523: Mailbag 7/9/21

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the lad Podcast with your host JJ Zachersa Jay Jake zacher reson. What's up everyone? It's JJ Zachareson, the editor in chief at Fandle and at number fire dot com in this episode five hundred and twenty three of the Late Round podcast. So many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network. Thanks for tuning in, Hey, baseball fans, Fandal is giving you the opportunity to get involved with daily fantasy baseball with the MLB Home Run Challenge. Each day, you can draft three players and you'll receive one point for every home run they hit. Score three points for a share of the two thousand dollars prize pool. Or score six or more points and you'll want to share the ten thousand dollars prize pool. All you have to do is head over to Fandel today and draft your sluggers. Eligibility restrictions apply. Go to fandel dot com or download the Fandel app for more details. Okay, Mailbag episode, Let's do it. The first question this week is from at FF Hansenator. Hey love the pod. By the way, thanks, How does team level regression apply for new coaching staffs and or quarterbacks? For teams for example, New York and Jacksonville with coaching and Wilson slash Lawrence and Carolina with Darnold. Always appreciate your data driven insights. Yeah. So, like I said on the show earlier this week, when you have a ton of things changing in an offense, regression is less relevant for a lot of reasons, the main one being what regression actually is. Like, when we talk regression, we're saying if everything stays the same and skill levels don't change, these numbers are going to change. It's just that when you get certain seasons from players that are unsustainable in either direction, fantasy managers are going to be inclined to use numbers from that previous season to make judgment calls in the current season, especially if situations haven't changed all that much. But when situations change dramatically, yeah, regression in the math behind regression, that becomes less relevant. I think what's important to note is that if you're making projections, if you're forecasting a player's outlook, that you should recognize that there are a lot of statistics in football that regress to the mean. Most statistics regress to the mean. People then make these assumptions about a team or a player that these statistics are their new norm, but that's usually not the case, and that's really what the last couple of weeks shows were all about. The next question is related to that first one. It's from at Luke Angelica. One says, Hi, JJ love the pod. Thanks. You talked about all kinds of regression the past two weeks, but which kinds do you weigh more into your projections, like touchdown regression or past the rush attempt regression. Thanks. So the answer to this is all of the above projections naturally weed out regression. When I project pass to rush ratio, I have a formula that does it for me, and it's based on neutral script ratio the previous season, coordinator tendencies win projections, and then I add some subjectivity to some teams if things just objectively look a little wonky. But because those formulas exist, regression naturally occurs. Like if a team had a pass to rush ratio of two to one year, meaning they threw the ball twice as much as they ran it, then their projection wouldn't come out as two. The following year it naturally be lower. And then the same goes for touchdowns. The formula that I use to get a baseline team touchdown projection just naturally shows regression. So you may be wondering why should we care about regression? Then, well, the reason is because the majority of fantasy managers aren't creating projections and I wouldn't expect them to. So, like I said in the previous question, since managers are using numbers from previous seasons, and since you can recognize those numbers aren't sustainable, then you're at an advantage. You're gaining an edge, So hopefully that makes sense. Regression really is kind of irrelevant when you're building projections because those projections sort of automatically show that regression. This last question is from at Christian Pendy nine. My PPR league adding an extra flex this year, so now we start two running backs, two wide receivers, and two flex How does this change positional value and draft strategy? Do wide receives gain value in running backs lose value? Or are the top fifteen running backs even more valuable? Do tight ends and quarterbacks lose value? Thanks? I get this type of question all the time. I'm sure I've answered it multiple times on a mailback episode in the past, but I figured I'd get to it this week. But this comes down to supply and demand. When you change the starting restrictions in your lineup, you're changing the demand for that position. Like if your twelve team league started eight running backs per team and then it started just one of every other position, then then demand for running backs would increase. More running backs would go early because you need more of them in your starting lineup each week. Now, there's plenty of strategy that comes from that too. If you know where running backs tend to flatten with their projected scoring, you can start to develop strategies on where you should pinpoint your quarterback, wide receiver, tight end in that kind of format. But there's no doubt that in a format like that, the running back position becomes even more important because you need more of them. With an additional flex you need more running backs or wide receivers, and since it's a PPR league, you'll likely find that wide receivers in particular get a little bit more love, and in turn, other positions don't see that uptick and demand. This is one of the things that I always find fascinating with the Scott Fish bull For those of you who don't know about the Scott Fish Bowl. It's a giant tournament filled with tons of leagues that have both analysts across the fantasy industry, but they have fans as well. You can read all about it on Scottfishbowl dot com. I know a lot of you already know about the Scott Fishbowl. The league structure for the Scott Fish Bull or SFB. It features scoring that favors quarterbacks. You can really get destroyed by bad quarterback performances, and it's superflex, so that drives the prices for quarterbacks up as well. But I feel like goes unnoticed so often in superflex formats is that people then ignore how many flex spots a league might have. Like if you have a standard lineup that just has an additional super flex spot, that's one thing. But with the Scott Fish Bull you've got massive rosters in starting lineups. You're starting two running backs, three wide receivers in the tight end, but there are four additional spots that you have to fill. That's still changes the supply and demand formula for the other positions. It's not just about the quarterback. Like I'm not saying don't get quarterback early in that kind of format. I'm just saying that it's not an absolute lock to have to do that, and it's because the supply and demand equation not only is shifting for quarterbacks, it is for other positions as well, and it's because of those additional flex spots. This is all to say that it's important to look at the lineup needs for every position instead of being locked into this mindset of oh man, it's super flex. I've absolutely got to get a quarterback in round one instead of Christian McCaffrey. And that goes for something like this. If your league adds a flex that increases the need for the positions that you can flex, it decreases the need for positions that you can't flex. So in this case, even though it's pretty slight because it's just one flex spot, you can increase the value for wide receivers in particular because it's a PPR format, and decrease quarterback. This as question is from at Wayne's Underscore rant. HEYJJ, I have the third pick in a sixteen man redraft league, assuming Henry and CMC will go one and two. Personally, I'm between Cook and Chubb considering Barkley has a tough schedule and Kamara's quarterback situation is a disaster. Any insight to who has more upside between Cook and Chubb? Now. I also got a question this week from at News Underscore Egg Underscore that asked who would you rather have in a half PPR league? T Higgins, Cam Makers or DeAndre Swift. Now. I wanted to answer these questions on today's show, not to call out the people who ask them. I appreciate the questions and I think that they're valid, especially if you haven't been drafting this offseason. But first off, you guys can get my rankings over on number fire dot com this year for absolutely free. Just go to number fire dot com, click NFL at the top than twenty twenty one NFL Draft kit, and then expert rankings. Those are my rankings for half PPR leagues. But both of these questions can be answered by looking at average draft position. With the first one, even if it's a standard league, I can't imagine taking Nick Chubb over any of those running backs. I love Nick Chubb. I actually think Chubb may be undervalued this year, which is crazy because I'm someone who always gravitates towards running backs who catch a lot of passes, but Chubb doesn't catch a lot of passes, and that's a problem. He's still sharing that backfield with Kareem Hunt. It's tough to buy into that at the three spot instead of true workhorses, and ADP really reflects that. And then the same goes for the second question. There's a pretty big gap in ADP between cam Akers and DeAndre Swift, and then there's a massive gap from there to t Higgins. I don't always just automatically agree with ADP, not even close, But it's not that common for me to have a take where it would disagree that strongly with what ADP is saying with what the market is saying unless I really really like a certain player, and in this case, I don't really really love DeAndre Swift to put him ahead of Cam Akers. So if anyone has a question like this one, I'd first check with my rankings and then I'd double check average draft position as well, And for the record, I try to update my rankings each week. This has questions from at Troy like stuff, where do you see the tier breaks a tight end? This year seems like Tier one Kelsey Waller Kittle Tier two pits Andrews Hockinson and maybe Higbee alone in tier three, anyone you would prioritize after these aforementioned gentlemen. Thank you. I think the first two tiers are pretty obvious, and I would agree. I have it ranked Kelsey Waller Kittle and then Pitts Andrews Hockinson, and to me, there's a fairly big break after those two tiers. But you mentioned Tyler Higbee in this next tier all alone, and I think it's fine if you view things that way. I still have Dallas Goddard over him, and I think you could still consider Logan Thomas in that tier. But I get it, Higby has an interesting ceiling given what we've seen with him. When Gerald Everett's been sidelined, Higby basically played with an injured Gerald Everett from weeks thirteen through seventeen and twenty nineteen, and in those weeks he averaged over twenty one PPR points per game. He had a weekly target share of over twenty seven percent. Last year, Jerald Everett was on the injury report for one game with what I think was a back injury. He played sixteen games, but in that one game against Philly where he was on the injury report, he didn't see a single target. He was on the field for about forty three percent of the team snaps, but he didn't see a target. I don't think it's just a coincidence that happened the week that he was on the injury report. That game, Tyler Higbee was the tight end one and weekly scoring after he found the end zone three times on a nineteen percent target chair Now, I think we're working with a small sample here, so I wouldn't get too excited about these splits. But I also don't think it's that big of a deal if you buy into that a little bit. It's not like Higbee has a cost that's so outrageously high to the point where the opportunity cost in getting him is so significant. So if you want Higbee in a tier all alone, I understand it. I really do. I think at least Goddard belongs in there, though, too. This last question is from at Maddy B two nine sixty six four eight six'. Four has The Miles sanders fade gone too? Far in most of my? Drafts he's going mid to late fourth as THE rb nineteen with AN adp of thirty nine point. Eight he's still THE rb one In, philly and we have to expect the team to be better than last. Season and even last Season sanders produced went on the, field the team couldn't have been. Worse Yet sanders was still solid per Roto, underworld he was fourteenth in yards, created tenth in yards created per, touch eleventh and true yards per. Carry loved the. Show, Thanks, YEAH i got another question About Miles sanders this, week so here's my. TAKE i don't think talent is necessarily the problem For Miles. Sanders i've been a Big Miles sanders backer on this. SHOW i was very into him last, season and that looked pretty bad until the end of the year when it mattered most in the fantasy, Playoffs but, overall he was a bad pick last. YEAR i do think this idea That Miles sanders hasn't been a workhorse is absolutely crazy, though and we see it all the time from fantasy analysts That Doug peterson was just refusing to Use Miles sanders as a. Workhorse last, Year sanders was eighth in THE nfl in running back rush share per. Game it was higher Than Ezekiel elliots And Josh jacobs And Clyde, Edwards, hilaire and that list goes on and. On let's chill out with this idea that he wasn't seeing a high percentage of his team's running back. Rushes the issue is less about talent for me and that whole thing With Doug peterson because he's no longer. There it's just that we have this new coaching staff and we don't know how they're going to utilize him and that coaching. Staff whether you're looking at head Coach Nick sirianni are oftensive Coordinator Shane, steiken they're two coaches who do have a history of sort of utilizing their running backs and specific. Roles we saw that With sirianni and The, colts and to some degree stiking with The. Chargers that's why there's some hesitation for. Me that's why there's some downside because we don't totally. Know AND i don't love the fact that they Drafted Kenneth gainwell WHEN i think Gain well is a very talented back and a good pass catching. Back now that being, said if you're Getting sanders in round, FOUR i really don't have an issue with. That he has a three down workhorse skill set and LIKE i, said in like the data says he's a good running. Back, unfortunately the running back position can often come down to coaching, decisions and in this case that's a GIANT x, factor which is why he's going where he's. Going so he's not Someone i'm actively actively, targeting But i'm more in On sanders Than i'm. Out this last question is from At Swave. Swaversen how are you projecting the target distribution In? Jacksonville it feels like any combination Of, Jones channault Or chark could lead the team in. Targets what are the Odds lawrence and his rookie year could produce two Consistent fantasy viable. Assets so the odds are low That Trevor lawrence ends up supporting multiple pass catchers who are really relevant In. FANTASY i did an entire episode on that a few weeks, ago episode five hundred and. Eighteen that means we have to try to pick who that one wide receiver might. BE i don't mind throwing darts at any of, them BUT i probably Leaned chanault Over jones In chark BECAUSE i don't think we've seen What chennault's capable. Of there was a good tweet from my Friend Hayden winks or At Hayden winks On twitter this week that said, Quote laviska had more carries eighteen than receptions on targets traveling seven or more yards downfield seventeen last. Year that's a, Problem BUT i don't necessarily think that's a capability. Thing he was a really good prospect who did a lot in. COLLEGE i think this is a usage thing or how that coaching staff Utilized chanault during his rookie. Year because we've got this new, staff maybe we see him used in a different. Way that's Why i'm most intrigued By, chanault because we've got a small sample on, him and a coaching staff change could be exactly what he needs to elevate his game in both fantasy and real. Football But i'll be, Honest i'm not incredibly high on any of, them not THAT i have to given their Adp the last question this week is from at ntabs thirty. Three i'm interested to know your perspective on content creation within the fantasy. Industry what advice do you have for someone starting? Out, tips, tricks follow. Suggestions SO i don't THINK i have all the answers on this, topic BUT i get people asking me this question pretty, frequently SO i figured THAT i talk about it to close out today's. SHOW i think your goal overall is very important. Here if you're someone with a good day job and you like your day job and you just want to write some content and analyze the game as a, hobby that's one. Thing do what you want to do because it's a. Hobby if you're really trying to make it a, job that's different in that. Case straight, up like anything that you do that you want to get compensated, for you've got to stand out what makes your analysis better than other analysis that's out? There but more, importantly why would it get? Noticed too often we see people writing pretty generic fantasy, articles like if you're trying to stand out writing an article on WHY CD lamb is a good pick this, year that's not going to get you very. Far just to be, honest it could be a great, article it could be really well thought, out but it's a pretty bland. TOPIC a lot of people are writing about, that and they're saying the exact same thing. Instead if you look around the fantasy, industry the people who are doing it full time are typically ones who are able to capture that macro level and come forward with some pretty unique. Content and then once you're, noticed then you can dig into that player analysis because more people are going to listen to you because you have that. Backbone find your point of, differentiation find what makes you. Unique it can be a certain piece of, analysis similar to What Matt harmon did with reception. Perception it could be a unique way of presenting that. CONTENT i don't know what that thing is for you or for anyone, else BUT i would spend time surveying the, landscape seeing what's missing and try to build something and do something to fill that. GAP i really think the concept here is that, simple because good content in this space generally ends up being found in some. Way it's just finding what that topic is or what your point of differentiation. Is that's a really tough thing to do because it takes more than just being a good analyst to do that a lot of. Times but differentiation is everything in most. Industries that's no different in The fantasy. One that's going to do it for today's, show, Though thanks to all of you for. Listening if you get subscribed to lay around, podcasts make sure you are by searching for it pretty much anywhere podcasts can be. Found they know't forget to follow me On twitter At late ROUND. Qb thanks for listening, Everyone hope you enjoy your. Weekend