Avoiding popular players (1 Viewer)

Let's say a certain cheap rb/te/wr is seen as the best value for a particular week and ends up at 70% ownership. As you enter your lineup you say, well I need to avoid this guy because everyone will own him, so you plug in the next guy on your list. The 70% player goes 163 and 2. You don't come out ahead here. A guy will have high ownership because he is perceived to have the most value, and perhaps the best chance to go, say, 163 and 2. By avoiding those guys you just create an inferior lineup. You want the guys who should score the most points, not the guys with low ownership who should score the most points, because the second group should generally score fewer points. If a $5500 wr scores 25 points and has 70% ownership, the other 30% are screwed. If the other $5500 guy you plugged in that spot somehow does better it's because you got lucky. If we're all submitting suboptimal lineups on the off chance we get lucky, why don't we all just go play roulette?

Agreed. There are a few plays (one priced at $5,500) that seem like optimal selections. Find uniqueness elsewhere.

Even if you rolled with this roster:

QB = 50%

RB1/2 = 50% each

WR1/2/3 = 50% (etc.)

TE

K

Def

Your 'uniqueness' factor would be 50% ^ 9 = 0.19%

I think -- my math is a little rusty. There will certainly be people who have BOTH your QB and RB1, for example, so maybe it's not quite as simple as raising it to the nth degree. Anyone with statistics background want to help out?

Only place I really use uniqueness as a factor is in close calls for GPPs. Elsewise agreed that you are only hurting yourself by going with players you don't believe will do as well.

mrip541 said:

A guy will have high ownership because he is perceived to have the most value.

Click to expand...

I think this the key part. If you think the player is very likely to reach that value/there are no other players that can compare in the price range, you play him no matter what.

If you think that the public is overstating the value, the player has a (relatively) high likliehood of not hitting the value, or there is a similarly priced player with comparable upside, then you may want to consider not using the player.

It is never as simple as "too many people are using this guy, I can't".

karmarooster said:

Agreed. There are a few plays (one priced at $5,500) that seem like optimal selections. Find uniqueness elsewhere.

Even if you rolled with this roster:

QB = 50%

RB1/2 = 50% each

WR1/2/3 = 50% (etc.)

TE

K

Def

Your 'uniqueness' factor would be 50% ^ 9 = 0.19%

I think -- my math is a little rusty. There will certainly be people who have BOTH your QB and RB1, for example, so maybe it's not quite as simple as raising it to the nth degree. Anyone with statistics background want to help out?

Click to expand...

except that those 'value' plays are going to be highly correlated. So if you look at lineups with Davonte adams week 1, they will have a higher percentage of other value plays than non- Davonte Adams teams.

I'm just going to use Davonte Adams as the example here. He is going to be very highly owned as with an injury he is now in prime position for a break out game, so people think he is a must play. However there is nothing wrong with fading him, but you don't just pick anybody in the same price range, you have to find somebody that you feel has similar upside. You aren't looking for a #4 WR who only plays on limited snaps. But whos to say guys like Steve Johnson or Eddie Royal cant put up the same numbers. They both are looking to have a larger role in the offense in the early weeks. Maybe Kendall Wright who is slated to lead his team in targets and has a new QB throwing to him this year. Or what about Terrance Williams or Rueben Randle, both are #2 WR in what should be a high scoring game.

Nobody is saying to go with somebody you don't think is going to do as well. If you feel so confident that Adams will out score all these guys, plus anybody else in the same price range then by al means go with him. However if you see a guy listed above that you think could score the same amount of points as Adams, then that is when you make the pivot. You go from a highly owned guy to a lower owned guy with the same upside.

ChaosM83 said:

I'm just going to use Davonte Adams as the example here. He is going to be very highly owned as with an injury he is now in prime position for a break out game, so people think he is a must play. However there is nothing wrong with fading him, but you don't just pick anybody in the same price range, you have to find somebody that you feel has similar upside. You aren't looking for a #4 WR who only plays on limited snaps. But whos to say guys like Steve Johnson or Eddie Royal cant put up the same numbers. They both are looking to have a larger role in the offense in the early weeks. Maybe Kendall Wright who is slated to lead his team in targets and has a new QB throwing to him this year. Or what about Terrance Williams or Rueben Randle, both are #2 WR in what should be a high scoring game.

Nobody is saying to go with somebody you don't think is going to do as well. If you feel so confident that Adams will out score all these guys, plus anybody else in the same price range then by al means go with him. However if you see a guy listed above that you think could score the same amount of points as Adams, then that is when you make the pivot. You go from a highly owned guy to a lower owned guy with the same upside.

Click to expand...

Key here is you not only think they could score as much but they have a similar chance to score as much. I think Johnson could score as much as Adams but I don't think its likely so no way I switch Adams for Johnson. Royal is guy I would put closest to Adams but I have him in most of my lineups with Adams so I cant really switch Adams for him.

I only play in tournaments and only play because I like the idea fantasy football making me a million dollars. It's different for me because I am going in with the understanding that I'm still going to need to be lucky.

With the disclaimer out of the way, I'm avoiding AP and Luck.

AP was/is a top 5 pick in yearly leagues, he has a decent match up and decent price so he is likely to be on a ton of teams. However, he hasn't traditionally been a high volume pass catcher, whatever "AP is going to be running extra angry" you could probably say about Bowman too and I think Teddy might be able to carry this team weak 1. Maybe AP get 20/90/1 and 2/12/0 which is still a solid outing but I likely won't win a tournament.

Luck is THEE quarterback to have right now and I think a bunch of people are going to pay the money to get the "guaranteed" production. However, the Bills have an elite defense, have had a ton of time to prepare, one of the best defensive coaches in the game and it's in Buffalo. The Colts also have a some new pieces on offense and they're first game together likely isn't going to be their best game of the year. Not to say it will be bad but it might not be the fire storm of points that we've all been dreaming about during the off-season.