Remove Completions from Scoring

[Commissioner]

Remove the 0.15 per completion from scoring. It's meaningless.


Or if we keep completions then we should also deduct for incompletions to keep it fair. Please see the link below for that discussion. We did already vote on the incompletion scoring and it failed 14 (YES) and 16 (NO), but I want to make sure everyone read the discussion topic and filly understands the process we proposed. It still rewards for completions (at a higher rate too .40 versus 0.15) but it equally deducts for an incompletion (.6). It is weighted for average passing completion in the NFL so it's a good metric to base it off of instead of just straight completions.

viewtopic.php?f=110&t=1712


This scoring change could be immediate for 2020 or wait until 2021.

Discuss below.

[Bucs Freemann]

I am opposed to removing completions. Completions reward receivers who work in the slot, do the dirty work, and won’t ever break off 75 yard bombs. Completions allows for more well rounded receiver bench. Guys like cole Beasley or Wes Welker (back in the day) have more value with completions.

[lukebroncos]

The rule is referring to points for completions for a quarterback. not points per reception for receivers.

[Bucs Freemann]

Good clarification and catch, thanks

[jamesosteen]

Hmmmmmm....wonder how many others were confused by this.

Yes guys it's completions for QBs. Has nothing to do with the 0.75 for receptions for catching the ball.

I really would like for everyone to please read this post:

viewtopic.php?f=110&t=1712

Pay attention to the 5th and 6th posts in the thread (Denver and mine) where we explain the calculation for completion / incompletion scoring. I honestly think that is the best way to solve this because you keep completions but you also weight them against NFL average completion % (completions / incompletions).

[rafastw]

Agreed.

[reeddominick]

I'd be against removing the .15 completion for QB's. By boosting the points a QB scores, I feel it helps to more closely mimic the value QB's have in the NFL. I like this aspect of this league, vs. a normal standard league, where QB's aren't as valuable

[bthoman]

I tend to agree with Saints. I also think it helps to level the playing field for pocket passers in today's NFL of scrambling QBs.

Although, increasing passing TDs to 5 or 6 points would accomplish that too.

[lukebroncos]

If we are seeking this shouldn't we just transition to Superflex?

[bthoman]

You can't do superflex with 16 teams.

[bthoman]

Also, people are growing fed up with all of this change. We all agreed to join this league knowing it wasn't a superflex. We could have waited for another opportunity to come around.

I am voting no on every single one of these late proposals.

[lukebroncos]

Hold on... why can't you have a SF in a 16 team league? Are you telling me scarcity at the position matters? It's a flex and you could play anyone right? You don't have to play a quarterback right? I could just plug in say... Willie Snead. It won't affect the value of quarterbacks because you can play receivers. It will only increase the value of back end receivers and late rookie draft picks.

[bthoman]

Such a dumb argument. RB and WR scoring are comparable, QB scoring is not. Keep trying Luke.

[lukebroncos]

So I'm the only one that values running backs more than receivers? ADP across all formats and platforms suggests differently.

[jamesosteen]

I'm trying to understand why people don't want to count completions / incompletions in a weighted formula against league average completion %. Your QB could actually score MORE under this than just .15 per completion.

I understand not wanting to get rid of completions so he keeps QB scoring up, but what about the above?

[bthoman]

I have a harder time understanding why only a handful of people out of 32 share their opinion on rule changes that affects their league. I am going to bed before I get all worked up again.

[detroitlions]

i am against removing this.. it increases the the value of good qbs.. i am down for what james just said as well and i would be down for 5pts TD pass and -3 for INT.
NEVER superflex

[mattbills]

I've actually toyed with this type of change in another league and I'm against it.

I understand the thought process of awarding completions and deducting incompletions. Therefore rewarding the quarterback that is accurate but this is fantasy football. Do we really care if our quarterback is accurate? I don't and I think this would actually hurt a couple of quarterbacks value and in a 16 team league where there are only 32 starting quarterbacks and only about 20 of those that you'd actually want to start I just don't see a reason for the change. I believe I voted no last time and would do it again. Keep it the same.

[rafastw]

About the superflex argument. Today I would only enter a new league if it was SF. I find it much better. But changing a 1 QB league to SF creates such scarcity (even more in our 16 team league) that it gives a huge boost to QB values out of thin air. It would be very unfair to those who, for strategy purposes, decide to have no big name QBs or few QBs or whatever. Love SF, hate changing 1QB league to SF.