I did a spreadsheet that breaks down Replacement Value in my league from last year.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6k97qlfcl6akfzv/Screenshot%202016-07-18%2023.5...

You can see the RB 4 and WR 12 were about equal in points last year.

With my exact league settings entered, 4for4 has the RB 12 and WR 7 about equal in points next year.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5tsactuxbwvvhl8/Screenshot%202016-07-18%2023.4...

Keeper rankings seem to value WR slightly higher, but it still doesn't match the RV my league settings produce.
.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fl9znh6s5fvsys1/Screenshot%202016-07-18%2023.4...

Anybody know what's going on here? There is a lot of content on the site about Zero RB, and my league settings favor WR, but the rankings don't back it up. I think John might have a bug in his site algorithms. Hit me if you need any Node.js/PHP development. I love the site and great content.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fuq1ondtrlftnj4/Screenshot%202016-07-18%2023.4...

John Paulsen 4for4 Scout

John here. RV at 4for4 = Relative Value. It is basically the difference between a player's projected points and the baseline at his position. We use a Core Roster draft plan which means teams will typically draft their starters at each position and a backup at RB and WR before drafting a backup QB/TE. So a 12-team league with roster settings of 1-2-2-1, will have baselines of 12, 36, 36 and 12.

The Full Impact and Top 200 rankings are meant as a general guide to player value and not the end-all, be-all of my 2016 draft plan. Last year was a historically bad year for running backs, so if you run the numbers for 2012-14, you may get different results. This does not mean that you should necessarily draft a RB in the first round. Our projections do not account for the historically higher bust rates among early-round running backs than the early-round receivers. That is something we're talking about, but it's quite difficult to implement.

If you have a flex, you can play with your roster settings to assume that your flex is a WR. This should serve to boost WR value in the early rounds. But a better way to do it is to map out your draft plan for the first 2-3 rounds and then generally follow the rankings the rest of the way. I like the RBs that are available in the 3rd-6th rounds this year, so I'm inclined to start WR/WR (unless Lamar Miller is there in the 2nd) before turning my attention to the RB position.

Jul 19, 2016 · 12:16 PM EDT
klassicd

Thanks for the explanation John. I was using the wrong terminology, but the same formula your describe for Relative Value. Using 1 2 4 1 for my 1QB 2 RB 3WR 1TE 1RB/WR/TE league produces Full Impact rankings that much more closer match the RV in our league from last year. Keep up the great work.

Jul 20, 2016 · 2:15 AM EDT