The 6 point passing TD super-being (with bonus triangle).

The 6 point passing touchdown super-being (with bonus triangle).

I’ve played in 6-point passing TD leagues since I started playing fantasy football in 2002.  Does it change how you should value QBs?  Of course! (Well, a little.  It’s not a massive change.)  I think the main thing to keep in mind is finding a difference maker at QB helps your team just a little bit more than it would have if you found the same difference maker in standard scoring.  For instance Andrew Luck had a great year last year, one that surpassed most preseason expectations.  As much as he helped teams by being a good value in standard scoring, he was that much better in 6 point passing TD leagues.  The stakes are higher for identifying this year’s Andrew Luck if you play in that type of league.

Here’s an example of why it’s important to own a good QB in these scoring systems.  Let’s say we have three theoretical QBs: Elite QB, Good QB and Replacement Level QB (RepL QB)  Here’s a table with their expected passing TDs and the difference between these QBs between the different scoring types.

QB Level Passing TDs Standard Scoring TD Points 6pt Passing TD Points 4 to 6 Difference (Gained Over RepL)
Elite 42 168 252 84(36)
Good 34 136 204 68(20)
RepL 24 96 144 48(0)

The last column is the important one.  It shows the gain from the switch to 6 point passing TDs plus the extra amount gained relative to the replacement level QB.  In other words, because a Good QB gains 68 points from the switch and a Replacement Level QB gains 48, the Good QB has gained an extra 20 points from the switch.  That’s the equivalent of an extra 5 Standard scoring passing TDs.  To say that another way, the difference of 10 TDs in 6pt passing leagues separates the players as much as a 15 TD difference does in Standard scoring (because 10 * 6 = 60 and 15 * 4 = 60).  Which is to say the difference between a good QB and an average QB is that much more significant in 6pt passing leagues.

Similarly, the Elite level QB gains an extra 4 (standard scoring) TDs or 16 points over the Good level QB with the change in scoring, while he gains an extra 9 TDs or 36 points over the Replacement Level QB.  (If you have to read that twice it’s okay, it’s not the easiest concept to put into words).  I also think this pretty much tosses out the “rising tide lifts all boats” theory of 6pt Passing TDs (espoused by Christopher Harris).  It lifts all boats, but not equally.  So when you value QBs in a 6pt Passing TD league, don’t you actually have to place (at least) a little extra value on the Good QB over the Replacement QB?  Yes…  (and that’s exactly what your common sense told you).

As far as strategy goes I want to make clear that you still need to get a good value on your quarterback and that I don’t actually think this changes your QB rankings relative to other positions rankings all that much.  I think it certainly moves up the elite QBs relative to players of other positions, but not drastically.  Last year I actually heard some fantasy players (even casual analysts possibly) refer to Peyton Manning as the #1 overall pick IN 4 PT PASSING TD LEAGUES.  That’s just nonsense.  I think in 6pt passing TD leagues the idea of selecting a QB 1st overall is at least worth considering, but it’s not something I would ever do or ever advise doing.  The people that were winning their leagues in 2013 (well at least making the playoffs, fantasy football is a harsh mistress) were the ones who selected the 2013 record setting Peyton Manning, not 1st overall, but in the 3rd round of Standard scoring and the early 3rd or possibly late 2nd round of 6pt Passing leagues.  In the 10 team league that I am the commissioner of I would say on average two of the four teams that make the playoffs have an elite level QB and that those QBs were typically acquired at a 2nd-3rd round price.

So to repeat myself, get yourself an elite QB but only if the value is there.  Don’t go chasing last year’s points by selecting a QB #1 overall.  I will say one thing that the elite QB has over players of other positions is they are generally much more consistent from year to year.  So yeah, you move them up a bit when valuing for 6pt passing TDs because as much as they can make a difference in standard they make that much extra difference in 6pt passing TDs (again, that’s exactly what your common sense told you).

One other thing to keep in mind is that the scoring difference doesn’t effect all QBs equally.  Quarterbacks which score an above average amount of rushing TDs gain less from the change than those that hardly run it in at all.  So the biggest losers (among QBs) from the change are those QBs that run it in a lot.  The biggest winners are not only those who throw it in a lot but also those that have a higher than expected TD output relative to their yards (QBs that are efficient scorers you could say) plus those whose QB/Interception ratio is poor.  Jay’s 6pt Passing article from last year has a chart that demonstrates this really well (it also turns out that his post works as a great complement to mine, and vice versa).

A quirk of all TDs being worth the same is that it means you don’t have to root for your QB to run it in because passing is scored the same.  Say your QB runs it in.. then it’s overturned and he ends up passing it in the next play.  If this causes you to lose your matchup, you’ll be like “damn”.  In 6pt passing scoring you win either way.  I find that the little things like that (not having to root for super specific things) help to make fantasy sports even more fun.

 

 

You can follow Lance on Twitter.

  1. RotoLance

    RotoLance says:
    (link)

    Today in adventures in bad grammar we have, probably among other things “Quarterbacks which score”. I don’t think a quarterback is a which. More like a who. Whoops.

  2. Clint says:
    (link)

    Does a 6pt passing TD league w/a QB1 and a QB/RB/WR/TE spot behoove drafting a 2nd QB until you get to the very bottom of the QB barrel?

    • RotoLance

      RotoLance says:
      (link)

      @Clint: Actually it behooves drafting 2 QBs even if the second one is bottom of the barrel. QBs are king in that format. Don’t go into the draft thinking you can use anything other than a QB in that QB/RB/WR/TE (aka Jumbo Flex) spot except in emergency (bye weeks, injuries whatever).

      I’ll break it down for you or anyone else that cares.

      Let’s say your slots are QB – RB – RB – WR – WR – TE – R/W/T – Q/R/W/T. First put all your best players at each position in your non-flexible slots. Then fill your R/W/T with your remaining best player from that group. Then fill Q/R/W/T with your remaining best player from _that_ group. Now at that point probably _any_ QB is going to be better than your best remaining RB or WR or TE. That’s your optimized lineup. So always plan on starting 2 QBs there.

      I would say acquire 3 starting QBs if possible, depends on how deep the league is. Also how you value QBs relative to other positions on draft day depends partly on how your league-mates value them.

      And honestly I wouldn’t recommend 6pt passing TDs for a Jumbo flex league. The % of points from the QB position will be too high in my opinion. Actually I’m the commish of my home league and I just decided to make the switch _from_ 6pt passing TDs with 1QB slot _to_ QB1 + Jumbo Flex but now only 4 pt passing TDs.

      Thanks for reading.

    • RotoLance

      RotoLance says:
      (link)

      @Clint: Clint,

      So another thing on the Jumbo Flex format… I’m on Twitter (as RotoLance) and a few weeks back I saw a discussion there between Scott Pianowski (of Yahoo fantasy sports) and Tristan Cockcroft (of ESPN fantasy) about just that, the Jumbo Flex. Actually the beginning of the discussion was Scott’s article ‘the case for the jumbo flex’ or some such, to which Tristan replied that the problem with Jumbo Flex is that in every league inevitably _some team_ will think that it’s ok to have something other than a QB there and for that reason Tristan prefers 2 QB.

      To which I say, it all depends on the size of the league. 10-team leagues are the perfect size, in my opinion, to use the Jumbo Flex because the need to start 2QBs should be obvious and everyone should be able to acquire _3_ QBs on draft day. Then the odds of not being able start a QB in the jumbo flex spot most weeks becomes very low.

      By the way Clint, because you are 2/2 for in engaging me in discussion on my posts (thanks for that) I’m going to point out that, yeah, I analyze things a lot and I have a lot to say (hopefully I’m making good points) and there’s not many fantasy football/baseball topics for which that is not true.

      • Packers says:
        (link)

        @RotoLance: I play in a 4pt. jumbo flex league. One thing I do is put all the QB’s in teirs according to bye weeks. I don’t want two QB’s with the same bye week. It’s ok if QB-3 has the same bye week. When people say the draft dictates on when you need to draft players it is, because if they start drafting QB’s you need to get one in that format. The other positions will still be there. Last year I drafted the first QB (Luck) off the board and Bell was there for me in RD 3. Please comment on the above.

        • RotoLance

          RotoLance says:
          (link)

          @Packers: I think being aware of the bye weeks for QBs in 2QB/Jumbo Flex is something you absolutely need to do. I agree with everything else said as well. When you have standard lineups you can fairly easily predict the draft because it will usually be similar to expert rankings. Once you vary those settings to a non standard format it becomes difficult to anticipate and you have to react.

      • Clint says:
        (link)

        @RotoLance:
        No problem sir. I appreciate the in depth analysis myself because I tend to overanalyze things especially in fantasy football (for some reason in baseball I don’t agonize over lineups as much, perhaps because of the season length & 1 game being so much more important).

        My league used to be 2 QB standard (we typically have 8-10 teams annually) but I found that forcing that issue led to people having to start scraps there during bye weeks since some teams came out of the draft w/4 QB’s rostered so I thought the jumbo flex added a nice dimension of choice to optimize lineups. Some call that lazy (just like my erasing a mandatory TE spot in favor of a standard flex spot) but I think it keeps the free agent pool diverse & allows managers to really manage their team utilizing more strategies of their choosing. I’ve always viewed my goal as commish to make offensive formations as diverse as the NFL is these days so I’ve also shied away from 2 mandatory RB’s in favor of 1 as well. And if Fantrax would let me eliminate team defense/st’s in favor of only IDP’s I’d do that too. I just don’t understand how forcing people to start a 3rd tier TE weekly or RB’s permanently enshrined in timeshares is somehow more realistic or proves your fantasy prowess in an NFL that goes 5 wide, lines up guys like Randall Cobb in the backfields, & doesn’t even care if they have a workhorse RB anymore.

  3. Grizza3569 says:
    (link)

    This isnt QB related, and i know its early, but things move early in our league…12 man dynasty league, no salary cap or keeper limitations. I have AP, Foster/Blue, Crowell and Ellington as rbs. Start 2 plus a flex spot. Was offered the #1 pick (only incoming rookies) for Foster/Blue and Torrey Smith (bye week fill in for me). Worth giving that up for Gurley or Gordon in a keep forever format? Thanks!!!

    • RotoLance

      RotoLance says:
      (link)

      @Grizza3569: I’ve never played dynasty but I read about them enough to have some clue. The trade for a 1st overall seems pretty good. The way Foster’s career is going it’s possible Torrey Smith for Foster is fair, so I think you are far and away the winner.

      You probably know more about what to do with that 1st overall than I would. I know consensus usually says WRs have the most value in rookie drafts but we do have a truly exceptional talent (or two) at RB this year. Good luck.

Comments are closed.