The Myth of TE Premium Scoring

Many leagues adopt “TE premium” scoring — usually 1.5 PPR for tight ends (instead of 1.0 for WR/RB), or extra points for touchdowns. The idea is simple: “tight ends score less than WRs, so let’s boost them to make the position matter.”

But here’s the problem: value in fantasy football isn’t about raw points — it’s about points relative to your competition at that position. Once you understand that, you’ll see why TE premium doesn’t fix the problem… and might actually make it worse.

Step 1: Value is Always Within Position

With Value Over Average (VOA), we always compare a player’s points to the average starter at the same position.

👉 A TE’s fantasy value = that TE’s points − the average starter TE’s points

It doesn’t matter if TEs get 6 points for a TD, 12, or 100.
What matters is how much more your TE scores than your opponent’s TE.

If every TE gets inflated equally, the relative gap doesn’t change. And that’s what actually determines wins and losses. (We cover this principle in more detail in Not All Points Are Created Equal.)

Step 2: Who Actually Benefits?

So what does TE premium really do? It widens the spread among tight ends:

• If the premium is extra PPR, then volume TEs (guys who catch lots of passes) benefit most.
• If the premium is extra TD points, then red-zone scorers benefit most.

But crucially — they only gain relative to other TEs, not to WRs or RBs.

It doesn’t suddenly make TE as a position worth drafting earlier overall. It just makes elite TEs even more elite, while mediocre ones are still mediocre.

Step 3: The RB Analogy (PPR vs Standard)

This is the same as the old RB debate:

• In PPR, pass-catching RBs gain more value relative to standard bruisers.
• But you’re still comparing RBs against RBs. WRs don’t suddenly become “worse” because RBs are scoring more points.

TE premium works the same way: the position doesn’t get normalized across the board — it just changes which TEs rise or fall within the position.

Step 4: The Unintended Effect

Leagues that think TE premium makes the position “fair” usually end up with the opposite:

• The haves and have-nots gap widens. The owners with the top TEs gain even more advantage, while bottom-tier TE owners fall further behind.
• Draft strategy becomes even more “elite or punt.”
• Instead of balancing the game, it exaggerates positional inequality.

Step 5: What Actually Normalizes Positions

If your goal is to truly normalize TE with WR/RB/QB, you can’t just inflate points — you also have to change how lineups are structured. Two realistic options:

• Add a mandatory 2nd TE slot. This forces depth at the position, so more TEs get drafted and started.
• Pair TE premium with TE flex eligibility. If you’re going to inflate scoring, you also need to give managers the chance to actually use TEs in flex spots. That way they’re competing against WRs and RBs, not just other TEs.

Without one of these changes, TE premium just widens the gap between the few elite TEs and the rest of the pack — it doesn’t normalize the position.

Conclusion

TE premium is a myth.
It doesn’t elevate tight ends into fair competition with WRs and RBs. It just shifts the hierarchy within the TE pool, often making elite TEs even more valuable while everyone else is left scrambling.

If you want TEs to matter more in your league, you can’t just inflate points. You also need to change roster structure — either by requiring more TEs or by allowing them to actually compete for flex spots. Without that, TE premium simply magnifies the advantage of owning an elite TE without fixing the underlying imbalance.

Try It Yourself

Don’t just take our word for it — test it out on your own cheat sheet:

1. Change TE scoring to 1.5 PPR (or add extra TE TD points).
2. The rankings will update automatically.

What you’ll see:

• The top TEs rise because their gap over the average starter TE widens.
• Some WRs will naturally slide down to make room.
• But as a whole, the TE position doesn’t actually gain value — only the very top does.

That’s the proof. TE premium doesn’t make the position fairer — it just makes the rich richer.