Andy posted the column earlier today about luck and fantasy sports. How much success can we attribute to chance? And are some positions more lucky than others. I decided to run a few numbers.
For this one, I looked at all offenses since the league went to 32 teams in 2002. For each team, I took its rank in passing, rushing and kicking. So each team gets a rank between 1st and 32nd each year, and then you can see how it fares the next year. This provides a little cross-section of how much fluctuation we’re seeing at the different positions.
Take kickers, for example. If every year you went out and drafted the kicker who ranked 1st in scoring the previous year, how much extra value would you generate?
Turns out, not very much. Those 12 kickers (teams, actually) averaged 122.2 points, which is fine. But all but one of the teams in the top dozen finished within 12 points of that No. 1 prospect. The No. 10 kickers were 99 percent as good, and the No. 11 kickers (on average) actually scored slightly more points.
You see a bigger dropoff with running backs and in the passing game.
If, every year, you were to buy into the No. 1 running game (the top team from the previous year), that team averaged a league-high 328 fantasy points per game. That’s using 6 points for touchdowns and 1 for every 10 yards. That’s 36 points better than the No. 2 team.
So right there, there’s a bigger spread from No. 1 to No. 2 than better all 32 teams in kicking.
When you get outside the top 10, you’re seeing teams that are only 70 percent as productive running the ball.
It’s similar with the passing. The top 2 passing teams tends to be way better than everyone else, and there’s a lot more dropoff in the teens.
On this chart below, we’ve got seven columns. It’s a little complicated, so a brief explanation is in order. First column is where the team ranked the previous year (1st = the 12 teams that ranked 1st in the previous season). Second column (“run”) shows their average rushing production in the current year. Average of the 12 in each group. That’s using 6 points for TDs and 1 for every 10 yards. Third column “Pct” shows amount of rushing production for teams, relative to the No. 1 (1st) teams. The fourth and fifth columns, that’s the same as those two rushing columns, except with passing. Finally, the last two columns are for kicking points – production and percentage relative to the 12 1st-place teams.
It's a little on the complicate side (and maybe a little stupid) and I apologize.
| CONSISTENCY OF OFFENSES SINCE 2002 (run-pass-kick) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | Run | Pct | Pass | Pct | PK | Pct |
| 1st | 327.6 | 100.0% | 614.0 | 100.0% | 122.2 | 100.0% |
| 2nd | 291.2 | 88.9% | 643.0 | 104.7% | 121.8 | 99.7% |
| 3rd | 289.2 | 88.3% | 588.8 | 95.9% | 111.8 | 91.5% |
| 4th | 304.3 | 92.9% | 555.3 | 90.4% | 113.4 | 92.8% |
| 5th | 286.1 | 87.3% | 600.3 | 97.8% | 109.8 | 89.9% |
| 6th | 288.5 | 88.1% | 606.0 | 98.7% | 113.0 | 92.5% |
| 7th | 273.1 | 83.3% | 521.6 | 84.9% | 113.6 | 93.0% |
| 8th | 300.0 | 91.6% | 542.5 | 88.4% | 112.3 | 91.9% |
| 9th | 321.8 | 98.2% | 551.5 | 89.8% | 117.9 | 96.5% |
| 10th | 271.8 | 83.0% | 531.2 | 86.5% | 121.2 | 99.2% |
| 11th | 232.5 | 71.0% | 555.6 | 90.5% | 122.3 | 100.1% |
| 12th | 230.0 | 70.2% | 484.6 | 78.9% | 114.3 | 93.5% |
| 13th | 246.0 | 75.1% | 502.8 | 81.9% | 111.8 | 91.5% |
| 14th | 278.6 | 85.0% | 468.5 | 76.3% | 106.2 | 86.9% |
| 15th | 232.5 | 71.0% | 498.6 | 81.2% | 111.6 | 91.3% |
| 16th | 248.7 | 75.9% | 525.1 | 85.5% | 105.8 | 86.6% |
| 17th | 238.5 | 72.8% | 494.6 | 80.6% | 111.9 | 91.6% |
| 18th | 273.3 | 83.4% | 470.4 | 76.6% | 105.2 | 86.1% |
| 19th | 241.5 | 73.7% | 463.3 | 75.4% | 115.8 | 94.7% |
| 20th | 250.3 | 76.4% | 493.7 | 80.4% | 117.3 | 96.0% |
| 21st | 245.5 | 74.9% | 468.3 | 76.3% | 109.1 | 89.3% |
| 22nd | 278.3 | 84.9% | 467.2 | 76.1% | 118.6 | 97.1% |
| 23rd | 259.8 | 79.3% | 469.2 | 76.4% | 106.1 | 86.8% |
| 24th | 240.5 | 73.4% | 450.2 | 73.3% | 114.3 | 93.6% |
| 25th | 221.6 | 67.7% | 464.6 | 75.7% | 108.2 | 88.5% |
| 26th | 251.3 | 76.7% | 443.5 | 72.2% | 109.4 | 89.6% |
| 27th | 257.1 | 78.5% | 465.7 | 75.8% | 104.2 | 85.3% |
| 28th | 235.6 | 71.9% | 462.5 | 75.3% | 111.8 | 91.5% |
| 29th | 250.6 | 76.5% | 453.9 | 73.9% | 101.5 | 83.1% |
| 30th | 243.5 | 74.3% | 446.6 | 72.7% | 103.5 | 84.7% |
| 31st | 230.0 | 70.2% | 455.4 | 74.2% | 104.3 | 85.3% |
| 32nd | 236.4 | 72.2% | 401.2 | 65.3% | 102.6 | 84.0% |
I don’t subscribe to the theory that kickers shouldn’t be selected until the final two-three rounds. To me, that makes little sense. At that point in the draft (the last four-five rounds) you’re down to receivers and running backs that others aren’t going to select, so why not go a round or two earlier to secure a kicker like Gostkowski, Crosby or Hauschka? You know those guys will be coveted by other teams in those final rounds.
—Ian Allan