As part of our ongoing attempt to titrate the league in the offseason, we present another debate about refining the game's scoring potential. Today, we'll address the issue of expanding IDP rosters in lieu of team defense.
Pro:
Say an expanded IDP roster consisted of 6 players - 2 DE/DT, 2 LB, 2 CB, S. In this way the defense could become like the offense, forcing franchises to select the individual elements of success rather than the gross team statistics. Specific IDP slots would make it more difficult for teams to acquire power-combos that we saw last year of two good DEs or CBs, since they would be under greater enforced competition and drawn down by the necessity of filling all three positions. Additionally, it would prevent double titration by say having Darrell Revis and the Jets defense. It would force franchises to engage in deep analysis in order to fill the weekly point total, rather than say just selecting whomever the Panthers are playing against next week. The real question at stake here is, why have team defense at all? The apparent answer is that the fantasy ancients believed we were too ill-equipped to judge individual defensive merit, or too busy to adequately research. Certainly, this is no longer true for our eternal destiny of full spectrum fantasy dominance.
Con:
All the above may be true, but team defense is still more fun. Scores will decrease by a large margin without team defense because of the unpredictability of defensive player scoring. Team defense is a fun part of the game precisely because the stat is wonky and obtuse compared to the refined stats of the offensive categories and IDP. Team defense is part of a properly titrated fantasy game because it represents the element of team-betting otherwise lacking in independent player statistics. The question is essentially one of Puritanism vs. Pluralism. If team defense is not reducible to the sum of its parts, then why remove it? Simply because it's too easy to understand? Too fun?
What say you, invisible off season majority? Expand the IDP? Save the team D? Both? Categorize the IDP without expanding?
There,s no question that the League will expand the IDP positions, and perhaps have caps on the number of DE,s, CB,s, etc (like the model suggested above). Full spectrum titration is the end game. But I doubt the League is ready to abolish team DEF,s given the fan favorite vegas-style double, triple, and quadruple-titration possibilities. If it,s true that fortune favors the bold, then isnt it also true greater deaths win greater portions? <also, the fact that strategy is easily discernible is not really a valid critique (see Ala,s running game led by Trent Rich and Ingram beasting UF in the 2010 SEC title game)
ReplyDelete