One of the most misunderstood concepts in fantasy football is strength of schedule.
I'm here to change that.
You see, most fantasy participants fall into one of two categories. Either they believe NFL schedules are basically the same, so it's a colossal waste of time to apply schedule analysis to their draft preparations, or they think strength of schedule is a worthwhile value to factor into player evaluations but mistakenly use traditional records-based rankings in their calculations.
Does this make a difference in fantasy football? It could, but only if the Bucs and Rams are weaker defensively in a particular area than the Saints and Cardinals.
Factoring strength of schedule into draft ratings is a no-brainer. Those who don't are just flat-out lazy.
Think about it: Almost everyone uses strength of schedule when doing weekly lineups. When two players are comparable, most fantasy participants will play the guy who faces the softer opponent.
That's simple enough. So then I ask: If it works on a weekly basis, why shouldn't it work over the course of the entire season?
The answer is it does, and it has.
Perhaps a 2009 example will help convince you.
Most analysts had Aaron Rodgers and Philip Rivers rated pretty much even on draft day a year ago. Rodgers had thrown for 29 more yards the previous season, Rivers for six more touchdowns. But when you broke down the schedules, you quickly saw Rodgers would have a huge advantage. His 16 opponents cumulatively were far weaker against the pass than those who would be facing Rivers. My projections had Rodgers facing the fourth-easiest collection of pass defenses, whereas Rivers would have to endure the second-toughest.
Maybe you went into your draft thinking one or the other was the clear-cut choice. That's fine. But if you were undecided, strength of schedule pointed you strongly in Rodgers' direction.
And if you trusted the concept, you benefited big-time.
OK, not all examples were as lopsided, and that's why I say strength-of-schedule ratings make for an ideal tiebreaker when all other factors lead you to believe two players are relatively even. To convince you to give it a try this season, I have done the hard work for you. I've computed all the strength-of-schedule mathematics.
Without going all Newton on you, these ratings are basically a sum of last year's statistics and a number value applied to any offseason personnel or coaching changes a team might have made.
Here's what the numbers-crunching spits out:
Easiest schedules to run against in 2010
1. Seattle; 2. San Francisco; 3. Kansas City; 4. San Diego; 5. Arizona; 6. Denver; 7. St. Louis; 8. Jacksonville; 9. Oakland; 10. Atlanta; 11. Carolina; 12. Pittsburgh; 13. Tampa Bay; 14. Tennessee; 15. Baltimore; 16. Indianapolis; 17. Washington; 18. New Orleans; 19. Cincinnati; 20. Houston; 21. Minnesota; 22. Dallas; 23. N.Y. Jets; 24. New England; 25. Green Bay; 26. Cleveland; 27. Detroit; 28. Miami; 29. Chicago; 30. N.Y. Giants; 31. Buffalo; 32. Philadelphia.
Easiest schedules to pass against in 2010
1. Washington; 2. Philadelphia; 3. Oakland; 4. N.Y. Giants; 5. San Francisco; 6. Dallas; 7. St. Louis; 8. Kansas City; 9. Tennessee; 10. Jacksonville; 11. San Diego; 12. Arizona; 13. Green Bay; 14. Chicago; 15. Indianapolis; 16. Denver; 17. New Orleans; 18. Carolina; 19. Minnesota; 20. Seattle; 21. Houston; 22. N.Y. Jets; 23. Tampa Bay; 24. Detroit; 25. Buffalo; 26. Atlanta; 27. Cincinnati; 28. New England; 29. Pittsburgh; 30. Baltimore; 31. Miami; 32. Cleveland.
Now let's apply these numbers to three 2010 examples, guys rated almost identically in the NFL.com player rankings. It's very possible you'll have to make one of these head-scratching decisions early in your draft. If you use my strength-of-schedule numbers, the decision becomes a no-brainer.
Tom Brady vs. Tony Romo
I believe that five quarterbacks stand out above the rest. Once Drew Brees, Peyton Manning and Rodgers are gone, you would be wise to grab either Brady or Romo as quickly as possible. But which one? Take Romo. While Brady has five games against teams I project to be the three best against the pass, Romo will enjoy six games against units I rank 24th or worse. Romo has the easier matchup five of the first six weeks (throwing out bye weeks) and nine of 14 overall if you dismiss the generally meaningless Week 17. Bottom line is that Romo will face the sixth-easiest collection of pass defenses in 2010. Brady's schedule rates 28th. It's an easy choice.
C.J. Spiller vs. Beanie Wells
It's the fourth round, and you're one of the few teams with just one running back. It's time to grab a second RB between two up-and-comers: Spiller or Wells. Which one? Take Wells. He has the head-to-head schedule advantage over Spiller in each of the first six weeks and 10 of the first 14. Wells gets seven matchups (almost half his schedule) against run defenses I rate 25th or lower. Spiller has the unenviable task of going up nine times against units I rate eighth or better.
Overall, Wells' schedule rates as the fifth-easiest in the league, and Spiller's is the second-hardest. Again, an easy choice.
Anquan Boldin vs. Steve Smith (Giants)
A proven commodity or a guy who burst onto the fantasy scene last season. This is a tough choice for your No. 2 receiver. But when you take strength of schedule into account, one separates himself from the other.
Take Smith. He gets a crack at the units I rate 30th, 31st and 32nd and enjoys a head-to-head advantage in each of the first eight weeks over Boldin, who will go up against each of the top five units in my ratings, including the second-ranked pass defense twice.
In the end, Smith gets the fourth-easiest schedule, and Boldin's rates 30th. Your decision is made.
So, there are your first three tips for the 2010 draft. Now here's a fourth: Don't be fooled by what you've read elsewhere about strength of schedule and its potential impact (or lack thereof) on your fantasy season. Trust me, you can trust these numbers.
Dave Del Grande, aka Mr. Fantasy, offers free advice via e-mail at dave@mrfantasy.com.
