Below is the winning entry to our Scott Fish Bowl subscriber contest. Thank you to all those who participated, and congratulations to Ben Battle for winning.1
A critical component to success in the Scott Fish Bowl will be a thorough understanding of how the #SFB8 scoring system changes player values compared to a typical PPR setup, along with the ability to leverage that understanding.
For a projection baseline, I used the latest iteration (6/23) of Anthony Amico’s projections. I used the same first down assumptions Anthony used in his first batch of #SFB8 projections – credit to Hasan Rahim.
After analysis, here are three tenets I will follow for #SFB8.
TEs are Flex Viable, Unlike in PPR
With Amico’s latest projections, the average increase in scoring for TE1-TE24 from PPR to SFB8 is 34.9 points. More important than the position’s raw increase in point total, though, is how it compares to the shifts in QB, RB, and WR values.
|PPR Avg||SFB8 Avg||Diff|
Out of all the positions, TE experiences the greatest increase in value from PPR to #SFB8.
Now, given the starting roster requirements of QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, TE, 4 FLEX, observe how this affects the flex value of each position:
|PPR Avg||SFB8 Avg|
The #SFB8 scoring system does a wonderful job of evening out the flex value across RB, WR, and TE. I won’t shy away from a TE2 in my flex. The above data also reinforces that a QB should always be used in the superflex.
Zero-RB Is Still Great
In #SFB8, WR’s are still more predictable and have a lower injury risk than early round RBs. In his Historical Perspective on #SFB8 Scoring, Hasan Rahim pointed out how “sticky” WR scoring has been using #SFB8 settings. Hasan also highlighted the volatility in year-over-year RB finishes. Zero-RB in #SFB8 is still antifragile.
Despite the increase in overall RB scoring in #SFB8, the change in the degree of separation between elite RBs and lesser RBs is inconsequential.
|Tiers Based Off Amico Projections||PPR Avg||PPR Point Gap Between Next Tier||SFB8 Avg||SFB8 Point Gap Between Next Tier||PPR to SFB8 Tier Gap Point Diff|
Scott Fish Bowl scoring gives no increased incentive to draft early-round RBs based off relative intra-positional production.
Additionally, Blair Andrews showed how Zero-RB’s return as a contrarian strategy increases its value. I anticipate that the bump in RB scoring will make Zero-RB even more contrarian in #SFB8 than in PPR, which cements Zero-RB as my ideal approach to attack #SFB8.
Target Different Late-Round RBs in #SFB8 than in PPR
Given the methodology behind projecting first-downs, the value of a target is lower in #SFB8 than it is in PPR3
Conversely, the value of a carry is increased by 0.22 points because of the first down equity generated. Observe this comprehensive list of top-48 RBs who are negatively impacted by these scoring changes. These RBs starkly contrast the 7.5 point increase #SFB8 RBs experience on average:
|Player||PPR to SFB8 Fantasy Point Projection Diff|
Many of these names are hot PPR Zero-RB targets because they fit the “receiving back with upside” profile. The raw projections of these players don’t tell the whole story of their Zero-RB value, but their depressed projections illustrate how the upside of receiving backs is capped in #SFB8. The ideal Zero-RB targets instead should be backs with more yardage (and thus first-down) upside via the ground. Some names I like are Marshawn Lynch, Isaiah Crowell, and Kerryon Johnson because of their potential rushing opportunity.
- We assessed a penalty to the submission for going over the recommended word length, but it still won out. (back)
- PPR QB scoring used 0.04 points per passing yard, 4 points per passing TD, -1 point per INT (back)
- PPR Target Value = (CR) + (fantasy points per target from yardage and touchdowns)
= (0.5)*(CR + CR) + (yardage and TD FP/Trg)
SFB8 RB Target Value = (0.27)*(0.5) + (CR)*(0.5) + (yardage and TD FP/Trg)
= (0.5)*(CR + 0.27) + (yardage and TD FP/Trg)
Note: CR = Catch Rate. This breakdown makes it easy to see that for RBs with CR > 0.27, aka all RBs, a target is worth (0.5)*(CR – 0.27) fewer fantasy points in SFB8 than in PPR. The same is true for WR’s – but replace the “0.27”s with “0.4”s.