NitroF
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2006
- 256
- 146
Drafting for a keeper fantasy league is a very fun exercise. The drafting lists will vary a lot from those mock drafts and other lists where you draft for team building with so many other factors coming into account than offensive production, particularly in a points only league.
There are way less fantasy draft lists out there, they usually are from less credible sources, they are very different for points only vs categories leagues and the decision process is unclear and can vary a lot.
Obviously you try to hit for the highest ceiling, but comes a time where you must take the floor and risks into account. Not only does completing your lineup with players on entry level deal is more useful than busts, but some of the more complete players often gets more opportunities to eventually end up exceeding expectations.
I built a decision matrix where you can weight every factors following your preferences.
Here is mine, where I weight
Thoughts about this kind of analysis?
Do you think of any other decision factors?
What weight would you put on each of the factors?
There are way less fantasy draft lists out there, they usually are from less credible sources, they are very different for points only vs categories leagues and the decision process is unclear and can vary a lot.
Obviously you try to hit for the highest ceiling, but comes a time where you must take the floor and risks into account. Not only does completing your lineup with players on entry level deal is more useful than busts, but some of the more complete players often gets more opportunities to eventually end up exceeding expectations.
I built a decision matrix where you can weight every factors following your preferences.
Here is mine, where I weight
- Offensive ceiling and floor: based on the premise that they have an NHL career taking outside risks of that equation
- Risk factor: injuries, size, easy to transpose style of play, geopolitical factors, off-ice issues, etc.
- Trending: Mostly self-explanatory. I find this more and more important to add recency fluctuations to the equation. Lesson learned from recent occurrences like M Seider, M McTavish and W Johnston.
*50% = stable - Team: Unknown information at the moment. Rating the quality of surrounding players, more offensive reliant team systems, future role on the team, number of similar prospects, personal preference, etc
- Late birthday bonus: 2005 = 0% | late 2006 = 100% | others = 50%
| Ceiling | Floor | Risk | Trending | Team | Age bonus | |||
| Weighting | 100 % | 50 % | 20 % | 10 % | 10 % | 5 % | 5 % | |
| 1 | Celibrini | 92 % | 100 % | 85 % | 100 % | 50 % | 100 % | 100 % |
| 2 | Demidov | 84,5 % | 100 % | 85 % | 50 % | 50 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 3 | Buium | 84 % | 100 % | 70 % | 75 % | 75 % | 100 % | 0 % |
| 4 | Parekh | 83,5 % | 100 % | 85 % | 40 % | 50 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 5 | Levshunov | 80,5 % | 95 % | 70 % | 90 % | 50 % | 100 % | 0 % |
| 6 | Catton | 80 % | 95 % | 75 % | 50 % | 50 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 7 | Lindstrom | 79,5 % | 95 % | 60 % | 50 % | 75 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 8 | Iginla | 79 % | 85 % | 50 % | 65 % | 100 % | 100 % | 100 % |
| 9 | Sennecke | 77 % | 85 % | 50 % | 70 % | 100 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 10 | Eiserman | 76 % | 95 % | 85 % | 40 % | 0 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 11 | Dickinson | 74 % | 80 % | 50 % | 90 % | 50 % | 100 % | 100 % |
| 12 | Yakemchul | 73,5 % | 85 % | 65 % | 80 % | 50 % | 100 % | 0 % |
| 13 | Connelly | 73,5 % | 90 % | 65 % | 30 % | 50 % | 100 % | 50 % |
| 14 | Helenius | 73,5 % | 80 % | 60 % | 90 % | 25 % | 100 % | 100 % |
| 15 | Silayev | 73,5 % | 85 % | 50 % | 60 % | 50 % | 100 % | 100 % |
Thoughts about this kind of analysis?
Do you think of any other decision factors?
What weight would you put on each of the factors?
