Hedging in Championship game (1 Viewer)

[Harry Beanbag]

We all know you start your studs, always. Fantasy rule No. 1 for sure. Playing in the championship games and when winning money is involved people tend to overanalyze their stratgey. This would apply to QBs and WRs seeing how their scoring relies heavily upon each other. Is it wise to play the QB that will be throwing to your opponent's WRs? The rationale is that any scoring those WRs rack up would be also applied to the QB who is giving them those yards and/or TDs, thus making that scoring a wash.

Anyone do this before and how did it work out?

 

[parasaurolophus]

this topic has been discussed a lot. and as is often stated it is fully dependent upon the situation. I am not a big fan of this type of theory except when certain factors are in place.

example: you start driver, ahman green, and Travis taylor tonight. They get you a boatload of points. your opponent has Torry Holt and already started some guys that did crap on thursday night. If i was deciding between bulger and a slightly better option than bulger. I may go with Bulger to eliminate one of his possible big scorers from hurting me.

 

[whhwalker]

I started Favre last week and benched Romo as both had good matchups and my opponent was starting Driver.

I lost.

Start your studs. Period.

 

[J R]

I started Favre last week and benched Romo as both had good matchups and my opponent was starting Driver.I lost.Start your studs. Period.

Your problem isn't that you hedged. It's that you did it wrong. QBs score more points than WRs, which usually makes it better to avoid the QB matched up against your opponent's WR. A hedge here would be starting Driver to go against a guy starting Favre, not the other way around. Since you lost, your game may actually demonstrate how the strategy works.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I started Favre last week and benched Romo as both had good matchups and my opponent was starting Driver.I lost.Start your studs. Period.

To say start your best "players" period, without ever considering the possibilty that there is a much better option is a bit foolish. I am substituting players for studs because Romo has been way too inconsistent to be considered a stud.In the example i stated above it is foolish to not do it.Another great example would be if you were going up against a team that started Housh and CJ. You have palmer and manning. You are far superior at all positions, except at WR where he has a big edge on you. If you decide the only way he can beat you is if CJ and Housh go for 300 combined and 3 tds, then you should definitely start Palmer over Manning.