2002 Fantasy Strengths of Schedule
Updated May 7th, 2002
An August 12th Update Exists in the Premium Area
Footballguys Strengths of Schedule just keeps getting better.
This year, for the first time ever, they are position specific. Instead of just
passing and rushing, we have QB, RB, WR, TE, PK, and Defense/Special Teams.
One thing that has remained is the basic philosophy. Our Strengths of Schedule
are based upon how things have changed from last season to this one. And boy
have things changed in a big way for some teams (i.e.. realignment).
Case in point: the Tennessee Titans. They traded home-and-home
games with former AFC Central rivals Pittsburgh and Baltimore in exchange for
less defensive two game series with new AFC South foes Indianapolis and Houston.
Steve McNair and company are making out like bandits!
Now, before getting to the rankings, here's how the numbers were
found:
Each team's 2001 performance was analyzed with regards to fantasy points allowed
(see scoring system below) at each position. Specifically, each team was ranked
according to their number of fantasy points allowed compared to their opponent's
average fantasy points scored. This idea was born at FootballGuysTalk.com
by frequent poster Chris Annunziata (aka "Kid Charlemagne").
For example:
If Team A averaged 20 fantasy points per game (fppg) at QB and scored 15 against
Team B, then Team B's QB defense did well. However, if Team A averaged 10 fppg
at QB and scored 15 against Team B, then Team B's QB defense did poorly.
These ranking were used to find the 2001 actual Strengths of Schedule.
The rankings were then modified (using opinions only) based upon
roster and/or coaching changes. These modified rankings were used to find the
2002 predicted Strengths of Schedule.
The difference between 2002 and 2001 was then found and, viola,
the 2002 Strengths of Schedule were born.
As you look through the rankings, remember 'bigger numbers are
better'.
Rk |
Quarterback |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
Rk |
Running Back |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
1 |
Tennessee |
16.4 |
13.5 |
2.83 |
1 |
Cleveland |
17.9 |
11.2 |
6.65 |
2 |
Cincinnati |
17.2 |
14.6 |
2.61 |
2 |
Tampa Bay |
20.4 |
15.5 |
4.89 |
3 |
Arizona |
16.0 |
14.1 |
1.87 |
3 |
Cincinnati |
18.1 |
13.3 |
4.83 |
4 |
Indianapolis |
15.6 |
13.8 |
1.82 |
4 |
Detroit |
20.6 |
16.5 |
4.11 |
5 |
Carolina |
17.4 |
15.7 |
1.70 |
5 |
Pittsburgh |
20.2 |
17.2 |
2.96 |
6 |
Pittsburgh |
18.3 |
16.8 |
1.54 |
6 |
Tennessee |
16.4 |
14.3 |
2.18 |
7 |
Tampa Bay |
17.8 |
16.5 |
1.30 |
7 |
Minnesota |
16.1 |
14.4 |
1.68 |
8 |
Detroit |
15.0 |
13.8 |
1.19 |
8 |
Green Bay |
19.6 |
18.5 |
1.11 |
9 |
Atlanta |
17.6 |
16.5 |
1.05 |
9 |
Baltimore |
17.0 |
16.0 |
1.00 |
10 |
San Diego |
17.8 |
17.0 |
0.78 |
10 |
Chicago |
20.3 |
19.4 |
0.83 |
11 |
Jacksonville |
17.2 |
16.8 |
0.35 |
11 |
Denver |
16.9 |
16.3 |
0.62 |
12 |
Seattle |
16.2 |
15.9 |
0.32 |
12 |
Buffalo |
17.9 |
17.4 |
0.52 |
13 |
Minnesota |
16.1 |
15.9 |
0.25 |
13 |
Atlanta |
18.4 |
17.9 |
0.44 |
14 |
New Orleans |
15.6 |
15.4 |
0.21 |
14 |
Jacksonville |
15.7 |
15.5 |
0.14 |
15 |
Baltimore |
17.1 |
16.9 |
0.16 |
15 |
Houston |
13.0 |
na |
NA |
16 |
Houston |
16.6 |
NA |
NA |
16 |
Carolina |
18.9 |
18.9 |
-0.03 |
17 |
Cleveland |
19.1 |
19.1 |
-0.03 |
17 |
Washington |
14.5 |
14.9 |
-0.40 |
18 |
Dallas |
16.9 |
17.0 |
-0.09 |
18 |
New England |
18.3 |
18.8 |
-0.53 |
19 |
San Francisco |
17.0 |
17.2 |
-0.16 |
19 |
San Diego |
17.2 |
17.8 |
-0.62 |
20 |
Green Bay |
15.8 |
16.0 |
-0.25 |
20 |
Miami |
18.6 |
19.4 |
-0.79 |
21 |
Chicago |
15.9 |
16.1 |
-0.25 |
21 |
Kansas City |
13.4 |
14.4 |
-1.01 |
22 |
St Louis |
16.3 |
16.9 |
-0.65 |
22 |
Dallas |
14.3 |
15.3 |
-1.04 |
23 |
NY Jets |
16.6 |
17.4 |
-0.73 |
23 |
NY Jets |
16.7 |
17.7 |
-1.05 |
24 |
New England |
16.3 |
17.1 |
-0.78 |
24 |
New Orleans |
17.3 |
18.8 |
-1.53 |
25 |
Kansas City |
17.0 |
17.9 |
-0.94 |
25 |
Oakland |
13.2 |
14.8 |
-1.59 |
26 |
Philadelphia |
15.4 |
16.4 |
-0.95 |
26 |
Seattle |
12.9 |
15.2 |
-2.29 |
27 |
Miami |
17.2 |
18.3 |
-1.07 |
27 |
Indianapolis |
13.8 |
16.3 |
-2.51 |
28 |
Buffalo |
15.1 |
16.5 |
-1.39 |
28 |
Arizona |
12.0 |
14.8 |
-2.77 |
29 |
NY Giants |
13.6 |
15.0 |
-1.41 |
29 |
Philadelphia |
12.3 |
15.9 |
-3.56 |
30 |
Denver |
17.2 |
18.7 |
-1.52 |
30 |
NY Giants |
14.8 |
18.4 |
-3.57 |
31 |
Oakland |
18.2 |
19.7 |
-1.55 |
31 |
San Francisco |
13.8 |
18.8 |
-5.02 |
32 |
Washington |
16.4 |
18.2 |
-1.76 |
32 |
St Louis |
12.8 |
18.2 |
-5.38 |
At the top
of the rankings, we see better days ahead for Steve McNair, Jon Kitna/Gus
Frerotte, Jake Plummer, and Peyton Manning (is that really fair). Rounding
out the QB rankings, we see tougher times for the likes of Drew Bledsoe,
Kerry Collins, Brian Griese, Rich Gannon, and Shane Matthews. How interesting
is it to see Washington stuck here at the bottom? Steve Spurrier's initial
NFL campaign may see more busted visors than aerial TDs. Imagine an ineffective
Matthews being yanked. Foresee an equally ineffective Sage Rosenfels giving
way to Danny Wuerffel. It's musical chairs in D.C. Taking a quick look
at the Texans, 16.6 is a fairly average number. Kent Graham/David Carr
could have a couple of decent games. |
Let's start
at the bottom. Let me be the first (OK, the 4,641st) to say, "Don't
worry about Marshall Faulk". He doesn't understand the concept of
Strength of Schedule. Faulk can do anything against anybody. On the other
hand, Garrison Hearst/Kevan Barlow, Tiki Barber/Ron Dayne, and Duce Staley/insert
probable veteran FA signee here are very much human. Furthermore, each
of these teams is/will be RBBC. It doesn't take a leap of faith to see
a struggling starter being quickly replaced. At the top of the RB pile,
things look almost rosy for Corey Dillon and Michael Pittman/Mike Alstott.
Finally, welcome the 2002 NFL rookie of the year in William Green. A quick
take on the Texans: 13.0 is a very low number. There will be very little
success on the ground for any RB in Houston. |
Rk |
Wide Receiver |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
Rk |
Tight End |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
1 |
Atlanta |
19.4 |
15.1 |
4.28 |
1 |
Detroit |
18.9 |
14.6 |
4.23 |
2 |
Carolina |
19.1 |
15.0 |
4.09 |
2 |
Chicago |
18.9 |
15.0 |
3.91 |
3 |
Indianapolis |
16.0 |
12.8 |
3.16 |
3 |
Carolina |
19.6 |
16.6 |
3.04 |
4 |
Tampa Bay |
18.6 |
15.5 |
3.08 |
4 |
Dallas |
14.6 |
11.7 |
2.82 |
5 |
Cincinnati |
18.0 |
15.1 |
2.90 |
5 |
Tampa Bay |
21.3 |
19.4 |
1.96 |
6 |
Arizona |
16.3 |
13.9 |
2.31 |
6 |
San Diego |
13.8 |
11.9 |
1.94 |
7 |
San Francisco |
16.5 |
14.5 |
2.05 |
7 |
Green Bay |
19.2 |
17.4 |
1.83 |
8 |
Tennessee |
16.9 |
14.9 |
2.03 |
8 |
Minnesota |
19.9 |
18.3 |
1.61 |
9 |
Pittsburgh |
18.6 |
16.8 |
1.79 |
9 |
Indianapolis |
17.3 |
16.4 |
0.93 |
10 |
Cleveland |
19.6 |
18.1 |
1.56 |
10 |
Tennessee |
17.4 |
16.5 |
0.92 |
11 |
Seattle |
17.1 |
15.7 |
1.38 |
11 |
Atlanta |
19.1 |
18.3 |
0.80 |
12 |
Minnesota |
16.1 |
14.8 |
1.22 |
12 |
Cleveland |
21.9 |
21.3 |
0.65 |
13 |
Baltimore |
18.8 |
18.2 |
0.62 |
13 |
Denver |
14.3 |
13.8 |
0.44 |
14 |
San Diego |
17.4 |
17.2 |
0.28 |
14 |
New Orleans |
15.4 |
15.2 |
0.28 |
15 |
Houston |
15.7 |
NA |
NA |
15 |
Baltimore |
17.6 |
17.6 |
0.01 |
16 |
Kansas City |
18.6 |
18.9 |
-0.34 |
16 |
Houston |
16.3 |
NA |
NA |
17 |
New Orleans |
15.9 |
16.3 |
-0.38 |
17 |
Philadelphia |
13.3 |
13.5 |
-0.23 |
18 |
New England |
15.7 |
16.4 |
-0.70 |
18 |
Jacksonville |
17.1 |
17.4 |
-0.36 |
19 |
Green Bay |
15.8 |
16.5 |
-0.70 |
19 |
NY Jets |
16.5 |
16.9 |
-0.40 |
20 |
Buffalo |
14.9 |
15.6 |
-0.74 |
20 |
Pittsburgh |
18.9 |
19.3 |
-0.42 |
21 |
St Louis |
16.9 |
17.7 |
-0.80 |
21 |
Buffalo |
17.5 |
18.3 |
-0.76 |
22 |
Jacksonville |
17.3 |
18.1 |
-0.82 |
22 |
Cincinnati |
20.3 |
21.0 |
-0.78 |
23 |
Detroit |
14.0 |
14.8 |
-0.84 |
23 |
Kansas City |
12.7 |
13.7 |
-0.99 |
24 |
NY Giants |
13.5 |
14.5 |
-0.95 |
24 |
Miami |
15.8 |
17.0 |
-1.22 |
25 |
NY Jets |
15.4 |
16.6 |
-1.21 |
25 |
NY Giants |
12.4 |
13.9 |
-1.50 |
26 |
Chicago |
15.5 |
16.8 |
-1.34 |
26 |
Seattle |
12.6 |
14.1 |
-1.50 |
27 |
Washington |
16.3 |
17.7 |
-1.36 |
27 |
New England |
16.1 |
18.0 |
-1.88 |
28 |
Miami |
16.0 |
17.6 |
-1.61 |
28 |
Washington |
15.1 |
17.3 |
-2.23 |
29 |
Oakland |
17.6 |
19.7 |
-2.11 |
29 |
Oakland |
12.7 |
15.0 |
-2.34 |
30 |
Dallas |
16.7 |
19.2 |
-2.54 |
30 |
Arizona |
11.1 |
14.4 |
-3.32 |
31 |
Denver |
15.3 |
18.1 |
-2.82 |
31 |
St Louis |
10.6 |
17.0 |
-6.34 |
32 |
Philadelphia |
15.1 |
17.9 |
-2.87 |
32 |
San Francisco |
12.9 |
20.5 |
-7.58 |
Wow,
it's too bad the Falcons don't have any real WRs (not yet at least). Don't
be surprised by better numbers from Muhsin Muhammad, Marvin Harrison (is
that possible?), and Keyshawn Johnson. Also, if a strong #2 WR emerges
from Carolina, Indianapolis, or Tampa Bay, they'll be worth a strong look.
Be wary of James Thrash, Rod Smith, Joey Galloway, Tim Brown, and Jerry
Rice as the going will be tougher for each. Looking in on Houston finds
a slightly below average number of 15.7. With their current collection
of WRs, does it really matter? |
Unless the Lions come up with
a late FA signing, it appears Mikhael Ricks could be a deep sleeper candidate
at TE. Granted, it's a long shot, but stranger things have happened as
Ricks is a former WR. Consider taking a shot with the Bears' Luther Broughton.
If Wesley Walls can stay healthy, he'll have another good year. Tony McGee
and Ken Dilger looked poised for success with their respective new teams.
Freddie Jones doesn't appear to be so fortunate. Roland Williams and Ernie
Conwell will both struggle to match their 2001 numbers. Finally, let someone
else go after Eric Johnson. |
Rk |
Place Kicker |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
Rk |
Def/Spec Team |
2002 |
2001 |
Dif |
1 |
Tennessee |
18.4 |
13.1 |
5.28 |
1 |
Detroit |
19.1 |
13.3 |
5.77 |
2 |
Cincinnati |
20.1 |
15.1 |
5.03 |
2 |
Tampa Bay |
19.7 |
15.2 |
4.46 |
3 |
Cleveland |
18.0 |
14.9 |
3.10 |
3 |
Cleveland |
18.7 |
14.6 |
4.11 |
4 |
Indianapolis |
17.6 |
15.0 |
2.66 |
4 |
Carolina |
19.7 |
15.7 |
3.95 |
5 |
Detroit |
15.9 |
13.5 |
2.33 |
5 |
Cincinnati |
19.0 |
15.6 |
3.39 |
6 |
Pittsburgh |
20.5 |
18.5 |
1.98 |
6 |
Minnesota |
17.9 |
14.8 |
3.10 |
7 |
Jacksonville |
17.2 |
15.2 |
1.96 |
7 |
Atlanta |
18.5 |
15.4 |
3.08 |
8 |
Tampa Bay |
15.8 |
14.4 |
1.43 |
8 |
Indianapolis |
19.2 |
16.6 |
2.61 |
9 |
Dallas |
15.9 |
14.5 |
1.42 |
9 |
Baltimore |
17.6 |
15.5 |
2.08 |
10 |
Minnesota |
14.8 |
13.9 |
0.94 |
10 |
Pittsburgh |
20.7 |
19.1 |
1.59 |
11 |
Atlanta |
17.9 |
17.0 |
0.91 |
11 |
Tennessee |
18.9 |
18.0 |
0.94 |
12 |
Chicago |
16.7 |
15.9 |
0.75 |
12 |
Jacksonville |
15.9 |
15.2 |
0.65 |
13 |
Carolina |
15.4 |
15.0 |
0.41 |
13 |
Buffalo |
17.2 |
16.6 |
0.61 |
14 |
Baltimore |
16.6 |
16.6 |
0.04 |
14 |
Philadelphia |
15.7 |
15.7 |
0.01 |
15 |
Houston |
18.3 |
NA |
NA |
15 |
Houston |
15.9 |
NA |
NA |
16 |
Washington |
15.8 |
16.5 |
-0.70 |
16 |
Green Bay |
19.6 |
19.9 |
-0.31 |
17 |
Arizona |
14.4 |
15.2 |
-0.85 |
17 |
Dallas |
15.8 |
16.3 |
-0.51 |
18 |
Green Bay |
16.5 |
17.5 |
-0.98 |
18 |
Miami |
14.6 |
15.3 |
-0.73 |
19 |
Kansas City |
16.1 |
17.2 |
-1.10 |
19 |
Chicago |
18.1 |
19.0 |
-0.91 |
20 |
NY Jets |
16.8 |
18.1 |
-1.38 |
20 |
New Orleans |
15.6 |
16.5 |
-0.95 |
21 |
Miami |
18.8 |
20.2 |
-1.44 |
21 |
NY Jets |
14.3 |
15.4 |
-1.04 |
22 |
Oakland |
17.0 |
18.5 |
-1.45 |
22 |
Washington |
15.0 |
16.7 |
-1.71 |
23 |
Denver |
17.2 |
18.7 |
-1.52 |
23 |
Kansas City |
11.8 |
13.9 |
-2.12 |
24 |
New Orleans |
15.3 |
16.9 |
-1.59 |
24 |
New England |
16.7 |
19.0 |
-2.34 |
25 |
New England |
16.1 |
17.7 |
-1.68 |
25 |
Denver |
12.2 |
14.6 |
-2.46 |
26 |
San Francisco |
14.8 |
16.8 |
-2.03 |
26 |
Oakland |
12.2 |
14.8 |
-2.65 |
27 |
San Diego |
16.8 |
18.8 |
-2.09 |
27 |
NY Giants |
14.3 |
17.2 |
-2.91 |
28 |
Buffalo |
15.4 |
17.5 |
-2.11 |
28 |
San Diego |
13.7 |
18.1 |
-4.44 |
29 |
Philadelphia |
15.1 |
17.4 |
-2.29 |
29 |
Seattle |
12.4 |
17.0 |
-4.59 |
30 |
NY Giants |
14.6 |
17.2 |
-2.66 |
30 |
St Louis |
12.8 |
18.1 |
-5.25 |
31 |
St Louis |
13.9 |
16.7 |
-2.77 |
31 |
Arizona |
11.7 |
18.5 |
-6.83 |
32 |
Seattle |
13.4 |
17.7 |
-4.24 |
32 |
San Francisco |
12.3 |
19.4 |
-7.17 |
It's a widely
held opinion that accurately ranking PKs is one of the most difficult
tasks in fantasy football. No argument here. If you're one that prefers
to take a PK late in your draft, consider the rookie Travis Dorsch from
Cincinnati or Cleveland's Phil Dawson. Don't gamble on Rian Lindell from
Seattle or anyone from the Giants. Side note: Jeff Wilkins = scoring. |
The 49ers took
giant steps forward in 2001, but look for them to take some baby steps
back this year. Arizona was horrid last year. Expect more of the same.
The Rams won't be as dominant this go around. Let's take a gander at the
top. How on earth can a sane human recommend the Lions defense/special
teams? Let's remember that a #1 ranking doesn't mean Detroit's the #1
Def/ST. They merely have the easiest schedule compared to their 2001 campaign.
Will Tampa Bay really improve without Tony Dungy? Could be as they weren't
exactly stellar last year. Look for good strides from Cleveland, Carolina,
and Cincinnati. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key:
'Rk' is each team's rank.
'2002' is each team's average opponent's rank in each position.
'2001' is each team's average opponents' rank in each position.
NA is not available as Houston did not play in 2001.
'Dif' is the difference between the '2002' and '2001'.
Note: Positive 'Dif' values are good while negative 'Dif' values are bad.
Scoring system:
Offensive scoring
TD passing = 4 points
TD rushing/receiving = 6 points
Passing yards = 1 point per 20 yards
Rushing/receiving yards = 1 point per 10 yards
INT = (-1) point
Two-point conversion (by any method) = 2 points
FG = 3 points
PAT = 1 point
Defensive scoring
TD Return = 6 points
INT = 2 points
Fumble recovery = 2 points
Sack = 1 point
Safety = 2 points
Defensive points allowed:
0 = 12 points
1 to 6 = 9 points
7 to 12 = 6 points
13 to 18 = 3 points
19 to 24 = 0 points
25 to 30 = (-3) points
31 to 36 = (-6) points
37 or more = (-9) points
Defensive yards allowed:
1 to 149 = 12 points
150 to 199 = 9 points
200 to 249 = 6 points
250 to 299 = 3 points
300 to 349 = 0 points
350 to 399 = (-3) points
400 to 449 = (-6) points
450 or more = (-9) points
Mail comments to: Clayton Gray
|