Fantasy Football Drafting Strategy: Value Over Replacement Player (VORP) Explained

Fantasy Football Drafting Strategy: Value Over Replacement Player (VORP) Explained

In the chaotic and often irrational marketplace of a fantasy football draft, the most pervasive error committed by managers—both novice and intermediate—is the seduction of absolute production. It is a natural cognitive reflex to equate “most points” with “most value.” When reviewing the previous season’s leaderboard, a manager sees a quarterback with 400 total points and a running back with 300 total points. The intuitive, linear conclusion is that the quarterback is the superior asset, offering a 100-point advantage over the running back. This logic, while mathematically accurate in a vacuum, is strategically catastrophic within the constrained economy of a fantasy roster.

Fantasy football is not a contest of accumulating the highest raw point total in isolation; it is a contest of accumulation relative to a rigid set of positional constraints. The value of a player is inextricably linked to the opportunity cost of acquiring them and the scarcity of the position they occupy. This is the fundamental paradox of the game: the highest-scoring players are frequently not the most valuable assets.

To understand why, one must look beyond the gridiron and into the principles of microeconomics. The “Water-Diamond Paradox,” introduced by Adam Smith, posits that while water is essential for survival (high utility), it is cheap because it is abundant. Diamonds, while non-essential (lower utility), are expensive because they are scarce. In fantasy football, “points” are the utility, but the vehicle for those points—the player’s position—dictates the scarcity. Quarterback points are often like water: essential but abundant. Running back points, particularly at the elite tier, are diamonds: rare and difficult to replace.

Value Over Replacement Player (VORP) is the metric designed to quantify this disparity. It strips away the illusion of raw totals and exposes the true “marginal utility” of every player on the draft board. By establishing a baseline of production that is readily available—the “replacement level”—VORP calculates exactly how much advantage a specific player provides over the generic alternative that any manager could acquire with minimal investment.

1.2 Historical Origins: From Sabermetrics to the Gridiron

The intellectual architecture of VORP traces its lineage directly to the statistical revolution in Major League Baseball, known as sabermetrics. In the late 20th century, Bill James and other analysts sought to measure a player’s contribution not by traditional counting stats like RBIs or Wins, which were heavily context-dependent, but by their value relative to a “replacement player”—a hypothetical minor league call-up or bench player available for the league minimum salary. This concept evolved into Wins Above Replacement (WAR), which became the gold standard for player valuation in baseball.

The transition of this methodology to fantasy football was pioneered by early innovators in the Value-Based Drafting (VBD) movement. In 2001, Joe Bryant of FootballGuys famously codified the principles of VBD, arguing that the only way to compare a quarterback to a running back was to normalize their scoring against a positional baseline. This shifted the paradigm from “Who scores the most?” to “Who outscores their peers by the widest margin?”.

The adoption of VORP in fantasy football was necessitated by the distinct structural differences between the two sports. Unlike baseball, where lineups are relatively flexible and contributions are additive in a linear fashion, fantasy football rosters are rigid. A manager must start a specific number of players at each position. This rigidity amplifies the importance of scarcity. If a league requires two starting running backs and there are only 20 RBs in the NFL receiving significant volume, the 24th RB (a theoretical starter in a 12-team league) represents a massive drop-off in production. VORP was the tool developed to measure the slope of that decline.

1.3 The Core Philosophy of Advantage

The ultimate goal of VORP is to maximize the aggregate “distance” between a manager’s starting lineup and the baseline. A fantasy matchup is won by the sum of the differentials at each position.

Consider a simplified head-to-head matchup:

Position	Team A Player	Team A Score	Team B Player	Team B Score	Differential
QB	Elite QB	25	Streamer QB	18	+7
RB	Elite RB	20	Replacement RB	8	+12
Total		45		26	+19

In this scenario, the Elite RB provided a 12-point advantage over the replacement level, while the Elite QB provided only a 7-point advantage, despite scoring more raw points (25 vs. 20) than the RB. The VORP framework argues that drafting the RB was the superior move because the magnitude of the advantage was greater. The “Streamer QB” scored 18 points, which is a high baseline, whereas the “Replacement RB” scored only 8 points, a low baseline. The 10-point gap in the baselines (18 vs. 8) is the mathematical manifestation of positional scarcity.

By aggressively pursuing VORP, a manager is effectively shorting the market on abundant positions (waiting on QB) and going long on scarce positions (prioritizing RB/Elite TE). This strategy aims to build a roster that is mathematically optimized to defeat the average roster construction of opponents who rely on ADP (Average Draft Position) or raw point projections.

2. The Mathematical Framework of VORP

2.1 The Fundamental Equation

The calculation of VORP is elegant in its simplicity but complex in its variables. At its core, the formula is a subtraction equation comparing a specific asset to a generic asset within the same class.

$$VORP_i = P_i – B_p$$

Where:

• $VORP_i$ is the Value Over Replacement Player for player $i$.
• $P_i$ is the Projected Points for player $i$.
• $B_p$ is the Baseline Points for the position $p$ that player $i$ occupies.

While the equation is straightforward, the output is entirely dependent on the input variables. A tiny fluctuation in the definition of $B_p$ (the baseline) can radically alter the draft board, turning a first-round value into a third-round reach. Furthermore, $P_i$ is inherently probabilistic—it is a median projection of a range of outcomes. Therefore, VORP should be understood not as a static integer, but as a probability cloud representing the likely advantage a player will confer.

2.2 Deriving the Baseline ($B_p$)

The baseline is the “Replacement Level.” It represents the threshold of production that a manager can acquire at a minimal cost—either late in the draft or via the waiver wire. Determining where to draw this line is the single most debated topic in Value-Based Drafting. There are three primary schools of thought: The Waiver Baseline (True VORP), the Starter Baseline (VOLS), and the Bench-Adjusted Baseline.

2.2.1 The Waiver Wire Baseline (True VORP)

This methodology sets the baseline at the level of the best player readily available on the waiver wire. The logic is that this is the “costless” alternative. If a manager drafts a player who scores 0 points (due to injury), the replacement they pick up for free is the opportunity cost floor.

In a 12-team league starting 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WRs, and 1 TE:

• QB Baseline: The 13th ranked QB (QB13).
• RB Baseline: The 25th ranked RB (RB25).
• WR Baseline: The 37th ranked WR (WR37).
• TE Baseline: The 13th ranked TE (TE13).

Critique: This baseline is often criticized for being too theoretical. In active leagues, the “best player on waivers” is rarely the QB13 or RB25, as teams hoard backups on their benches. Using this baseline can inflate VORP numbers, making players appear more valuable than they truly are relative to the actual alternatives available during a draft.

2.2.2 The “Worst Starter” Baseline (VOLS)

Value Over Last Starter (VOLS) sets the baseline at the lowest-ranked starter in the league. This assumes that the goal of the draft is to fill the starting lineup with players who outproduce the worst starter in the league.

• Calculation: If there are 24 starting RB spots (12 teams x 2), the baseline is the projected score of the RB24.
• Implication: This is a more aggressive baseline than the Waiver Wire method. It essentially ignores bench value and focuses purely on the starting lineup. It tends to push values down, highlighting only the elite tiers that offer a distinct advantage over “replacement level starters”.

2.2.3 The “Bench-Adjusted” or “Man-Games” Baseline

This advanced approach recognizes that fantasy Fantasy Football Drafting is a weekly game involving bye weeks and injuries. A manager effectively needs more than just the starters to survive a season; they need a pool of usable players. The “Man-Games” approach calculates how many games are required to fill a position over a season (e.g., 17 weeks x 12 teams = 204 QB starts) and determines how many players are needed to fulfill that demand based on historical availability.

Usually, this results in a baseline that sits somewhere between the Last Starter and the Waiver Wire. For example, if teams draft an average of 1.5 QBs, the baseline might be set at QB18. This method is highly customizable and accounts for the depth required in deeper leagues.

2.3 The Role of Projections

The engine of VORP is the projection ($P_i$). If the projection is flawed, the VORP calculation is useless (“Garbage In, Garbage Out”).

• Median vs. Ceiling: Most projection sources provide a median outcome—the 50th percentile scenario. However, fantasy leagues are often won by outliers (90th percentile outcomes). A player like De’Von Achane might have a lower median projection than a steady veteran like Najee Harris due to volume concerns, but Achane’s VORP ceiling is league-winning.
• Consensus Data: To mitigate individual bias, savvy drafters use aggregated consensus projections (e.g., FantasyPros, 4for4) to feed their VORP models. This smoothes out the noise and provides a more reliable $P_i$.

2.4 Calculating VORP: A Step-by-Step Workflow (2025 Example)

To illustrate the mechanics, we will calculate the VORP for the 2025 season using hypothetical projections for a 12-team, Half-PPR league.

League Settings:

• Teams: 12
• Roster: 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex (RB/WR/TE)
• Scoring: Half-PPR

Step 1: Determine the Baseline Rank.

We must account for the Flex position. Historically, Flex spots are utilized by WRs (~60%) and RBs (~40%) more than TEs.

• QB Starters: 12. Baseline: QB13.
• RB Starters: 24 (2 per team) + ~5 (Flex usage) = 29. Baseline: RB30.
• WR Starters: 24 (2 per team) + ~7 (Flex usage) = 31. Baseline: WR32.
• TE Starters: 12. Baseline: TE13.

Step 2: Assign Projected Points (Hypothetical 2025 Data).

Rank	QB Projection	RB Projection	WR Projection	TE Projection
1	390 (J. Allen)	330 (B. Robinson)	290 (J. Chase)	240 (T. Kelce)
12	290 (T. Lawrence)	210 (K. Walker)	190 (D. Samuel)	130 (D. Goedert)
Baseline	280 (QB13)	140 (RB30)	150 (WR32)	110 (TE13)

Step 3: Calculate VORP.

• Josh Allen (QB1): $390 – 280 = \mathbf{110}$
• Bijan Robinson (RB1): $330 – 140 = \mathbf{190}$
• Ja’Marr Chase (WR1): $290 – 150 = \mathbf{140}$
• Travis Kelce (TE1): $240 – 110 = \mathbf{130}$

Analysis: This calculation reveals the core truth of VORP. Although Josh Allen is projected to score the most raw points (390), his VORP (110) is the lowest among the elite options. Bijan Robinson, scoring 60 fewer raw points than Allen, is nearly twice as valuable (190 VORP) because the replacement level running back (RB30) is so unproductive compared to the replacement level quarterback (QB13). This mathematical proof drives the strategy of prioritizing RBs and elite WRs in the early rounds.

3. Positional Scarcity and Landscape Analysis

Understanding the shape of the scoring distribution curve at each position is critical. Scarcity is not linear; it is geometric.

3.1 The Running Back “Cliff”

The distribution of fantasy points at the running back position typically follows a steep power law. There is a small tier of “Bellcow” backs who dominate touches, goal-line work, and receptions. After this top tier (usually roughly 8-12 players), the drop-off is precipitous—a phenomenon known as the “RB Cliff.”

• The VORP Implication: The difference between RB1 and RB12 might be 100 points. The difference between RB12 and RB24 might be another 80 points. Because the baseline (RB30) is so low (often a committee back or handcuff), the VORP of the top-tier RBs is massive. This scarcity forces managers to pay a premium. If you miss the top tier, you cannot replicate that production by aggregating lower-tier players.
• Hero RB Strategy: This VORP distribution supports the “Hero RB” strategy (also known as Anchor RB). Managers draft one elite RB in the first round to secure the high VORP, then pivot to WRs, avoiding the “Dead Zone” RBs (Rounds 3-6) where the VORP flattens out but the acquisition cost remains high.

3.2 The Wide Receiver “Slope”

In contrast to the RB Cliff, the wide receiver position exhibits a more gradual decline—a “Slope.” In the modern NFL, passing volume is high, and teams utilize 11-personnel (3 WRs) frequently. This creates a deep pool of viable fantasy starters.

• The VORP Implication: The VORP gap between WR10 and WR25 is often much smaller than the gap between RB10 and RB25. This creates a “flat” value curve in the middle rounds.
• Strategic Leverage: Because the decline is gradual, managers can often wait on WRs and still acquire a player with 80-90% of the VORP of a higher-drafted player. This is the mathematical underpinning of the “Zero RB” strategy (which is actually a “Heavy WR” strategy). By stockpiling WRs who maintain value deeper into the draft, managers can dominate the Flex positions while taking shots on high-upside (but low-cost) RBs.

3.3 The Quarterback “Plateau”

Standard 1-QB leagues often feature a “Plateau” at the quarterback position. The difference between the QB5 and the QB15 is often negligible on a points-per-game basis.

• Replacement Level: The baseline (QB13) is often a player like Jared Goff or Kirk Cousins—quarterbacks who can consistently put up 18-20 points.
• The Elite Separators: However, a recent trend has emerged: the “Konami Code” quarterbacks. Players like Josh Allen, Jalen Hurts, and Lamar Jackson, who combine elite passing stats with 600-800 rushing yards and 10+ rushing TDs, have begun to break the plateau. They create a “tier of their own” that sits significantly above the field.
• Draft Strategy: VORP dictates that you either draft one of these elite separators early (if their projection creates a large enough VORP gap) or you wait until the very late rounds to draft from the plateau. Drafting a mid-tier pocket passer in Round 6 is a VORP error; you are paying a premium for replacement-level production.

3.4 The Tight End “Wasteland”

The Tight End position is notoriously binary. Historically, there are 2-3 elite options (e.g., Kelce, Andrews, LaPorta) and then a massive drop-off to a murky swamp of touchdown-dependent players.

• Historical Data: Over a 10-year sample, TEs drafted as the TE4 finish as a top-12 TE only roughly 20% of the time. This is an abysmal hit rate compared to WRs or RBs in similar ADP ranges.
• The VORP Spike: Because the baseline (TE13) is so low—often averaging 6-8 points per game—an elite TE who averages 14-16 points per game generates a massive VORP advantage. Travis Kelce in his prime often generated a VORP equivalent to a top-5 WR.
• Strategy: This distribution suggests a “Barbell Strategy.” You either pay the high cost for an elite TE to secure the VORP advantage, or you punt the position entirely and stream off waivers (accepting 0 VORP). The “middle class” of TEs is the most dangerous trap in the draft, offering low VORP ceilings with high opportunity costs.

4. League Variations and VORP Adjustments

VORP is dynamic. It is essentially a living organism that adapts instantly to the environment of league settings. Changing a single rule—like adding a second QB slot or increasing TE scoring—can invert the entire draft board.

4.1 Superflex and 2-QB Leagues

The most dramatic shift in VORP occurs in Superflex leagues, where a second quarterback can be started in a Flex spot. Since quarterbacks generally score the most raw points of any position, the optimal strategy is almost always to start two quarterbacks.

• The Baseline Shift: In a 12-team Superflex league, the functional demand for quarterbacks doubles. Managers need 24 starters. The baseline shifts from QB13 (a solid starter) to QB25 (a low-end starter or bridge QB like Gardner Minshew or Derek Carr).
• The Math of Scarcity:
  • 1-QB League: Josh Allen (390 pts) – QB13 (280 pts) = 110 VORP.
  • Superflex League: Josh Allen (390 pts) – QB25 (200 pts) = 190 VORP.
• Strategic Implication: The VORP of elite QBs nearly doubles. In Superflex drafts, it is common to see 8-10 quarterbacks drafted in the first round. This is not panic; it is rational VORP adherence. The scarcity is absolute: there are only 32 starting jobs in the NFL. If a league tries to roster 3-4 QBs per team, the waiver wire offers zero points. The baseline for a 3rd QB is essentially 0. This makes QBs the most valuable currency in the format.

4.2 Tight End Premium (TEP)

Tight End Premium leagues attempt to balance the positional value by awarding extra points per reception to TEs (usually 1.5 PPR vs. 1.0 PPR for others).

• The Misconception: Many managers believe this boosts the value of all tight ends equally.
• The VORP Reality: TEP disproportionately benefits high-volume pass-catching TEs.
  • Elite TE (100 catches): Gains +50 bonus points.
  • Replacement TE (40 catches): Gains +20 bonus points.
  • Net VORP Gain: The elite TE gains +30 VORP relative to the baseline.
• Strategic Implication: TEP increases the VORP of the top tier (Kelce, McBride, Bowers), pushing them into the first round of drafts. However, it does little to help the “TD-dependent” tight ends (e.g., Dawson Knox) who catch few passes. Their VORP remains low because they cannot separate from the baseline on volume.

4.3 PPR vs. Standard Scoring

The scoring format dictates the slope of the VORP curves.

• PPR (Points Per Reception): This format flattens the RB curve slightly because “satellite backs” (e.g., Tyjae Spears, Jaylen Warren) become viable starters, raising the RB baseline. Conversely, it raises the ceiling for elite WRs (e.g., CeeDee Lamb with 135 catches), increasing their VORP. In full PPR, elite WRs often rival elite RBs for the #1 overall VORP spot.
• Standard (Non-PPR): This format is the kingdom of the Running Back. Without reception points, WR scoring compresses. The only players who can separate significantly from the pack are the RBs who score 15+ touchdowns and rush for 1,200+ yards. In Standard, the VORP of the top 5 RBs is usually astronomical compared to any other position.

5. Advanced Game Theory: Beyond Static VORP

While VORP provides a snapshot of value before the draft begins, the draft itself is a dynamic, fluid event. To win, managers must evolve from static VORP to dynamic valuation metrics.

5.1 VONA: Value Over Next Available

Value Over Next Available (VONA) is the tactical application of VORP in real-time. It asks a critical question: “If I bypass Position X now, what will be available when I pick next?”.

• The Calculation:
  $$VONA = (Projection_{Player A}) – (Projection_{Next\_Available\_Player})$$
• Scenario: You hold the 2.10 pick in a snake draft. You are debating between a WR (Davante Adams) and an RB (Travis Etienne).
  • Adams Projection: 220 pts. Next WR available at 3.03: DK Metcalf (Proj 210 pts). Drop-off: 10 pts.
  • Etienne Projection: 230 pts. Next RB available at 3.03: Rachaad White (Proj 180 pts). Drop-off: 50 pts.
• Decision: Even if Adams and Etienne had identical VORP scores, the VONA dictates you must take Etienne. The “RB Cliff” creates a 50-point penalty for waiting, whereas the deep WR pool imposes only a 10-point penalty. VONA quantifies the cost of waiting.

5.2 The Psychology of “Runs” and Panic

Drafts often feature “runs”—sequences where multiple players of the same position are drafted consecutively (e.g., 5 QBs go in a row).

• The VORP Anchor: VORP serves as an emotional anchor during runs. When a run on QBs occurs, the ADP of the remaining QBs spikes due to panic (scarcity fear). However, a VORP-disciplined drafter checks their sheet. If the VORP of the next QB is essentially flat (the “Plateau”), they recognize that the panic is irrational.
• The Pivot: Instead of joining the run and drafting a mediocre QB at a premium, the manager pivots to the position being neglected (likely WR or RB), scooping up value that is falling past its ADP. This is “Value Arbitrage”.

5.3 Exploiting ADP Inefficiencies

The “Perfect Draft” occurs at the intersection of Maximum VORP and Market ADP.

• Scenario: Your VORP model ranks QB Anthony Richardson as a top-20 overall asset due to his rushing upside. However, his ADP is roughly 50th overall.
• The Trap: Drafting him at pick 20 is a “VORP Reach.” Even though he is worth the 20th pick to you, the market says you can get him at pick 45.
• The Strategy: You wait. You draft other high-VORP players at picks 20, 30, and 40, and then take Richardson at 45. You have now captured the “Consumer Surplus”—the difference between the value you paid (Pick 45) and the value you received (Pick 20 production). VORP identifies the target; ADP dictates the timing.

6. Case Studies: VORP in Action

6.1 The Josh Allen vs. Christian McCaffrey Paradigm (2023/2024)

The 2023 season provided a textbook example of VORP mechanics.

• Josh Allen (QB): Scored roughly 392 points (Standard scoring).
• Christian McCaffrey (RB): Scored roughly 324 points.
• The Layman’s View: “Allen scored nearly 70 more points; he was the MVP.”
• The VORP Reality:
  • The QB12 (e.g., Brock Purdy/Jordan Love) scored roughly 285 points. Allen VORP = +107.
  • The RB24 (e.g., Najee Harris/Chuba Hubbard) scored roughly 145 points. CMC VORP = +179.
• Conclusion: McCaffrey was undeniably the most valuable player in fantasy football. His advantage over his positional peers was 72 points greater than Allen’s advantage over his. In VORP terms, CMC provided a “Wins Above Replacement” margin that was nearly double that of the top QB. This data validates the consensus 1.01 ADP for CMC in 2024 drafts.

6.2 The “Late Round QB” Success Story

In many seasons, the VORP of the QB1 is not significantly higher than the QB10.

• Historical Data: In 2016, Aaron Rodgers (QB1) scored 380 points. Matt Ryan (QB2) scored 347. Kirk Cousins (QB5) scored 300. The curve was flat.
• Opportunity Cost: Drafting Rodgers in Round 3 meant passing on elite WRs/RBs. Drafting Cousins in Round 11 cost nothing.
• Result: Teams that waited on QB and loaded up on RB/WR VORP in the early rounds dominated. This historical trend reinforces why VORP models often suppress QB rankings in 1-QB leagues.

7. Pitfalls and Limitations of VORP

While VORP is the most robust metric available, it is not a crystal ball. Blind adherence without context can lead to roster construction errors.

7.1 The “Bench Trap”

VORP assigns a value of 0 (or negative) to any player projected below the baseline.

• The Flaw: This implies that a backup RB who projects for 50 points is “worthless.” However, fantasy football is a game of contingent value. If the starter in front of that backup gets injured, the backup’s projection instantly jumps to 200+.
• Solution: Use VORP to draft your starting lineup (Rounds 1-9). For your bench (Rounds 10+), ignore VORP. Draft for Upside and Contingency. Prioritize high-ceiling rookies or handcuffs over “safe” veterans who project for slightly above replacement level but have no path to being difference-makers. A 5th WR who scores 8 points a week has a VORP of +5, but he will never win you a league. A rookie RB with a VORP of -20 (currently) might win you the league in Week 14.

7.2 Projection Fragility

VORP is highly sensitive to input data. If your projection for a player is off by 15%, their VORP can swing by 50%.

• The Danger: Over-confidence in specific numbers. “My model says Player A is 3 points better than Player B.” This false precision ignores the margin of error.
• Solution: Use VORP to identify tiers, not rankings. If two players are within 10-15 VORP points of each other, treat them as equal and use other tie-breakers (schedule, offense quality, bye weeks) to decide.

7.3 Ignoring Roster Balance

Strict VBD might tell you to draft 5 WRs in a row because the value is there.

• The Outcome: You end up with 5 great WRs but can only start 3 or 4. You have “wasted” VORP on your bench while leaving your RB2 slot filled by a sub-replacement level player.
• Solution: Positional needs act as a constraint on VORP. You must fill your starting roster. VONA helps correct this by highlighting the scarcity of the positions you don’t have yet.

8. Detailed Implementation Guide for 2025

To implement a professional-grade VORP strategy for your 2025 draft, follow this structured workflow.

8.1 Step 1: Aggregate Projections

Do not rely on a single source. Download CSV projections from at least 3 major sites (e.g., ESPN, CBS, FantasyPros). Average them together to create a “Composite Projection.” This reduces the impact of outlier predictions and increases the stability of your $P_i$ variable.

8.2 Step 2: Define Your League Baselines

Input your exact league settings into a spreadsheet.

• Calculate Total Starters: Multiply league size by starting spots.
• Adjust for Flex: Add ~40% of Flex spots to RB count and ~60% to WR count.
• Identify the Baseline Player: Sort the composite projections and find the player at the cutoff rank (e.g., RB30). Note their projected point total. This is your $B_p$.

8.3 Step 3: Calculate VORP Scores

Create a new column: Composite_Projection – Baseline_Points.

• Apply this to every player.
• Note: Players below the baseline will have negative VORP. This is correct; it means they are replacement level or worse.

8.4 Step 4: Create a Tiered Cheat Sheet

Sort all players by VORP (descending). Group them into tiers.

• Tier 1: The “League Winners” (Top 5-8 VORP scores).
• Tier 2: The “Difference Makers.”
• Tier 3: The “Starters.”
• Tier 4: The “Flex Plays.”

8.5 Step 5: Draft with VONA

During the draft, mark off players as they are taken. Constantly scan the “Next Available” players at each position to identify where the cliffs are approaching. When a tier is about to dry up, prioritize that position to avoid falling off the cliff.

9. Conclusion

Value Over Replacement Player is the physics of the fantasy football universe. It explains why gravity acts differently on running backs than it does on quarterbacks. It provides the mathematical proof that “points” are a currency that fluctuates in value depending on the position that generates them.

For the serious manager, VORP is the first step toward enlightenment. It strips away the hype, the name recognition, and the illusion of raw totals, leaving only the stark reality of advantage. By rigorously applying VORP—while tempering it with the dynamic adjustments of VONA and an understanding of upside—a manager transforms the draft from a game of guessing into a game of strategic resource allocation. In 2025, the edge belongs not to the one who knows who will score the most points, but to the one who knows how much those points are truly worth.