are 34 before-and-after teams on this list. All were expected (on paper, in August) to play really easy schedules. In my eyes, about half (18 of 34) did, in fact, play really easy schedules (over 10 games under .500).

Only seven of the 34 teams (21 percent – about one in five) played opponents that finished with a cumulative winning record. Those are tagged with a black dot (•). And of those seven, only two played a schedule that you might call “difficult” – the 2003 Cardinals and the 2009 Ravens, whose opponents both went 127-113. The others were close to middle-of-the-pack schedules.

Of these 34 teams projecting to play easy schedules (again, these are the projected easiest schedules of the last 14 years) four of them ended up playing schedules that were even easier than expected. That group is headlined by the 2000 Broncos. Their opponents were 115-141 coming in, and then went only 98-142, which is remarkably feeble.

So there is, you will agree, some value here. When teams are expected to play easy schedules (like the Colts, Titans and Texans for the coming season), that tends to mean that will either play and easy schedule (which is a boost) or at least play a reasonable schedule. It’s very rare for a team with a projected easy schedule to then be saddled with the burden of playing a hard schedule.

EASIEST SCHEDULES THIS CENTURY
WLTPct.YearTeamWLTPct.
991570.3872008New England1181220.492
1051492.4142009Chicago1181220.492
1071481.4202009Minnesota1091310.454
1081480.4222008San Diego1241160•.517
1091470.4262000Philadelphia1081320.450
1091461.4282009Green Bay1081320.450
1101460.4302000St. Louis1141260.475
1101460.4302013Denver1171230.457
1101460.4302014Indianapolis????
1101442.4342009Pittsburgh1181220.492
1121440.4382008Oakland1221180•.508
1111432.4382009Baltimore1271130•.529
1121440.4382014Tennessee????
1131430.4412000Oakland1041360.433
1131430.4412000Arizona1211190•.504
1131430.4412002Houston1201191•.502
1131430.4412002Cleveland1161213.490
1131430.4412009Arizona1081320.450
1131430.4412011Arizona1121280.467
1131430.4412014Houston????
1131421.4432003Arizona1271130•.529
1131421.4432009San Francisco1141260.475
1141420.4452002Pittsburgh1191210.496
1141420.4452005St. Louis1141260.475
1141420.4452006Chicago1071330.446
1141420.4452008Denver1091310.454
1141420.4452010Arizona1081320.450
1151410.4492002Cincinnati1221153•.515
1151410.4492000Denver981420.408
1151410.4492003Green Bay1191210.496
1151410.4492005Arizona1191210.496
1151410.4492006Green Bay1201200.500
1151410.4492008Buffalo1071330.446
1151410.4492008New Orleans1191210.496
1141402.4492009Cleveland1201200.500
1151410.4492010St. Louis1061340.442
1131421.4592003Seattle1131270.471

So it’s my opinion that there is some nominal value here. This isn’t the holy grail. I’m not suggesting going into a fantasy draft with the idea of trying to select players based primarily upon who they’re going to play. But there is some marginal, slight value that can be added. It makes sense (I think) to let Strength of Schedule affect a selection here and there. So when going into a draft, best to jot down the names of the three or so teams that project to play the easiest schedules, and the three or so at the other end of the scale.

While I didn't mention them here or lay out the opposite-end numbers, the following teams project to play the hardest schedules: Raiders, Broncos, Rams, Chargers and 49ers.

—Ian Allan

Older
Newer

Fantasy Index