Instead of grading everybody's teams, I decided to try a different approach. I'm classifying everybody's players into 5 categories:
All-Star (A): Studs who can be counted on to carry your team
Consistent (C): Consistent or solid, safe players. Have some upside in them and have delivered proven performance.
Upside (U): Your sleepers, or players who are high-risk, high-reward. Players with high potential who have not yet proven themselves.
Limited (L): Players on the down slope of their careers. Probably won't match their previous stats. Or new players who probably won't get many chances this season.
Questionable (Q): Should have been free agents instead of being drafted.
With this method, a team's "portfolio" can be assessed as high-return, high-risk, or safe and dull.
Andrew:
A: 2 C: 7 U: 3 L: 3 Q: 1
Overall look: low variability, low peak, middle-of-pack in expected returns. Won't overwhelm other teams, but won't roll over either.
Donny:
A: 3 C: 7 U: 5 L: 0 Q: 1
Overall look: Running backs need things to go right for him, not as strong on paper as last year. May have selected too many defenses given presence of Eagles.
Hai:
A: 3 C: 7 U: 6 L: 0 Q: 0
Overall look: Much improved team, but still volatile. A bit risky with QBs, but should improve from last year if one of the two pan out. Due to lack of clear QB starter, this team can get en fuego or ice bucket-cold, too use a basketball cliche.
Katy:
A: 6 C: 3 U: 3 L: 2 Q: 2
Overall look: Very unbalanced, lots of studs and dogs at the same time. Can have problems due to weak bench, but starters are solid. To use a boxing cliche, she's still the reigning champ until she gets knocked out.
Kevin:
A: 4 C: 6 U: 5 L: 1 Q: 0
Overall look: Surprisingly heavy in sleeper-types. Did not improve on keeper RBs, but has strong WRs. May face some efficiency problems with his lineup.
Larry:
A: 3 C: 9 U: 2 L: 2 Q: 0
Overall look: Mostly solid but dull. Not much upside to expected performance, but nice bench. Will be competitive, probably with a winning record. But to use horse racing cliche, will place but not win the roses.
Bill:
A: 5 C: 3 U: 6 L: 2 Q: 0
Overall look: Nice mix of studs and upside material. In position to get top score of the week at times, but may not be consistent at times. High potential, but also possible slow start to season.
PJ:
A: 1 C: 10 U: 4 L: 1 Q: 0
Overall look: Very straight-laced picks. Didn't go for home runs, will try to win by hitting singles, to use a baseball cliche. Possibly picked too many WRs, which he may not have intended. Also, like Larry, has solid bench.
Tuna:
A: 3 C: 3 U: 7 L: 2 Q: 1
Overall look: High-risk team, but anchored by 2 all-star RBs and 1 all-star WR. Team makeup outside the core will probably change by the middle of the season. To use golf cliche, went for the driver.
Victor:
A: 3 C: 6 U: 7 L: 0 Q: 0
Overall look: Another sleeper-heavy team. However, some of the sleepers handcuff starters, so not as volatile as it looks. With only 3 WRs, however, will be busy checking and hitting the waiver wire like an NHL goon, to use a hockey cliche .
In summary, I believe there is some parity in the league, no one had a really terrible draft but no one had a monster one either. As always, there will be players who have surprising career years or come out of nowhere. So it may just come down to luck. But then that would be gambling, and of course fantasy football is officially not a gambling enterprise. Otherwise, why would the NFL support it? :-P
All-Star (A): Studs who can be counted on to carry your team
Consistent (C): Consistent or solid, safe players. Have some upside in them and have delivered proven performance.
Upside (U): Your sleepers, or players who are high-risk, high-reward. Players with high potential who have not yet proven themselves.
Limited (L): Players on the down slope of their careers. Probably won't match their previous stats. Or new players who probably won't get many chances this season.
Questionable (Q): Should have been free agents instead of being drafted.
With this method, a team's "portfolio" can be assessed as high-return, high-risk, or safe and dull.
Andrew:
A: 2 C: 7 U: 3 L: 3 Q: 1
Overall look: low variability, low peak, middle-of-pack in expected returns. Won't overwhelm other teams, but won't roll over either.
Donny:
A: 3 C: 7 U: 5 L: 0 Q: 1
Overall look: Running backs need things to go right for him, not as strong on paper as last year. May have selected too many defenses given presence of Eagles.
Hai:
A: 3 C: 7 U: 6 L: 0 Q: 0
Overall look: Much improved team, but still volatile. A bit risky with QBs, but should improve from last year if one of the two pan out. Due to lack of clear QB starter, this team can get en fuego or ice bucket-cold, too use a basketball cliche.
Katy:
A: 6 C: 3 U: 3 L: 2 Q: 2
Overall look: Very unbalanced, lots of studs and dogs at the same time. Can have problems due to weak bench, but starters are solid. To use a boxing cliche, she's still the reigning champ until she gets knocked out.
Kevin:
A: 4 C: 6 U: 5 L: 1 Q: 0
Overall look: Surprisingly heavy in sleeper-types. Did not improve on keeper RBs, but has strong WRs. May face some efficiency problems with his lineup.
Larry:
A: 3 C: 9 U: 2 L: 2 Q: 0
Overall look: Mostly solid but dull. Not much upside to expected performance, but nice bench. Will be competitive, probably with a winning record. But to use horse racing cliche, will place but not win the roses.
Bill:
A: 5 C: 3 U: 6 L: 2 Q: 0
Overall look: Nice mix of studs and upside material. In position to get top score of the week at times, but may not be consistent at times. High potential, but also possible slow start to season.
PJ:
A: 1 C: 10 U: 4 L: 1 Q: 0
Overall look: Very straight-laced picks. Didn't go for home runs, will try to win by hitting singles, to use a baseball cliche. Possibly picked too many WRs, which he may not have intended. Also, like Larry, has solid bench.
Tuna:
A: 3 C: 3 U: 7 L: 2 Q: 1
Overall look: High-risk team, but anchored by 2 all-star RBs and 1 all-star WR. Team makeup outside the core will probably change by the middle of the season. To use golf cliche, went for the driver.
Victor:
A: 3 C: 6 U: 7 L: 0 Q: 0
Overall look: Another sleeper-heavy team. However, some of the sleepers handcuff starters, so not as volatile as it looks. With only 3 WRs, however, will be busy checking and hitting the waiver wire like an NHL goon, to use a hockey cliche .
In summary, I believe there is some parity in the league, no one had a really terrible draft but no one had a monster one either. As always, there will be players who have surprising career years or come out of nowhere. So it may just come down to luck. But then that would be gambling, and of course fantasy football is officially not a gambling enterprise. Otherwise, why would the NFL support it? :-P
Comments