The Weekly Gut Check examines the players, strategies and guidelines fantasy football owners use to make personnel decisions.

Crank Scores

I have written a lot about player consistency in the past five years. This is a very similar concept to what Jeff Pasquino covers in his Quality Games series. The main difference is that I have my own unique formula created from a database of game stats to determine fantasy points baselines for what makes a performance "quality," and I break those baselines into lineup-friendly tiers - for example, what baseline differentiates a fantasy RB1 from an RB2?

I also began incorporating X-values into my analysis to highlight the Value Based Drafting style influence from which Crank Scores evolved. Then I started integrating it into my experiments with projecting consistency.

If you are new to Crank Scores and you don't have a clue about what I'm writing, I suggest you check out these articles:

Crank Score Projections - How it all works

What Makes QBs and RBs Consistent?

What Makes WRs and TEs Consistent?

In this column I will combine the basics of what makes each of the fantasy skill positions consistent and publish the Crank Scores from the 2009 season.

I believe the most valuable thing about Crank Scores is analyzing which factors in hindsight contribute to a high scorer at each position. I believe this is helpful with projecting future performance, but I need to emphasize that there is no magic Crank Score formula that predicts consistency.

While I do have a trusted assistant, he's not a magic elf and his duty isn't projecting fantasy performers (although he provides occasional editorial input, much to Clayton Gray's dismay). His greatest service is stress reduction, low-level radiation shield between my TIVO and me, and sterling judge of character.

Once again, the best way to use this information is to take the bulleted points about what makes a player a consistently high scorer and apply it to your own projections and rankings. If you want to see how I apply what I learn from analyzing consistency, check out at my redraft rankings.

2009 Crank Scores - Quarterbacks

What Makes A QB Consistent?

My views are based on a few years of analysis. These are the factors that I believe make a quarterback a good Crank scorer:

Few Top-12 Crank QBs have RBs with commensurate production unless the player is a strong receiver.

The best Crank QBs have a high ratio of touchdowns to attempts and a higher attempt per game average than their peers.

The best Crank QBs have at least two receivers or one receiver and tight end with commensurate skill/productivity.

These points hold true for 2009's passers. Only Aaron Rodgers, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, and David Garrard had top-12 consistency and also played with a top-12 consistent runner. Garrard was at the bottom end of the list and not so coincidentally his top-12 runner is a very strong receiver. Both Manning and Favre's starting backs had at least 40 receptions as well.

Only six more quarterbacks in the top-12 actually had a runner produce in the top-24. While 75 percent of the QB1s had a fantasy starting quality RB, only 33 percent of them had a top-12 RB. What this means to me is that these top-12 quarterbacks play on a team with offensive balance, but that balance benefits the passer more than the runner.

As for scoring efficiency, the top-five Crank-scoring QBs had the highest ratio of touchdowns to attempts in the league last year. Is it a coincidence that all five of these passers, (Rodgers, Favre, Brees, Manning, and Rivers) had a top-24 consistent runner? It's just another example of offensive balance favoring the passer.

The reason it does has to do with the quality of players available to spread he field for the quarterback to find open men quickly. Only David Garrard lacked both a top-24 WR and top-12 TE, but if you place Maurice Jones Drew back into the equation as a productive receiver out of the backfield, then you see that consistently productive fantasy quarterbacks have at least two productive weapons to throw the ball.

It's these points that play into this year's lower ranking of Phillip Rivers. While Darren Sproles might provide some help to Antonio Gates, I'm not convinced Malcolm Floyd or Legedu Naanee have the consistency of a top-flight receiver like Vincent Jackson. It was their rising start at wide receiver pared with Antonio Gates that helped Phillip Rivers to be as consistent has he was from 2008-2009. If Jackson doesn't play or misses significant time, Rivers lacks the tools to produce to his capability.

2009 Crank Scores - Running backs

What Makes an RB Consistent?

As you can gather from the quarterback analysis, top-Crank runners aren't as tied to quarterback play:

Top 12 Crank RBs are predominantly in offenses without a Top 12 Crank QB.

Top 24 Crank RBs are more (72% in four seasons) often the clear-cut starter and not in a committee.

Less than one third of the backs in four seasons made the top 12 as Crank RBs with a Top 12 Crank QB and all but one (Ryan Grant in 2009) at least 40 receptions that year.

The vast majority (43 of 48) of Top 12 Crank RBs from 2006-2009 missed no more than two games.

The top six Crank RBs for the past four years averaged no fewer than 331 touches for a season; the top 12 no fewer than 310; and the 13th-24th ranked had no less than 231 opportunities.

As with quarterbacks in 2009, last year's runners performed to these trends. None of the top-five runners on this list had a quarterback with top-12 production and only three of the top-12 had a top-12 Crank QB. Of the RB1s on this list, only Ricky Williams and DeAngelo Williams were arguably in a committee and with Ronnie Brown gone for half of the season, Williams did most of his best work last year as the featured back. In fact, 14 of the top 17 backs were not committee runners.

These factors are why I think Ryan Mathews and Knowshon Moreno are good candidates to make the leap into the top-12 in 2010. They should get the ball enough, their offenses lack at least two top-tier talents at tight end or wide receiver, and this impacts the potential of their quarterback play. As long as they can stay healthy, I think they are reasonable bargains if you choose to opt for a non-runner with your opening pick(s).

2009 Crank Scores - Wide Receivers

What Makes a WR Consistent?

Note that the top receivers have the highest Crank Scores of any position. There were six receivers in 2009 that had a Crank Score has high or higher than Chris Johnson and Adrian Peterson - the top two Crank scorers at running back. There are 23 receivers and 7 backs that equaled or outscored Aaron Rodgers, the top quarterback. In fact, 35 receivers and 19 runners were more consistent hitting starter quality production at their positions on a weekly basis than the 5 best quarterbacks in 2009.

Although the top quarterbacks and runners score more fantasy points as individuals, this data is a big reason why I've opted to wait until as late as the fifth or sixth round to select running backs in recent seasons. If you play in a league where you start at least as many receivers as runners and quarterbacks combined, this information makes a compelling argument to opt for three receivers, a quarterback and/or tight end before you take a runner. Of course, this depends on where you're drafting and which players fall to you.

Here are the factors that I believe make a consistently productive receiver:

Top-36 WRs have a teammate at WR and/or TE with strong Crank score productivity

The QB has a history of Crank-consistent productivity or is taking the reigns of an offense that passes more productively than it runs the ball.

Receivers that catch at least 5 balls per game or have a highly productive yards per catch average. Considering the examples, these deep threats have a strong RB or ground game in the fold that helps the offense stretch the field.

Receivers that produced a season with a top 36 ranking and attained a high yards per catch and more than 40 receptions are likely flashing bigger production to come.

Top 12 WRs are three times more likely to have a second WR in the top 36 than a TE teammate in the top 12 at their position.

An average of three, top-12 WRs per season from 2006-2009 had a top 12 RB as a teammate.

Viewing this list of bullet points, I'm looking for receivers with obvious qualities in the early rounds: the likelihood of a lot of targets, a fantasy starter-quality teammate at receiver or tight end (preferably receiver), and a highly productive quarterback.

These are some of the reasons why I'm not as bullish on Larry Fitzgerald as my peers. I like Steve Breaston and Early Doucet and Andre Roberts are also promising players, but I'm not convinced Matt Leinart will be playing football at even close to the same level as Kurt Warner. Leinart lacks the experience and savvy to deal with pressure as effectively as Warner, and because he's only marginally more mobile than his predecessor, Leinart is going to encounter a lot of pressure unless his offensive line has vastly improved. Combine these issues and this makes Fitzgerald a very good, but not great fantasy option.

Sneaky-good picks this year? Santana Moss and Nate Burleson. Moss finally gets a quarterback with top-12 ability and a strong offensive mind in a head coach. He's moving to the flanker spot, which means he will see a lot more underneath work and this should translate into a target-rich environment for the veteran receiver. Moss also has talented personnel at tight end, and I expect these factors to make him a more productive player - and potential steal - in 2010. The impending Dr. Anthony Galea HGH case might be an additional factor depressing his value but if Moss' head coach is stating for the record that he doubts we'll see any action taken against Moss this season, that's a good sign.

Burleson is a skilled player teaming with perhaps the most physically talented receiver in the league. Second-year quarterback Matt Stafford had three things working against him last year that will change: 1) He was a rookie. 2) His surrounding talent was injured. And 3) His coaches limited the offense due to the lack of talent working with Stafford and not due to the quarterback's development. Burleson's injury history has rarely allowed him to show his wares for a full season, but his ADP is low enough to take him as a reserve while potentially reaping the benefits if he performs like a top-36 starter.

2009 Crank Scores - Tight Ends

What Makes a TE Consistent?

What leaps off this table (and past years) is that I want an elite player at this position and it's worth paying for one.

The elite TEs tend to dominate the fantasy world for at least 3-4 seasons, if not longer. You have a good shot to be right on at least two of the top three TEs if you project from the previous season.

When that one new TE enters the top three at his position, he is a player capable of playing split from the offensive line.

An average of seven of the top-12 TEs are players that are split away from the offensive line frequently.

Although not a strong factor, it is more likely for a top-12 TE to have a strong starter at RB than a strong starter at WR.

It's worth the cost because these players seem easier to identify and have a longer tenure at the top. There are few sure things in fantasy football, but identifying an elite player at this position is generally easier to do.

(4-Year) Average Crank Value Chart

If you aren't familiar with VBD or AVT, then I suggest you learn more about them here and here before getting knee deep into my explanations of my process for projecting with Crank Scores.

A short summary is that you can determine the projected value of a one player versus another across positions with a concept called X-Value, which is a positive or negative number calculated against a baseline player at each position. The baseline player at each position is the lowest-ranked starter according to your leagues lineup rules - for example, the 12th-ranked QB in a 12-team league that starts 1 QB or the 36th-ranked RB in a 12-team league that starts 3 RBs.

To create these X-Values, I opted to take the average Crank Score over the four-year period of 2006-2009 for each position. I also generated a number I called the Percentage of Perfection, which is how close a particular Crank Score is to the highest possible Crank Score at the position for a league.

I like using AVT because performance trends haven't changed dramatically for the NFL. There will be years where there are significant outliers in performance, but there hasn't been a huge shift overall. It means if I use average values, I have less risk of distorting my entire draft board by over-projecting stats.

It's possible that eight RBs could rush for at least 1700 yards in 2009, however if I go that far against the historical grain, I throw off potential accuracy of the rest of my draft board due to my unusual expectations for these eight runners and if I'm wrong I likely miss out on key values in the early rounds of my draft.

When you look at my Average Value Crank Score Cheatsheet listed below, you'll see that the players with the highest X-values are receivers and backs. In fact, six of the top seven players from the standpoint of consistency are receivers.

I have often mentioned that the wide receiver position has historically less turnover from year to year, and individual receivers in the top tiers hold their value longer than top players at other positions. This is why targeting as many elite receivers as possible in the early rounds can be a valuable strategy.

The X-Values from this chart tell us that wide receivers have more value in most leagues than any other position. During this four-year period, there are an average of 25 receivers with equal to greater value than the 10th-ranked running back, the 3rd- and 4th-ranked quarterbacks, and the 3rd-ranked tight end.

This doesn't mean that you should take a wide receiver if you have one of the first 3-5 picks in the first round. In fact, it should encourage you that if you have one of these picks that with the right pick at RB, you should still be able to acquire valuable receivers with the next 3-5 picks and also possibly have your pick at QB and TE.

It does mean that if you pick at the later half of the first round that following the crowd with an RB can be more dangerous because you're potentially missing two top-tier talents at other positions for a back with value you're likely to find later.

As valuable as this information can be for a fantasy owner, one should always try to complement stats with an understanding of the game and its players. Don't ever rigidly stick to a formulaic draft strategy if a talented player drops further than you expected for an inexplicable reason and his value is better than the players you were originally considering.

When you can incorporate good data with a knowledge of the game your drafting prowess will give you a competitive start to the season.

Questions, suggestions and comments are always welcome to waldman@footballguys.com.