The Sikorski Memo
Sikorski@research.moore.com wrote:
>
> O.K. The Part's have been very silent up to this point in the season, but
> there hasn't been much for me to gloat about (other than my 1 win coming
> against our natural ememy - THRAK!!)
>
> Hear me out on this:
> I was looking at the outcomes for this weeks games and I would like to toss
> a few things out on the table for review.
>
> Just call this "food for thought" for now, but I think the scoring system
> is a bit "askew"...
>
> Let's take a look at a few players from yesterday:
>
> PLEASE NOTE: I am not trying to single any team out !!!!!
>
> Lets look at 3 non-quarterbacks who had pretty good games:
> WR: HORN,JOE NO C:9-167 R:1-13 F:0-0 TD:C43 (27 points)
>
> RB: SMITH,LAMAR MIA R:24-125 C:4-17 F:0-0 TD:R46,R8 (25 points)
>
> WR: ALEXANDER,DERRICK KC 29* C:9-139 F:0-0 TD:C9,C48 (29 points)
>
> Now, look at the flip side for 3 quarterbacks who had HUGE games:
> QB: KANSAS CITY TEAM QB KC 28 P:39-53-2-504 R:1-3 F:0-0 TD:P9,P48,R3
> (28 points)
>
> QB: ST. LOUIS TEAM QB STL 24* P:29-42-0-431 R:2-12 F:1-0 TD:P14,P4 (24
> points)
>
> QB: OAKLAND TEAM QB OAK 24* P:20-31-0-242 R:5-33 F:0-0
> TD:P10,P6,P20,P2 (24 points)
>
> I think we need to review the scoring system for next season. How can a QB
> (KC) who passed for over 500 yards (and 3 TD's) have less points than a WR
> who caught 2 TD's and only 139 yards??? I think our good intentions to
> changed the scoring system went a bit too far. Yes? No?
>
> Or, look at the Oakland QB who had a HUGE game - 4 TD's and 242 passing
> yards (plus 33 rushing yards). How is is possible that Lamar Smith can
> outscore the Oakland QB with only 2 TD's and 142 combined yards. That
> doesn't seem right, does it?
>
> Over the past few weeks, I've actually put in quite a few hours looking at
> other leagues and what kind of scoring system they use. If the LAC Commish
> will permit me, I would like to submit a new scoring system for us to
> review for next season. Don't worry, I won't put it out there until this
> season's battles are over. I think I can offer an alternative that is a
> little more balanced. I think the Commish had very good intentions, but
> when you look at player performance, I think we can polish it up a bit.
>
> ALSO:
> A few things for your consideration that I will officially propose at a
> later date:
> Adding a defense to our teams.
> Changing the way we draft quarterbacks. Instead of drafting a team QB,
> let's actually draft real people. I think this would be more fun in that
> we would actually have to MANAGE our teams a little bit more. QB
> injuries are a big part of the game, I think most of us have played long
> enough to include that into our teams.
>
> Thanks,
The Lord Almighty Commish's Response
From:
"Kevin L. Papendick"
11/29/00 1:37 PM
Subject:
Re: Scoring
To:
Leonard Swiat ,
Dave Daigle ,
Bob Sikorski ,
Eric Palmer ,
Ander Babar ,
Sam D'Angelo ,
Chris Clark , jim Honer ,
Tom Kuenzi , Larry Guidi
This e-mail is a reply to an e-mail that Private sent to me with a
proposed new scoring system...I had started to reply to him but after
finishing it I felt I should share this with all of you as we are going
to have to cover it eventually. -klp
See, I didn't forget about you. I justs hadn't had time to look at
this. My comments are noted with the "*". Overall this is pretty
similar to what we now have. Note these are my thought and the unwashed
masses may disagree/override my desires...
Offense: Includes Quarterbacks (QB), Running Backs (RB), Wide Receivers
(WR), Tight Ends (TE)
6 pts per rushing or receiving TD
6 pts for player returning kick/punt for TD
* No. I don't want to get into special teams.
4 pts per passing TD
2 pts per rushing or receiving 2 pt conversion
*Minor...I don't think I can control this in the software ->(note: teams
do not receive points for yardage gained during the conversion)
2 pts per passing 2 pt conversion
1 pt per 10 yards rushing or receiving
1 pt per 25 yards passing
* -1 or -2 for interceptions and fumbles
Kickers are easy:
* I'd prefer to just stay with what we have as it is similar and there
are penalties for failures...
5 pts per 50+ yard FG made
4 pts per 40-49 yard FG made
3 pts per FG made, 39 yards or less
2 pts per rushing, passing, or receiving 2 pt conversion
1 pt per Extra Point made
Defensive/Special Teams (D)
* Again, I'd prefer not to add these to the league.
10 pts per shutout
7 pts for 2-6 points allowed
4 pts for 7-13 points allowed (note: team defense is responsible for
all
points allowed)
1 pt for 14-17 points allowed
3 pts per defensive or special teams TD
2 pts per interception
2 pts per fumble recovery
2 pts per blocked punt or FG (note: a deflected kick does not receive
points)
2 pts per safety
1 pt per sack
***The significant changes I see would be:
4pt passing TD's which returns some of the value to QB's (your gripe).
1pt/10yrds receiving...this jacks the WR's back up where they are far
more valuable than RB's.
You know that things have been good and tough this season with RB's
being at a premium. I agree that the QB's need to be the MVP's in most
situations. I just crunched the numbers for the 2000 regular season.
POS 1-10 2-9 (player ranking)
------------------------------------
RB 188.5 179.5
WR 185.0 178.9
QB 195.5 185.2 Team QB, not individuals
QB's are the MVP's and RB's are runners up. I would favor a change that
makes QB's more valuable, but don't want to make WR's more valuable.
Thus my suggestions to do this would be the 4pt Pass TD, -1 for INT's,
1pt/20yds. We don't have to do all of these, but it would raise the
numbers.
The #5 QB is PHI who had 196 point this season which is just above the
1-10 average.
With 4pt TD's he would get 16 more points (16 passing TD's = 48pts @
3pts/TD, @4pt/TD = 64pts)
Changing to -1 INT's adds 13 more points (13 INT's @ -2 = -26pts /2 =
-13pts)
If you go to 1pt/20yrd Passing you add 25.38 more points
(1pt/25yds=101.52pts, 1pt/20yds=126.9pts)
Altogether this adds up to 250.38 or 19.26pts/gm average versus his
current 15.08pts/gm. (all calcs based upon 13 games)
If you keep the 1pt/25yds passing he's at 225 or 17.31pts/gm
If we adopted all three of these, the "average" QB's instantly become
worth a STL QB (#1) in our league. And of course this makes some one
above this level extremely valuable. STL QB jumps to 299 or 23pts/gm
without the yardage change and 342.93 or 26.38pts/gm
So to me the questions are:
1) Do we boost the QB scoring? (I beleive all agree on "YES")
2) How much? 15% (-1 INT & 4pt/TD) or 25% (w/ 1pt/20yd)
3) Do we keep the WR's in check or do we again make them more valuable
than RB's?
-klp
From:
"Kevin L. Papendick"
11/6/00 3:42 PM
Subject:
Re: SFFL Scoring
To:
Sikorski@research.moore.com
CC:
babar , CClark1607 ,
daigle , dangelo ,
Kuenz1 , palmer ,
Jim.Honer@email.moore.com, swiat@acsu.buffalo.edu, Guidi@research.moore.com
I believe you all know that I have always been open to suggestions for
improvements to the league and even solicited for recommendations. All
changes made to the scoring system were approved by the unwashed
masses. At no time have I imposed any draconian rules upon you pisants!
;)
That said, I will be more than happy to accept any and all requests for
changes for 2001. Obviously we are playing out this season as the
scoring rules stand. I believe everyone realizes that. The changes
voted in for this season were to equalize the scoring between WR's and
RB's. I believe we have done that. Also, the scoring was changed to
3pts per passing TD, but rushing TD's were left at 6pts. This is a
common practice in many scoring systems to throttle the "QB factor" a
bit and also, I wasn't too fond of 100+ point efforts on a regular
basis. I agree that a 500 yard QB game should be rewarded in some
fashion, but any scoring system that I will support as an owner has to
keep the game scores to reasonable numbers. Remember our first year
where a 30pt game was a good outing? And a single digit disaster was
not unheard? Actually they were very amusing also...ask the Hackers
(who have been very quiet this season).
Moving on...All owners can propose anything they desire. In regard to
Bob's suggestions, -as an owner- I don't support the addition of defense
to our league, but if the majority want it then it will become law. As
for QB's and K's for that matter it was my intent to propose abandoning
the "team concept" and drafting individuals. I've wanted to do this for
a while now, as I think it would make things far more interesting. To
facilitate this move I also will propose expanding the rosters by 1 more
position to allow teams to generally carry 2-QB's, 3-RB's, 3-WR's,
2-K's. And possibly another slot so you can carry and extra player.
And because I know you guys love this one so much, expansion will again
be discussed! ;)
Moving on...We do have one very critical issue we need to decide on
soon...ties. I favor keeping ties during the regular season as it's
always amusing when they occur. But what happens if we have a tie game
during a playoff game? Uh oh, I'd had to be the commish that has to
rule on that one! Anyone have any suggestions. I know some leagues
require you to designate a bench player, or award one point to the home
team. I don't like those, because the best players are on the field and
they should decide the outcome. Thus my thoughts are to use QB pass
completions percentage and some other stat as a second tie
breaker...longest field goal? (But what if there were none?) Anybody
else got any reasonable ideas?
-LAC
P.S. I just spoke to THRAK, he thinks the way the chips fell this week
is just dandy! ;)