I've felt that some of those numbers have been artificially low in the last couple of our Fantasy Seasons.
I think each driver ought to be a reflection of the combined value of engine/chassis/driver talent in which the ideal proposition would be worth (I'd say it's the league's administrator prerogative to decide) either 3/4 or 2/3 of the "money" available to each player. Thus the best driver in the best chassis with the best engine would be worth 30 out of 40 Geeteedollars in case we go for the three quarters approach, or 30 out of 45 if we go for the two thirds philosophy.
Now, how we reach those 30 ideal points is another matter. The easiest way would be to assign 10 points for engine, 10 points for chassis and 10 points for driver. But my opinion is that the current formula puts a lot of emphasis on engine and a lot less on driver talent. The other question is that deciding which "chassis" is better makes it a bit difficult to judge, so how about we assess team performance as a whole? that way we include the other stuff that influences the points a certain car combination delivers on raceday.
To cut the chase I say we split values like this 14 for engine, 10 for team and 6 for driver.
Engines: I'd say it's Mercedes > Ferrarri >> Renault > Honda
Teams (this is based on their avg finishing position in the last 3 years):
Code:
Mercedes 10
Ferrari 9
Red Bull 8
FI 7
Williams 7
Renault 4
STR 4
Haas 3
McL 3
Sauber 2
Drivers, well that's some work. Balki let me know if you think I'm on the right track and then i can put together some numbers.
So to go for quick examples, under this proposal Hamilton = 30 (14+10+6), Perez = 25 (14+7+4) and Sirotkin = 22 (14+7+1).
I know this makes teams like Williams highly undesireable, but that would be a reflection of reality.
What do you think, does it spice things up? Is there a way to reach Hamilton points without spending three quarters (or two thirds) of your money allocation?