We\u2019re back, which means our fantasy hockey cheat sheet has arrived and it\u2019s time to start your draft prep!<\/p>\n
If this isn\u2019t your first rodeo, you know what to do: the rankings are at the bottom for you to download in big bold letters. For the folks who are new around town, here\u2019s the deal: we\u2019ve got a fancy spreadsheet that creates fully customizable rankings tailored to whatever weird way your league is set up. There\u2019s no real standardized hockey league and the best way to get ahead is having rankings that take into account your league\u2019s specific settings. Your league is not the same league as the next person\u2019s and that\u2019s a critical point when it comes to research and rankings. In fantasy hockey, it\u2019s not one-size-fits-all, and depending on any one rankings list \u2014 no matter how smart the person writing it is \u2014 might already be your first mistake.<\/p>\n
While other rankings can work for standard leagues or for research purposes, they probably don\u2019t apply directly to your own league\u2019s quirks. That\u2019s the point of this spreadsheet: to create an easy way for any fantasy hockey manager to have their own rankings that actually fit their league\u2019s scoring system and format. (And trust us, it pays to have projections for every stat you need, not just points).<\/p>\n
You can find download links to the sheets below (In Excel and Numbers\/Mac formats). Underneath that you can find instructions on how the sheet works as well as answers to some frequently asked questions. (All patches and updates will be updated at the bottom of this story)<\/p>\n
(Note: There was an initial error in the rankings\/projections for category leagues. That has been corrected and the files were updated at 5:15 pm ET on Tuesday, September 2. Anyone who downloaded the rankings\/projections prior to that time should re-download the files for the corrected version)<\/p>\n
Microsoft Excel download link (Yahoo)<\/a>Microsoft Excel download link (Fantrax)<\/a>Numbers download link (Yahoo)<\/a>Numbers download link (Fantrax)<\/a>How to use this fantasy hockey cheat sheetStep 1: Scoring settings<\/p>\n The first thing you need to do is to go to the \u201cSettings\u201d tab to start customizing. On the left side is where you\u2019ll enter your league\u2019s scoring system. If you\u2019re in a points-based league, you only need to worry about the points column. If you\u2019re in a categories or roto league, only worry about the categories column.<\/p>\n For points leagues, simply type in the value next to each stat. If a goal is worth three points, type \u201c3.\u201d That\u2019s it.<\/p>\n For category leagues, I use standard deviations to score players in each category, so simply type \u201c1\u201d next to whatever category your league uses. This weights each category equally. If you would like to add more weight to certain categories (goals, assists, shots) over others (PIM, hits, blocks) based on scarcity, you can make the former categories worth more than one and the latter categories worth less.<\/p>\n Step 2: League settings<\/p>\n Next, you are going to focus on the right side of the page.<\/p>\n At the top, fill in how many players are in the starting lineup. If you\u2019re in a league that doesn\u2019t separate forwards by position, just make sure all three positions add up to the total amount of forward positions. At the bottom under \u201cnumber of teams\u201d type in how many teams are in your league.<\/p>\n For ADP data type in which fantasy service you use.<\/p>\n For league type, type in \u201cpoints\u201d or \u201ccategories\u201d depending on whichever your league uses. This year there\u2019s only one page for rankings as opposed to separate pages for both so this step is crucial as it makes sure the correct total fantasy point calculation is used.<\/p>\n For forward positions, type in \u201cC\/LW\/RW\u201d if it\u2019s separated or \u201cforwards\u201d if it\u2019s not. We realize all of this is pretty self-explanatory from looking at the spreadsheet, but for those less fluent we figured we would spell it out for you.<\/p>\n Then there\u2019s \u201cgames played projections.\u201d \u201cNo\u201d means that every skater is projected to play all 82 games, while \u201cyes\u201d uses my games played estimates. If you\u2019re of the mind that injuries are random, it might be better to go by a player\u2019s projected per-game output. Just make sure you go through the list to mark the players who already have known injuries.<\/p>\n There\u2019s one more setting, but that one requires further explanation.<\/p>\n Step 3: Establishing a baseline<\/p>\n There\u2019s a reason that you\u2019re asked to fill out league size and starting lineup size above, and that\u2019s so the spreadsheet can calculate each player\u2019s value over replacement \u2013 the key to the rankings.<\/p>\n Essentially, each player has a projected fantasy point rate, but that number needs the added context of what position he plays and what other players at the position are expected to do. Generally, this is to control for the fact that there\u2019s an abundance of strong scoring centers and not as many capable wingers or defenders.<\/p>\n For example, if Rasmus Dahlin is expected to score 400 fantasy points and Jack Eichel is expected to score 450, it\u2019s the latter that seems more valuable. But it all depends on that baseline, where you can generally get a 400 point center just as easily as a 350 point defender. That makes them equally valuable. This year, we\u2019ve added a column in the settings sheet so you have an easy view at what that baseline is for each position.<\/p>\n Now, here\u2019s where things get tricky: how do you actually establish the baseline?<\/p>\n Previously, it was an automatic calculation based on league size and starting lineup combined with how players are normally drafted within the top 100. That generally made defenders more valuable, but to some it doesn\u2019t go far enough \u2013 that the need for four defensemen in a standard league makes them even more valuable than using that method suggested. To some, the positional requirement is the way to go and that the baseline should be starting line up multiplied by team size \u2013 essentially, the true definition of replacement.<\/p>\n Using the draft to dictate the process helps account for the fact that people don\u2019t normally draft defensemen super high (even if they should), but perhaps it\u2019s not cognizant enough of the reality of defensemen needs. With most teams now opting for a 4F1D power play, finding a good defender is more difficult than it\u2019s ever been.<\/p>\n It\u2019s for that reason that there\u2019s an option for how to establish baseline: draft (the usual way that\u2019s based off top 100 selections), position (based off starting lineup and league size) and blend which mixes both together. We made blend the default because we\u2019re not sure which method is better, but the option is now there for you based on your own beliefs. As long as you\u2019re not reaching for targets and drafting along ADP, you should be fine either way.<\/p>\n Step 4: Creating the ranking<\/p>\n All of that work sets up your rankings, but once you go to \u201cThe List\u201d page you will see that everything is probably out of order. All you need to do now is sort. In Apple Numbers, just double click the top of the rank column and press \u201cSort Ascending.\u201d In Excel, click the arrow at the top of the rank column and then click \u201cSort Ascending.\u201d The rank is based on each player\u2019s VORP, so alternatively you can sort by that as well. If you\u2019re in a league that uses a salary cap, the \u201c\/$\u201d column compares VORP to a player\u2019s salary, so alternatively you can also sort by that.<\/p>\n For keeper leagues, use the \u201ckeep\u201d column to denote any player who is a keeper. You can then filter them out using the arrows above in Excel or the filter option under \u201cOrganize\u201d in the sidebar in Numbers.<\/p>\n Step 5: Projection Customization<\/p>\n The final step is disagreeing with us. We know you probably will and that\u2019s okay! We\u2019ve even made that process easier with a specific column for adjusting called \u201cboom or bust.\u201d<\/p>\n The gist is that we know a model, no matter how good, is not infallible. Human intuition is important and we wanted to include some adjustments based on our own feelings and disagreements with the model\u2019s output. This is especially helpful for younger players who look ready to break out or players who switched teams \u2013 two instances the model has historically struggled with.<\/p>\n We went through each projection and debated whether a player deserved to be a little higher or lower. On the actual list page you can see a \u201c+\u201d or \u201c-\u201c denoting exactly which players we tinkered with, making it easy to see exactly where our subjective judgement came in to play.<\/p>\n This is also where your own disagreements come into play. On the sheet there\u2019s a column labelled \u201cADJ\u201d that\u2019s already filled with adjustments made by Shayna Goldman and I, but you can change those or add your own. It\u2019s as simple as adding a \u201c+\u201d or \u201c-\u201c for small adjustments, or \u201c+ +\u201d and \u201c- -\u201c for bigger adjustments (not recommended for goalies). Don\u2019t be afraid to use your gut instinct.<\/p>\n Step 6: Drafting<\/p>\n The final step is actually drafting your team. Here\u2019s what we usually do: once a player is drafted, we use the \u201ckeep\u201d column as a way to denote which players are taken already. If they were drafted, we might type a \u201cY\u201d in that column, and then you can use the filters above the column to automatically hide players who are selected as it happens.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also worth keeping track of your team while you draft, and that\u2019s where the \u201cTeam Comparison\u201d tab comes in. Type in the players you draft as it happens and the table will auto-populate their projections. If you\u2019ve got time, you can also type in the other teams as well for an instant comparison of where your team stands.<\/p>\n FAQHow do these projections work?<\/p>\n First and foremost, it starts with Evolving Hockey. We don\u2019t know where we would be without that site, but all the data that goes into creating the projections comes from there.<\/p>\n After that, it\u2019s a relatively simple marcel projection that uses the past three years of data for each stat, weighted by recency, regressed to the mean, and age-adjusted. That\u2019s done on a per-minute level and applied to time-on-ice projections based on each player\u2019s ice time last season, adjusted for where they\u2019ll likely fit on the depth chart this year (with the help of the NHL beat writers here).<\/p>\n How accurate are these projections?<\/p>\n This is always a very important question. While the projections themselves look absolute, the reality is that there are margins of error. A player projected to hit 80 points really means \u201csomewhere between 70 and 90 points.\u201d Worst case, he\u2019s on the low end; best case, he\u2019s on the high end \u2013 with some exceptions to the rule that end up way higher or lower. I didn\u2019t go through last year\u2019s projections, but the general rule of thumb is points are usually off by 9-10 points, while shots are usually off by 25.<\/p>\n Do you really believe Connor McDavid is going to score exactly 130 points?<\/p>\n Not exactly, and it goes back to the point made above. Think of a projection as a probability and the figure shown as an average of that probability. The likeliest point total for McDavid next year is 130 points in 81 games, but as we saw above, the average error for projections is about nine points in a normal season. So really, that\u2019s saying he\u2019ll likely score between 121 and 139 points in a season, give or take. It\u2019s a ballpark figure where the goal is to be less wrong. A projection model will do that better than just guessing, and a good projection will do better than a bad one.<\/p>\n Once I have customized rankings, should I blindly follow the list that was generated for me?<\/p>\n No, and it comes down to the range discussed above. If Jason Robertson is at 405 fantasy points and Filip Forsberg is at 400 points, both players are well within each other\u2019s error bounds. Robertson is probably the better player, but if you want to argue Forsberg, that\u2019s an important debate to have while making selections.<\/p>\n That type of context won\u2019t be explicitly included in a projection like this. That\u2019s why it will be helpful to read all the other fantasy hockey draft content coming down the pipeline to become more informed about the players who might underperform or overperform their projections.<\/p>\n In general, it\u2019s best to follow the rankings, but it\u2019s fair to squabble when players are very close to each other. In those cases, you\u2019re usually splitting hairs.<\/p>\n Why is there a mediocre goalie ranked so high?<\/p>\n Fair enough! For points leagues, start volume is the key for goaltenders and often when you see a goaltender ranked higher than expected here, it\u2019s because of that reason alone. In a league that\u2019s veering more and more towards tandem situations, it pays to have a legitimate starter likely to play in 70 percent of their games as those are few and far between.<\/p>\n Explaining our color-coded context<\/p>\n Knowing a player\u2019s expected output going into a draft is crucial, but it\u2019s not the only thing worth considering \u2014 especially if you\u2019re stuck picking between two equal-ish players. Last year we added a few color-coded indicators that can help with a legend on the settings page.<\/p>\n Team: This is a double-whammy with two things to consider: strength-of-schedule and fantasy scheduling itself.<\/p>\n On the first front, we\u2019ve colored teams with the weakest average defensive opponents blue and the strongest in red. Basically, the more games against the Sharks, Blackhawks or Penguins the better.<\/p>\n On the second front, we also looked into which teams play the most off-days (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Sunday). Those teams are in bold and are especially good targets lower in the draft as they\u2019ll be much easier to fit into lineups. It\u2019s a way to get more out of your bench as a player sitting there doesn\u2019t do much good.<\/p>\n Age: The projections are already age-adjusted, but it\u2019s worth being mindful of players who may take bigger jumps, up or down, to age. Blue is anyone who isn\u2019t in their prime yet (95 percent of peak age production) and could breakout. Red is anyone who is likely past their prime.<\/p>\n Salary: If you\u2019re a believer in contract-year hype, we\u2019ve got you covered. Any player with one year left on his deal is highlighted in bold blue.<\/p>\n ADP Difference: This is one we\u2019ve already had for years, but there\u2019s a slight tweak this year. Now, bold means anyone who is a two-round difference or more, while the normal weight (but colored) is anyone between 1-2 rounds off where we have them.<\/p>\n Knowing who to draft is only half the battle. Where to draft them is the other, and this slight tweak should be helpful when it comes to figuring out where to target players.<\/p>\n TOI: One of the foundations of these projections is projecting which players should see an increase and decrease in ice time. Now those changes will be easier to spot as anyone who is expecting to see a one-minute difference from last year, or higher, is highlighted.<\/p>\n PPP: Going hand-in-hand with role is knowing which players will have a coveted job in the top power play. It\u2019s especially true for defensemen, where there\u2019s usually only one spot available. Getting that right \u2014 especially for teams where there\u2019s uncertainty \u2014 can be the difference between winning and losing. This year we\u2019ve highlighted exactly who we expect to get those roles in blue, with bold names likely to get over 60 percent of the available power-play ice time.<\/p>\n In some cases, we\u2019re making an educated guess, with some names looking like serious sleepers as a result (hello, Sam Rinzel in Chicago, maybe). But in a few cases, there\u2019s still some uncertainty leading to a 50-50 split.<\/p>\n As things become more clear during training camp, we will provide updates, but the knowledge of who we have in those roles should be helpful \u2014 especially if you disagree.<\/p>\n The downloadable cheatsheets<\/p>\n (Note: There was an initial error in the rankings\/projections for category leagues. That has been corrected and the files were updated at 5:15 pm ET on Tuesday, September 2. Anyone who downloaded the rankings\/projections prior to that time should re-download the files for the corrected version)<\/p>\n Microsoft Excel download link (Yahoo)<\/a>Microsoft Excel download link (Fantrax)<\/a>Numbers download link (Yahoo)<\/a>Numbers download link (Fantrax)<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n (Photo of Nathan MacKinnon: Ron Chenoy-Imagn Images)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"We\u2019re back, which means our fantasy hockey cheat sheet has arrived and it\u2019s time to start your draft…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":178604,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[377],"tags":[276,5],"class_list":{"0":"post-178603","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-hockey","8":"tag-fantasy-hockey","9":"tag-hockey"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/channels.im\/@nhl\/115137329882070406","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178603","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178603"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178603\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/178604"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178603"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178603"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nhl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178603"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}