Anyone that has played in large-field fantasy football tournaments—whether best ball, redraft, or DFS—has some understanding of stacking, the strategy of rostering multiple teammates from the same team. The basic premise of stacking is that by getting multiple pieces of a single offense, the likelihood of ceiling weeks and outlier seasons increases for a roster.
While this intuitively makes sense, it’s that intuition that most fantasy managers have been using to build their stacks, rather than relying on data. With two years of data from Underdog’s Best Ball Mania, we can now use the 4for4 Best Ball Stacking Tool to quantify how to optimize our approach to stacking, rather than just relying on feel.
Underdog Fantasy Resources: Get a Free 4for4 Pro Subscription | Half-PPR Rankings | Underdog ADP | Roster Construction Tool | Advance Rate Explorer | Best Ball Stacking Tool
Best Ball Mania Research: Positional Allocation Guide | Roster Construction Guide | Positional Draft Strategies | Anatomy of a Final-Round Roster | Building a Unique Roster
The Most Succesful Best Ball Mania Stacks
There are thousands of possible stacking combinations but the 4for4 Best Ball Stacking Tool has isolated 100 of the most frequently used two-man and three-man stacks from the last two Best Ball Mania tournaments. Of that sample, 18 stacks have returned a playoff advance rate at least one percentage point over expectation in each season with eight of those stacks including a quarterback.
See footnotes for an explanation of how to read each stack table.
Successful Quarterback Stacks
| Stack | Count - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Count - 2021 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QB1+RB2+WR4 | 304 | +8.15% | 1793 | +11.47% |
| QB1+WR3+WR4 | 662 | +2.61% | 3779 | +1.74% |
| QB1+TE1+WR4 | 743 | +4.37% | 4026 | +5.03% |
| QB1+WR2+WR4 | 923 | +4.23% | 4937 | +8.09% |
| QB1+WR1+WR4 | 903 | +4.34% | 5473 | +4.60% |
| QB1+RB3+WR3 | 495 | +1.42% | 1256 | +3.84% |
| QB1+RB2+WR3 | 1273 | +1.27% | 5010 | +1.72% |
| QB1+WR4 | 3186 | +4.06% | 19391 | +4.27% |
Two things jump off the page when looking at the most successful quarterback stacks: most of the stacks are three-man stacks and almost all of them include a WR4. At first, it comes as a surprise that WR4s are so prominent here but this is actually quite predictable with an understanding of player advance rates.
The 4for4 Advance Rate Explorer shows 242 players with an ADP in Round 11 or later over the last two seasons. Among those late-round picks, pass-catchers have shown the best success rates in terms of advance rates over expectation—40% of wide receivers and 42% of tight ends in that sample have finished with above-average advance rates compared to 34% for running backs and 28% for quarterbacks.
When you consider how many more viable wide receivers there are than tight ends, it makes sense that they would show up here, especially when they can be brought along in a positive correlation with their quarterback. Targeting a team’s WR4s also capitalizes on the uncertainty in preseason projections—while we’re pretty good at projecting the top of depth charts, it gets tricky as we move further down a team’s roster to decipher battles such as WR3 vs WR4 or RB2 vs RB3. Later-round receivers are also the players that figure to break out late in the season—this includes rookies, players on new teams, or dart throws that benefit from a teammate’s injury.
Knowing that QB/WR4 has typically been a beneficiary, stack, the 4for4 Best Ball Stacking Tool can lend some insight on how to approach implementing these stacks into your draft strategy.
| Detailed Stack | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| QB1 as QB1 + WR4 | +3.1% | +5.0% |
| QB1 as QB2 + WR4 | +4.7% | +4.2% |
| QB1 as QB3 + WR4 | +2.9% | +0.5% |
Stacking a quarterback with his WR4 has routinely shown positive results but waiting to stack a late-round QB—or the third quarterback on your roster—with one of his late-round receivers has had its shortcomings in both Best Ball Mania tournaments. In 2020, no QB drafted as a team’s QB1 as QB3 + WR4 advanced to the finals, and in 2021 that combo barely had a playoff advance rate above the baseline.
Successful Non-Quarterback Stacks
| Stack | Count - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Count - 2021 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RB2+WR4 | 960 | +3.99% | 7185 | +8.37% |
| TE1+WR2+WR4 | 282 | +5.09% | 1634 | +7.29% |
| TE1+WR1+WR4 | 259 | +4.30% | 1583 | +5.92% |
| WR2+WR4 | 1489 | +3.98% | 10338 | +5.64% |
| RB3+TE1 | 2423 | +1.32% | 5268 | +4.86% |
| TE1+WR4 | 1156 | +4.37% | 9456 | +3.50% |
| WR1+WR4 | 1393 | +4.25% | 10609 | +3.05% |
| RB2+TE2 | 948 | +3.36% | 2097 | +2.76% |
| RB2+WR1+WR3 | 596 | +2.52% | 2786 | +1.21% |
| WR3+WR4 | 1124 | +1.53% | 9074 | +1.18% |
Once again, WR4 is prevalent as a position to target in non-quarterback stacks but the other two positions that stand out here are a team’s RB2 and TE1. With a vast majority of tight ends and RB2s drafted in the middle and late rounds, this collection of stacks highlights the advantage of waiting on values to complete a stack rather than forcing stacks with early-round draft picks.
| Detailed Stack | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| RB2 as RB3 + WR4 | +0.1% | +12.5% |
| RB2 as RB4 + WR4 | +4.1% | +8.9% |
| RB2 as RB5 + WR4 | +0.7% | +5.3% |
| RB2 as RB5 + WR4 | +13.5% | +1.0% |
| TE1 as TE1 + WR4 | -3.4% | +0.5% |
| TE1 as TE2 + WR4 | +12.1% | +4.6% |
| TE1 as TE3 + WR4 | +14.4% | +9.9% |
There hasn’t been a noticeable trend for when it’s ideal to draft an RB2 in these stacks—the second running back on a team is often used as a pass-catching role and usually presents decent ADP value. However, there has been strong evidence that stacking a tight end from the middle or late rounds with a late-round receiver has shown better returns than similar stacks with a tight end from the earlier rounds.
A Note on Other WR4 Stacks
There were eight stacks used in 2021 Best Ball Mania leagues with an advance rate of at least two percentage points over expectation that had little to no sample size in 2020. All eight of those stacks included a WR4 but half of them also included a team’s RB1. Each stack also happened to be a 3-man stack.
| Stack | Count - 2021 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| WR1+WR2+WR4 | 1453 | +6.08% |
| RB1+TE1+WR4 | 1439 | +5.33% |
| RB1+WR1+WR4 | 1788 | +5.17% |
| RB1+WR2+WR4 | 2786 | +3.47% |
| WR2+WR3+WR4 | 1700 | +3.01% |
| WR1+WR3+WR4 | 1259 | +3.00% |
| TE1+WR3+WR4 | 1151 | +2.76% |
| RB1+WR3+WR4 | 1439 | +2.27% |
Underperforming Best Ball Mania Stacks
Over the course of two seasons, there have been eight two-man or three-man stacks that have a playoff advance rate a full percentage point below expectation in both Best Ball Mania tournaments—all eight of those stacks included a team's RB1.
| Stack | Count - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Count - 2021 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QB1+RB1+WR3 | 2050 | -3.68% | 7872 | -2.21% |
| RB1+TE1+WR3 | 892 | -4.88% | 3320 | -1.97% |
| RB1+WR1+WR3 | 893 | -4.79% | 3667 | -1.62% |
| RB1+WR2+WR3 | 799 | -6.16% | 3449 | -1.25% |
| RB1+TE1+WR1 | 1454 | -4.64% | 5183 | -1.59% |
| QB1+RB1+TE1 | 2743 | -1.84% | 9079 | -2.07% |
| RB1+WR3 | 5690 | -3.54% | 28547 | -1.66% |
| RB1+RB3 | 1940 | -2.81% | 4532 | -1.25% |
By looking at these stacks on a more granular level, you can see when to typically avoid these stacks and when RB1 stacks might actually be feasible.
| Detailed Stack | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2020 | Advance Rate Over Expectation - 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| QB1 as QB1 + RB1 as RB1 | -4.8% | -0.7% |
| QB1 as QB2 + RB1 as RB1 | -0.4% | +0.8% |
| QB1 as QB3 + RB1 as RB1 | +7.4% | +0.4% |
| QB1 as QB1 + RB1 as RB2 | -1.2% | -3.1% |
| QB1 as QB2 + RB1 as RB2 | +0.4% | -0.7% |
| QB1 as QB3 + RB1 as RB2 | -1.6% | +2.8% |
| QB1 as QB1 + RB1 as RB3 | +0.8% | -4.0% |
| QB1 as QB2 + RB1 as RB3 | -1.9% | -2.4% |
| QB1 as QB3 + RB1 as RB3 | +1.6% | +0.2% |
| RB1 as RB1 + WR3 | -6.1% | -2.1% |
| RB1 as RB2 + WR3 | -0.1% | -0.5% |
| RB1 as RB3 + WR3 | -0.3% | -2.2% |
When pairing a quarterback with his primary running back, the biggest disadvantages have come from pairing the first quarterback you draft with your first or second running back drafted. As is the case with most stacks, QB + RB1 can be useful when the stack falls to you rather than forcing it, highlighted by the relatively high advanced rates of the QB1 as QB3 + RB1 as RB3 stacks.
When stacking a team’s RB1 with any other teammate besides the QB or WR4, there have been almost no consistently positive outcomes in terms of advance rates. It should also be noted how frequently these unsuccessful stacks have been used relative to the successful stacks, furthering the advantage of those listed in the first section.
Final-Round Roster Trends
Using playoff advance rates as the groundwork for stacking strategy helps to build a safe draft plan but dissecting final-round Best Ball Mania stacking trends can inform Underdog managers on how to build tournament-winning upside with stacks as well. There have been 758 stacks used across 210 final-round teams from the last two Best Ball Mania tournaments. Stacks with the highest final-round advance rates over the last two seasons share many similarities with stacks that advanced past the first round at the highest rates.
| Stack Summary | Finals Adv. Rate, 2020–2021 |
|---|---|
| RB2 + WR2 + WR4 | 0.48% |
| RB2 + TE1 + WR4 | 0.42% |
| TE1 + WR3 + WR4 | 0.41% |
| RB2 + WR3 + WR4 | 0.38% |
| QB1 + RB2 + WR5 | 0.38% |
| RB2 + WR1 + WR4 | 0.37% |
| RB3 + WR1 + WR2 | 0.37% |
| QB1 + WR3 + WR5 | 0.35% |
| RB2 + TE1 + WR3 | 0.34% |
| WR2 + WR3 + WR4 | 0.33% |
Here are some highlights from those stacks.
When Did Final-Round Teams Draft Stacks?
It was somewhat unusual for final-round teams to spend a ton of draft capital on a team stack. The first player in a stack was drafted before the sixth round about half of the time but just 207 of the stacks (27%) found on final-round rosters used at least two picks in Round 8 or earlier. However, waiting until the late rounds to complete a stack wasn’t too popular either—just over 20% of all stacks in the final rounds were made up of players only drafted in Round 9 or later. Using the back half of the draft to match up stacks with earlier-round selections is seemingly the ideal approach to stack-building.
How Many Stacks Were on Final-Round Rosters?
If you read the introduction to this section closely, you noticed that the average final-round roster has used between three and four team stacks. (758 stacks used across 210 final-round teams). This suggests that rosters that made it to the final round of the last two tournaments tended to avoid onslaughts or stacks with four or more players from the same team.
Here is the distribution of stack sizes across all final-round rosters from the last two Best Ball Mania tournaments.
| Stack Size | Count |
|---|---|
| 2 | 517 |
| 3 | 177 |
| 4 | 49 |
| 5 | 12 |
| 6 | 0 |
| 7 | 3 |
Stacking Notes for Your Best Ball Mania 3 Rosters
- Stacks that include a team’s WR4 have typically shown some of the most positive results over the last two years, especially three-man stacks with a quarterback—late-round wide receivers have higher hit rates that running backs or quarterbacks.
- When stacking a quarterback with a WR4, it is typically best to avoid the stack if it is with a late-round quarterback.
- Other than quarterback, stacking ancillary players from a team has been a successful stacking strategy—tight ends and RB2s stacked with a WR4 show up as a winning trend.
- Stacking a team’s RB1 with another highly drafted teammate has been an underwhelming strategy unless that RB1 has been drafted as the RB3 on the BBM roster.
- Final-round Best Ball Mania teams rarely used high draft capital on a single stack. Instead, it was best to use the later rounds of a draft to pair players with teammates that you drafted early in your draft.
- Rather than loading up on an entire offense on one roster, final-round teams tended to use multiple team stacks, usually with no more than three players
Footnotes
Stack Summary: Player number represents ADP relative to his NFL teammates at the time of the draft. WR4 is read as the WR with the fourth-highest ADP on his team.
Detailed Stack: Player chosen AS represents a player's position based on where he was drafted relative to others drafted on the same BEST BALL team. RB2 as RB3 is read as the RB with the second-highest ADP on his NFL team selected as the third RB on a BEST BALL roster.
"ball" - Google News
May 28, 2022 at 07:36PM
https://ift.tt/BlnMAyx
Underdog Best Ball Mania Bible: Stacking Strategy - 4for4
"ball" - Google News
https://ift.tt/icFXGmh
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
No comments:
Post a Comment