What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Ever start a player on bye to preserve your bench? (1 Viewer)

daylight

daylight

Footballguy
I hate dropping handcuffs, quality backups and Lotto Tickets in order to cover a starting position for a player on bye.  I often consider starting a player on bye just so I don't have to drop someone I believe in and want to hang on to.  For example, in one of my leagues I have K. Rudolph and the MIN DEF and in order to cover those starters (outside of players I simply WILL NOT drop like Booker DEN) I have to drop M. Thomas NO WR (my 3rd WR) and K. Dixon BAL RB (who I am not yet convinced won't move into the starting role and be a RB2 with upside).

I'm considering keeping Thomas and dropping Dixon for a DEF and starting Rudolph on BYE (he only got me 1 point last week and I still won).  I don't want to let Thomas go!

Crazy?  Does anyone ever do this?

 
Sure, short bench leagues like ESPN standard or NFL.com.  actually, doing it this week.  Just don't like waiver options more than my current roster so same situation.

 
If it's allowed in your rules, then it's certainly something to consider.  Depends on how favored you are and what a loss does to you.

 
Things happen    Theres probably some poor soul with no time to look at his team, because of the hurricanes etc.  Id tend to think one week, maybe a couple spread out isnt too bad.  Now some may think to call you out for holding onto Dixon?  Three carrys for -ten yards, may work in Detroit..  But Coach aint gonna be feeling that noise in Baltimore!  At the same token, if ya dropped the Vikings defense?  I think ya may wanna consider a new hobby..

p.s.  What TE's are on the wire?  Is it 1.5 for TE

 
The only time I would do it is if I had already clinched a playoff spot.

I don't know about you guys, but personally I can't remember a year when the last playoff spot(s) weren't determined by 1 game or less in the last week of the regular season.

How will you feel if you lose by 3 points this week and end up missing the playoffs by a game?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skoo said:
The only time I would do it is if I had already clinched a playoff spot.

I don't know about you guys, but personally I can't remember a year when the last playoff spot(s) weren't determined by 1 game or less in the last week of the regular season.

How will you feel if you lose by 3 points this week and end up missing the playoffs by a game?
Click to expand...
Or the opposite of this-you are already eliminated from playoff contention. One of the leagues I play in it costs $5 for each player pick up and I played without a K to save money during down seasons in the past.

 
I'll be doing this next week, when my TE and K are on bye (Olsen and Gano). Short bench league, and I don't want to drop either of my handcuffs (Booker or Dwill), which would leave me dropping one of Diggs, Hyde, or Big Ben to fill the TE spot while I stream K. Not gonna happen.

My plan is to drop Gano for a TE, and then start a blank in the K spot. I'm in 1st with a pretty good roster, and I'll be playing against the last place team in the league. Hopefully I can eat the kicker points and still be ahead, but if it came down to it I'm OK losing one week and keeping my roster intact for the remainder of the season.

 
I try to map out my bye schedule when it comes to TE, QB, maybe Def if they are not streamable. I then try and make a two for one trade to upgrade a position to open a roster spot.

 
I don't think I've ever done it but am considering it this week in a mandatory TE league.

I have 2 TEs .. Reed and Eifert, and really don't want to drop anyone on my roster 

 
My leagues both tried to vote a rule in for this and it was shot down twice. Totally acceptable strategy in a short-bench league. If you like your odds of winning without that player, go for it. 

Bomus: "I beat you without a TE!" brag, if you win. :D

 
I feel slimy when I do it, but I still do end up doing it, but rarely. Maybe 1-2 times a year out of around 15 leagues total and every time it's been dynasty leagues. Those are all VP leagues so worse case is don't get a VP for the week. I did it last week in a dynasty league with Seattle D on bye. In week 9 I have a team with Brady, Gronk, Gostwowski, Patriots D, , James White/Dion Lewis, Jordan Howard, Eifert(if playing) and Deandre Hopkins on bye. It's a 20 man roster.  I hate it because it distorts H2H play which of course impacts VP's but sometimes when faced with a sitiuation like that it's best to trot out whatever junk you can and if you get lucky great but otherwise just take the 0 VP's and move one.

 
It's an interesting ethical question.  We don't have a rule and another player had a very similar situation that made us consider adopting a rule.  He essentially had a 1 pt lead going into monday night, the other player was done and he had his defense.  It's not that hard for dst's to end up with negative points in our league so he pulled his defense and one the week by the one point.  

 
killface said:
It's an interesting ethical question.  We don't have a rule and another player had a very similar situation that made us consider adopting a rule.  He essentially had a 1 pt lead going into monday night, the other player was done and he had his defense.  It's not that hard for dst's to end up with negative points in our league so he pulled his defense and one the week by the one point.  
Click to expand...
I think what that dude did was weak but for what the OP stated as the reason - to not lose a player and knowing he'd be taking a zero for the week - I have no problems with this (assuming it's not proscribed in the rules).

 
As you can see, your gonna get alot of feel good answers  ala How would you manage a Wining team, and to what lengths..  Its mostly how strong you feel on your players, and the Leagues scoring.  Id find it hard to believe in some Leagues that the Winner doesnt have a defense like the Vikings.  Basically a loss this week is meaningless if you cant field a superior defense in the Championship game.  But anyway, I believe your fine dropping your bn RB who will never be may never be started.  Id also consider what may be available on the wire for TE.  ie. Wash TE this week should be a great play.

It is your team, you should manage it..  I think Id tell the commish to pack sand if he thinks, I should consider dropping the Vikings  D/ST.  However to really have any similarities to making real sense?  We would need to know starting req's, and size of Bn.  ex.  Do you start two RB's max, and Dixon is your RB5-6?  I doubt it considering that your speaking of possibly dropping a WR3, but you get the idea (I hope)

Personally, I play Dynasty.  So some of the choices made reflect all the way down the line   Who you draft effects how you play, and byes become a risk of a goose-egg.  Most guys would probably be upset that I just dropped so n so, in comparison to not fielding a full lineup. 

 
If your league constitution allows it, then it's fine.  If not, then it's not fine.

Edit:  Poor planning on your part though.  Drop Dixon if needed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
beerbuff said:
Against the rules in my league.  Penalty is $10.
Click to expand...
I think that's a fair compromise - thank you for the idea. In our league add/drop is $5, so I'm going to propose a $5 penalty - e.g. the same amount the team would have had to pay for an add/drop. 

Part of why I don't mind it is if I'm facing the team with the hole in his lineup, that gives me an advantage that week, in theory. 

So while I feel that everyone should field a complete roster, it's not a lot different than say, running out a player who's injured who you know is unlikely to be productive for the same reason (no one on the bench to drop for a scrub addition). 

I dunno - I'm not sure why it's "unethical", as many have suggested. Unethical is something underhanded to give yourself an advantage. This is a strategic decision, where the team starting the guaranteed zero is purposely putting themselves at disadvantage.  I'm not seeing the ethics issue here. 

But I love the idea of a $5  penalty, because for sure they're robbing the kitty of the transaction fee. Great idea, thanks again! 

 
killface said:
It's an interesting ethical question.  We don't have a rule and another player had a very similar situation that made us consider adopting a rule.  He essentially had a 1 pt lead going into monday night, the other player was done and he had his defense.  It's not that hard for dst's to end up with negative points in our league so he pulled his defense and one the week by the one point.  
Click to expand...
Tried and true strategy for fantasy baseball - you've hit your innings minimum for the week, and you own QS, ERA and WHIP....if you run out your SP on Sunday you might take W's but at the price of 2 other categories if they get shellacked. 

So you bench the SP and take the bird in the hand. 

Same idea - if you've got the game won, and your player can hurt you, why start him? 

That said, in my leagues you must have a player occupy every position (in this case D/ST) so to pull this off you'd have to have a D/ST that's on the BYE to put in your lineup, or you'll score a 0 for the entire lineup. Makes it a bit trickier. ;)

 
Skoo said:
The only time I would do it is if I had already clinched a playoff spot.

I don't know about you guys, but personally I can't remember a year when the last playoff spot(s) weren't determined by 1 game or less in the last week of the regular season.

How will you feel if you lose by 3 points this week and end up missing the playoffs by a game?
Click to expand...
This is how I feel about it. My league is competitive, with playoff spots and seeding almost always coming down to one game or a tie-break. 

Last year, there was a team who was facing a ZERO at QB. I offered him FitzMagic, but we couldn't agree on compensation. So he voluntarily took the donut.

Fitz scored 27, he lost his game by 20, and missed the playoffs via a tie-breaker. 

 
I'd be hard pressed to have it only at one position, but I did it once a few years back when I had four or five starting spots that I couldn't fill due to bye weeks/injuries.  I wasn't going to hatchet my team for the off chance that I would get enough production out of multiple ww guys.  Of course, my leaguemates were ticked until I explained it to them.  A few went with "Next time, manage your team better" and I responded with "Thanks for your input".  I lost, but would have lost even if I had filled my starting lineup.  But one guy?  No way would I do that.  

 
Zero RB said:
Last year, there was a team who was facing a ZERO at QB. I offered him FitzMagic, but we couldn't agree on compensation. So he voluntarily took the donut.

Fitz scored 27, he lost his game by 20, and missed the playoffs via a tie-breaker. 
Click to expand...
If it's a TE, D/ST or K I could see it. I can't see punting a QB. Usually they are the highest weekly source of points. 

 
Ill do it with a D or K some times TE but i always check the availability of players in the Sunday and Monday night games. If I'm down by a small margin ill drop a marginal player (if i can) to pick up the best available option in one of those games.

This week it may be Powell(My RBs are terrible) for the NYJ D and cross fingers 

 
Only had to do it once. Short bench idp league. The stars aligned and like half my team was on a bye. I dropped both of my dbs and replaced them with offensive players and left those spots empty. Reason being dbs aren't that hard to replace off the wire. 

 
Just did it last week, though that was due to injury (Ebron and Graham) also we limit waiver moves to 2 each week. Won both games in a double header anyway.

Might hurt in the end as we give money for most total points on the year. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy said:
Part of why I don't mind it is if I'm facing the team with the hole in his lineup, that gives me an advantage that week, in theory. 

So while I feel that everyone should field a complete roster, it's not a lot different than say, running out a player who's injured who you know is unlikely to be productive for the same reason (no one on the bench to drop for a scrub addition). 

I dunno - I'm not sure why it's "unethical", as many have suggested. Unethical is something underhanded to give yourself an advantage. This is a strategic decision, where the team starting the guaranteed zero is purposely putting themselves at disadvantage.  I'm not seeing the ethics issue here. 
Click to expand...
This on the ethical part of the discussion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
daylight said:
This on the ethical part of the discussion.
Click to expand...
Unless someone is doing it to conspire with another team to deliberately tank & give them an easy win, I'm not seeing the ethical issue. 

Though after the QB was mentioned I should clarify that my comment is more about a team making the trade-off of losing ~5-10 points or taking the 0 and having to drop a player who'll be more value able long-term. 

If they're not starting a QB I'd have to question their motives, because that's suicidal. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TE: Eifert and Jimmy Graham on a bye last week and Eifert was OUT...still won going away but I also had about 60 in the house already from DJ and Hyde Thursday night so with that in hand I rolled the dice.

We can flex a TE and I am hoping this combo is close to en fuego in the next few weeks. So many targets would be going to Eifert who scored 13 TDs last year...he is a threat to score multiple times a game...you don't just cut bait at this point.

 
It's only an ethical issue if you are tanking for a higher draft pick, and even in SOME of those cases it would be idiotic to cut guys that you want to keep for the future in dynasty just to plug in some waiver scrub. 

In redraft, not even sure there are any ethics here unless it is just plain as day you are doing something shady like trying to let a crappy team get a win to knock a better team out of the playoffs or something. 

If you have like 5 guys on bye and someone tells you to "manage your team better", they are clueless. 

 
Not allowed in my dynasty league.

1st offense: -20 points that week.

2nd offense: Forfeit the week.

3rd offense: Dismissal from the league.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All the time.  Can't believe some leagues don't allow it.  If you're willing to take a zero, I don't see why anyone would care. Pretty stupid to have a rule against that if you ask me.  I'm doing it this week on D. I have MIN defense and nobody on my bench I'm willing to drop for a bye week filler D.  So, I'll take a 0 this week at D.

 
daylight said:
Agreed but that's notwat we are discussing here
Click to expand...
Depends on league parameters, but you are right, empty spots is not ALWAYS a case of bad ownership.  Though, in larger roster leagues, empty spots is USUALLY a case of bad ownership.

We have fairly large rosters which makes avoiding empty spots easier, and I like that the rule forces owners to make a roster decision sometimes.

Usually, the mediocre idp's and kickers are added, dropped, and passed around like sorority girls.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skoo said:
The only time I would do it is if I had already clinched a playoff spot.

I don't know about you guys, but personally I can't remember a year when the last playoff spot(s) weren't determined by 1 game or less in the last week of the regular season.

How will you feel if you lose by 3 points this week and end up missing the playoffs by a game?
Click to expand...
Just as bad as if he ends up missing the playoffs because he didn't have Thomas or Dixon later in the season, and possibly worse if having them would have meant winning MORE than a single game.

 
The only reason I see to have a rule against it is you just remove it as an option for throwing games or tanking.  Which in some leagues can be a good enough reason.

If you played with a bunch of owners that was never an issue though, I don't see why it should be illegal. If you're trying to maximize your own team's gametime efforts and you think you come out ahead over the course of the season by retaining the player you'd have to cut otherwise, then I'd say you're managing your team to their max in the spirit of the game. Which is exactly what I'd want everyone to do.

 
Ive been looking at my week 9 and week 8 bye issues for 2 weeks now in a short bench league. Competition deserves it. Its part of the planning. in this league we don't charge for transactions.

Its actually challenging and fun. 

 
I probably do this every season in at least one league - knowingly take a 0 from a starting position for a week in order to NOT have to drop someone I think will have playoff value.  I want the strongest possible team at the most critical point in the season, and I'm wiling to risk some points in mid-season for a late-season payoff. 

And sometimes you get unexpected late-week injuries, or unexpected game-time decisions after legit replacements would be available (ie after the waiver wire has been picked clean).  It would be foolish to blow up your team in the early or mid-season just to win a week that you don't necessarily need.

It does depend on the context, though - whether I had a reasonable shot at the playoffs and need to bother stashing anyone for Week 14+, whether I am facing a strong opponent during a week when I'd have a roster hole, etc.

I think the objection to this, and it's very different as far as I am concerned, would be that some managers take 0s to try to manipulate OTHER teams rather than their own.  By that I mean trying to throw games so that a theoretically weaker team will advance to the playoffs and offer a less competitive post-season.  To me that is completely different, because the intent is to manipulate other teams rather than to field the most competitive team during the season - and I believe the priority needs to be on the overall season.

 
Silly.  Some of you are actually in favor of having to drop an every week starter under the right set of circumstances.   And for what?  To pick up some scrub for one week just to satisfy a bad rule?  Ouch.

Hypothetical: say your top 7 players are all either on bye or are going to miss ONE game this coming week (concussion, ankle, etc.....).  You need to pick up 3 guys to field a full lineup.  Sooooooooo, you have to drop 3 of your top 7 players just for this week??  Just so you can lose more closely while killing your entire season?

Sounds reasonable

 
ghostguy123 said:
Silly.  Some of you are actually in favor of having to drop an every week starter under the right set of circumstances.   And for what?  To pick up some scrub for one week just to satisfy a bad rule?  Ouch.

Hypothetical: say your top 7 players are all either on bye or are going to miss ONE game this coming week (concussion, ankle, etc.....).  You need to pick up 3 guys to field a full lineup.  Sooooooooo, you have to drop 3 of your top 7 players just for this week??  Just so you can lose more closely while killing your entire season?

Sounds reasonable
Click to expand...
...and now we have the obligatory "you're more likely to be struck by lightning" scenario.

I knew this thread was missing something.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Best waiver wire player available in your league
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
Doubles
D
zamboni
Draft Question on Sleeper - Autopick Off
Replies
0
Views
582
zamboni
zamboni
Judge Smails
Best player available - or best roster construction pick?
Replies
24
Views
782
ignatiusjreilly
ignatiusjreilly

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top