PPR or Standard?

[Br0kenB 1,943]

Is your league PPR or Standard? I ask this because I, and probably many others, want to know how to address most player threads in this section.

[Timmah! 72]

I play both.

I'll take "C".

[sox2004 0]

I play both also. Some of the same guys are in all of them. We try and make all of them different to keep things interesting.

[rwood37 0]

All 9 of my leagues are PPR... I don't think I'd ever play in a non-PPR format as my brain would have a hard time adjusting positional value having played in PPR leagues for so many years.

Posters just need to be considerate, realize no one is a mind-reader, and list the requisite league information so people can provide input accordingly (assuming we're talking about a "who do I trade/draft/drop" conversation).

[BigH 1]

It's been a few seasons since I've participated in a standard league. Though I am member of a couple 0.5 PPR leagues, which some feel is a nice middle ground for the two systems. I still personally prefer the full point system for PPR leagues.

[SkinsRBack 0]

I also play in both leagues. I like PPR because it gives WR's more value

[QuietStorm 0]

.5 ppr. after doing ppr, i hate not having it.

[footballpimp 90]

ppr cause it actually make WR valuable

[Bandito 2,600]

PPR and I love it. However, you do get interesting results from time to time. This past season, AP didn't even crack the top 30 in scoring in my league. PPR was a major undoing for him.

[Rush2112 4,322]

All my leagues are PPR. the only way to go.

[Enoch 0]

I prefer standard leagues, for the simple reason that, whenever possible, value in fantasy leagues should approximate value in real football, and adding a point-per-reception is a step in the wrong direction from that point of view. It rewards aggregators who simply get a lot of passes more than it does players who based on how well they actually perform. I can see how it leads to more interesting fantasy strategy, but that's secondary to me to the above concern.

(Sidenote: My ideal league would have really weird scoring, with negative points per rush (RB gets under 3ypc = net negative fantasy points), per pass (similar concept with y/a), & per kicking attempt; positive points for first downs; and turnover penalties that exceed the points awarded for TDs (and all fumbles, regardless of recovery, penalized at half the level of INTs).)

[GreatGigInTheSky 0]

I prefer standard leagues, for the simple reason that, whenever possible, value in fantasy leagues should approximate value in real football, and adding a point-per-reception is a step in the wrong direction from that point of view. It rewards aggregators who simply get a lot of passes more than it does players who based on how well they actually perform. I can see how it leads to more interesting fantasy strategy, but that's secondary to me to the above concern.

My thoughts almost exactly.

[Hokie79 15]

I do both. I'm not sure I really care either way as long as I know which way it will be well in advance of my draft.

[Roy 0]

PPR. I think he really evens the playing field and makes the game more fun.

[2Balls 535]

I prefer standard leagues, for the simple reason that, whenever possible, value in fantasy leagues should approximate value in real football, and adding a point-per-reception is a step in the wrong direction from that point of view. It rewards aggregators who simply get a lot of passes more than it does players who based on how well they actually perform. I can see how it leads to more interesting fantasy strategy, but that's secondary to me to the above concern.

(Sidenote: My ideal league would have really weird scoring, with negative points per rush (RB gets under 3ypc = net negative fantasy points), per pass (similar concept with y/a), & per kicking attempt; positive points for first downs; and turnover penalties that exceed the points awarded for TDs (and all fumbles, regardless of recovery, penalized at half the level of INTs).)

Correct.

[ludawg23 1,982]

I prefer standard leagues, for the simple reason that, whenever possible, value in fantasy leagues should approximate value in real football, and adding a point-per-reception is a step in the wrong direction from that point of view. It rewards aggregators who simply get a lot of passes more than it does players who based on how well they actually perform. I can see how it leads to more interesting fantasy strategy, but that's secondary to me to the above concern.

(Sidenote: My ideal league would have really weird scoring, with negative points per rush (RB gets under 3ypc = net negative fantasy points), per pass (similar concept with y/a), & per kicking attempt; positive points for first downs; and turnover penalties that exceed the points awarded for TDs (and all fumbles, regardless of recovery, penalized at half the level of INTs).)

well said.

I wouldn't mind playing in a PPR but the worst setting i've come across was the points per carry format...terrible.

I only play standard format as my main leagues are all standard scoring.

[Kanter112186 17]

I prefer standard leagues, for the simple reason that, whenever possible, value in fantasy leagues should approximate value in real football, and adding a point-per-reception is a step in the wrong direction from that point of view. It rewards aggregators who simply get a lot of passes more than it does players who based on how well they actually perform. I can see how it leads to more interesting fantasy strategy, but that's secondary to me to the above concern.

(Sidenote: My ideal league would have really weird scoring, with negative points per rush (RB gets under 3ypc = net negative fantasy points), per pass (similar concept with y/a), & per kicking attempt; positive points for first downs; and turnover penalties that exceed the points awarded for TDs (and all fumbles, regardless of recovery, penalized at half the level of INTs).)

But in the same sense, is it fair to reward Devery Henderson more points for going 1 for 70 then someone who has a useful 6 for 60?

Hypothetical example:

Devery catches one 70 bomb, and NO ends up with a FG after stalling. He disappears the rest of the game and ends with a 1 for 70 line.

Welker comes along at the 4:15 game vs the Steelers. Incredibly tough team. He is held in check except on third down, when Brady somehow finds him all day on 3rd down. He ends up getting 6 for 60, with 5 of his 6 catches for a first down on 3rd down.

So in theory, going by your example, Welker is going out there and getting destroyed but it ultimate helping his team more then Devery did in that one catch.

This is the arguement I bring up in the league I'm in that is non ppr.

[Enoch 0]

What you're really arguing for there is points for first downs, not for catches. (Which I would be wholly on board with, if only major online FF league hosts supporting scoring by first down.) PPR might come a little bit closer to approximating a first-down-based scoring system, but ultimately, big 70-yard plays that don't have a major effect on the game's results are pretty rare, while 6-yard checkdowns on 3rd & 10 (which PPR ridiculously scores as equivalent to a 16-yard run in the same situation) are comparatively commonplace.

[GreatGigInTheSky 0]

But in the same sense, is it fair to reward Devery Henderson more points for going 1 for 70 then someone who has a useful 6 for 60?

Hypothetical example:

Devery catches one 70 bomb, and NO ends up with a FG after stalling. He disappears the rest of the game and ends with a 1 for 70 line.

Welker comes along at the 4:15 game vs the Steelers. Incredibly tough team. He is held in check except on third down, when Brady somehow finds him all day on 3rd down. He ends up getting 6 for 60, with 5 of his 6 catches for a first down on 3rd down.

So in theory, going by your example, Welker is going out there and getting destroyed but it ultimate helping his team more then Devery did in that one catch.

This is the arguement I bring up in the league I'm in that is non ppr.

You are coming up with a specific hypothetical to argue against a general scoring rule. You can obviously cherry pick situations to argue against both scoring styles.

How about a WR catching a 70 yard bomb with a minute left in the game with his team down three points. Then assume that the player was ruled down by contact on the 1/2 yard line. His team then brings in a big back for the short score. That WR just won the game on a single catch.

Compare that player to a guy who catches six balls for 70 yards in the 4th quarter of a game that his team trails by four scores and ultimately loses by four scores.

The six for 70 guy outscores the other player by six points while doing something totally irrelevant and in comparison to the other player - paltry.

[Winky 1,999]

I always saw PPR as a way to elevate the value of WRs & TEs (and some RBs for that matter) and make draft day and trading more interesting.

RBs will generally get drafted first, but now some WRs could sneak into the first round based on their production. It adds a dynamic to the draft that non-PPRs do not have... not saying it is better or worse, just saying it adds a different flavor to the mix.

WRs don't get 15+ touches per game so they have less opportunity for fantasy production.

PPR elevates their scoring potential and deepens the pool of productive players.

[2Balls 535]

I always saw PPR as a way to elevate the value of WRs & TEs (and some RBs for that matter) and make draft day and trading more interesting.

RBs will generally get drafted first, but now some WRs could sneak into the first round based on their production. It adds a dynamic to the draft that non-PPRs do not have... not saying it is better or worse, just saying it adds a different flavor to the mix.

WRs don't get 15+ touches per game so they have less opportunity for fantasy production.

PPR elevates their scoring potential and deepens the pool of productive players.

Not true at all. They catch the ball in open space, so many times will average 12 YPC while a RB might average 4 yards per carry. So they can rack up yards with less touches. Generally speaking, you have as many 100 yards and a TD type game from WRs as you do from RBs each week.

The reason RBs have traditionally been drafted earlier has been because each NFL team starts only one, while starting 2 WRs. So there were less quality. But with RBBC now, things are changing. PPR leagues were started as a way to combat the value of RBs in drafts, but really it's not necessary anymore. Now all it does is over-inflate the value of WRs.

[scott c 0]

PPR... a must

[GreatGigInTheSky 0]

PPR... a must

Why a must?

[drater 155]

The reason RBs have traditionally been drafted earlier has been because each NFL team starts only one, while starting 2 WRs. So there were less quality. But with RBBC now, things are changing. PPR leagues were started as a way to combat the value of RBs in drafts, but really it's not necessary anymore. Now all it does is over-inflate the value of WRs.

^this.

I play both, prefer standard. With performance bonuses.

[Rush2112 4,322]

Why a must?

Cause it's the better league to do.