My opponent is Brady, and my WR's are Branch and Welker. I actually pondered starting both to negate Brady. Is this A bad idea in general? The possibility of Brady blowing up this week is likely, and I'm thinking defensively. Am I overthinking this? Anyone ever done this and had A good outcome?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Anyone ever play your WR's against your opposing QB? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ballstein
- Start date
BucFan40
Footballguy
I did this last week, started Wayne and Garcon against Manning. Little did I know Collie would return and crush my plan so it's didn't work out that well. That being said, my other options were not that much better so it wasn't a great stretch to start those two. If you're on the fence with a few players, it may be a deciding factor. It really all depends on your opponents strength, if you think you are a big underdog, I wouldn't do it. It's not going to help you get ahead, it only negates some of their points. If you're the favorite or even, it may be a safe option.
by_the_sea_wannabe
:sj:
play the guy you think will score the most points. ywia
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Nope...play the guy that gives you the best percentage chance of winning.
footballnerd
Footballguy
actually you should play the QB of your opponents WR
WildEyedOne
Footballguy
I usually do this with a kicker. I figure i knock at least 1 point off of any td thrown and a bonus if they fail to score with a possible fg. This strategy has been very effective but only against top qbs
---
So if you use this logic I should start Hartley instead of Matt Bryant since my opponent has Brees. Still not sure about that
---
So if you use this logic I should start Hartley instead of Matt Bryant since my opponent has Brees. Still not sure about that
Last edited by a moderator:
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I wouldn't be worried about chipping one point away. I think the stronger correlation is successful FGs reducing the number of passing TDs. With Bryant in the mix, things get real muddy. I'd probably start Hartley if I was a big underdog.I usually do this with a kicker. I figure i knock at least 1 point off of any td thrown and a bonus if they fail to score with a possible fg. This strategy has been very effective but only against top qbs ---So if you use this logic I should start Hartley instead of Matt Bryant since my opponent has Brees. Still not sure about that
killrobotkill
Footballguy
The book on this strategy is that this is a way of minimizing risk - you're making it more likely that your WR's will have a good day if your opponents QB does (or a bad day if your opponents' players are having a bad day). So it makes sense if you're playing an inferior opponent and want to exploit them in other places in your lineup. If you're playing an opponent with a stronger team, however, you want to avoid doing this and put in players with higher upside relative to your opponent.
JMJ
Footballguy
Can you explain further please?
by_the_sea_wannabe
:sj:
pretty sure I said that - you win by scoring points - never can understand why everyone makes this so difficultBassNBrew said:
It has to do with variance. Sometimes the move that gives you the best chance of winning isn't necessarily starting the guy who you think will score the most points. The situation doesn't come up often, though, and only really applies if the two guys in question are within a couple points of each other.
I've got a weird situation this week, I've got the option of playing Woodhead vs. Buffalo, or flexing in a WR who's projected to score about the same. But my opponent has BenJarvus Green-Ellis starting at RB.
I think Woodhead might go off vs. Buffalo. But, it's the Pats, and you can never be sure what Belichek's game plan is going to be. BJGE might get some big plays, and score more FP. If he does, it'll probably mean fewer FP for Woodhead, who doesn't always get 10 carries and who might only really play in the fourth quarter.
So if it's a big day for BJGE, I'm better off with someone besides Woodhead in my lineup to try and keep pace, as every time BJGE gets a carry, Woodhead is on the sidelines. On the other hand, if it's a bad day for BJGE, who I play won't matter... Woodhead might get the points, but, so will the WR I've got for about the same total, and if I can't beat the guy after his RB doesn't score any points, I'm not going to win anyway.
Either way, I'm better off flexing in a WR than playing Woodhead, even if I've got Woodhead projected to score a point or two more.
I think Woodhead might go off vs. Buffalo. But, it's the Pats, and you can never be sure what Belichek's game plan is going to be. BJGE might get some big plays, and score more FP. If he does, it'll probably mean fewer FP for Woodhead, who doesn't always get 10 carries and who might only really play in the fourth quarter.
So if it's a big day for BJGE, I'm better off with someone besides Woodhead in my lineup to try and keep pace, as every time BJGE gets a carry, Woodhead is on the sidelines. On the other hand, if it's a bad day for BJGE, who I play won't matter... Woodhead might get the points, but, so will the WR I've got for about the same total, and if I can't beat the guy after his RB doesn't score any points, I'm not going to win anyway.
Either way, I'm better off flexing in a WR than playing Woodhead, even if I've got Woodhead projected to score a point or two more.
Resident A
Footballguy
I got burned by this when my playoff opponent started Manningham to offset my QB, Eli. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
I would not start both Branch & Welker this week to offset Brady. Buffalo is notorious for getting destroyed by opposing Tight Ends. Brady could throw 2-3 TDs to Gronkowski/Hernandez.
I would not start both Branch & Welker this week to offset Brady. Buffalo is notorious for getting destroyed by opposing Tight Ends. Brady could throw 2-3 TDs to Gronkowski/Hernandez.
No, you win by scoring more points than the other guy. As stated above, this strategy is useful to minimize risk against an inferior opponent. It mitigates the chance that your opponents QB will blow up and beat you by scoring more than his projections figure he should... if he does you hope that your WR also outscores his projection. If he doesn't, you still have your innate advantage of being the better team... with an even better chance of winning because his player with the most potential to substantially outscore his position had been neutralized. Obviously its not a guarantee (he could throw entirely to an unexpected receiver), but its a question of hugging the curves and playing the angles, pick up a few percentage points of advantage.There is an open question about whether its an effective strategy in the real world. The hole in the logic is that just because a WR has been correlated to a QB all things being equal doesn't mean that he will correlate if the QB has an uncharacteristically huge day. As an example if the entire defense decided to take away the WR- obviously the QB could have a monster day without the WR getting a sniff. If somebody hasn't studied the statistics on this it probably would be worth a look.
Last edited by a moderator:
FootballGuy22
Footballguy
My Championship opponent has Rivers and Maclin, I have Vick and V Jackson, since I have the better team otherwise I think this works in my favor. I think you can outthink yourself in these situations.
Maybe. Anybody starting John Skelton or Shaun Hill this week? I think this is a poor correlation- WRs can have big days but their QBs only decent. Steve Johnson might go 150 and 1 this week and Fitzpatrick end the day 200 and 1. It really only applies if the QB in question is elite and how many teams have elite QBs to choose from? If you can choose between Manning and Brees based on which WR your opponent has, god bless.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
This is the same thing, actually. If I have Roddy White and DeSean Jackson and am picking one against Vick the better decision will be the guy who scores more. If Vick throws 2 touchdowns to DeSean and Roddy White catches 3 touchdowns how is DeSean the better play?In the real world, it's not usually so clear cut who the better play is of course. So it actually comes down to a question of variance. Going checker-on-checker and starting the WR with your opponent's QB effectively ties that player up and limits how much you can gain (or more accurately not lose) against him. If your team is stronger across the board at the other positions, lowering the variance is good. If, however, you think your team is weaker across the board you need to increase the variance and go away from his QB if you think the decision between the two WR is otherwise a toss-up.-QGBassNBrew said:
UTLonghorn31
Footballguy
In FF, most leagues are H2H... if your goal is to beat your opponent, then you want the team that gives you the best chance to win, not the one with the highest scoring upside. With an FF winning percentage of about 85%, I can tell you it makes a huge difference and one that is often mismanaged. Being high scorer for the week is gravy, but the goal is always a W over the opponent. I would tend more to use this strategy starting the QB against someone else's top tier WR. Why? Because if his WR has a great game, it increases my odds of my QB outperforming his QB and eats into his advantage of the WR and if his WR has a bad game, then it is also possible my QB doesn't have a bad game but just threw to other options. But in the event that my QB and his WR had a bad game, then my top WR and the rest of my team can recover for me... the top tier WR would likely be one of his best players, and he would be in the hole even more.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Well said.Actually QB/RB, defensive plays, or even RBBC as mentioned above provide better opportunties for hedging (or not).
footballdiva
Footballguy
This makes me feel better. I am playing an overall inferior team. They have Witten & Miles and instead of Flacco, I'm rolling with Kitna.
By that logic if you were playing against Calvin Johnson every week, you'd start whatever Detroit QB they happened to be trotting out? I wouldn't try to work it that way- you should put out your highest projected QB every week, because in most leagues QBs are potentially the highest scoring position. Even if you neutralize his WR1, if his QB murders your QB all you've done is embarrass yourself.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Only if you had a superior team and your options at QB were the Det QB and someone ranked in the same neighborhood. You never sit a stud for a far inferior option.
Erin Go Bragh
Footballguy
That would make me VERY happy. You benefit every time AJ does something and you benefit whenever Foster is used in the passing game. It is a two for one hit in favor of the guy playing the QB. Plus, you get everything Schaub throws to Walter, Daniels, etc. while those opportunities are taking away potential touches from Foster and AJ. Love being in the exact spot you are talking about.
Exactly- but barring a catastrophic injury how often is Shaun Hill arguably your best option at QB AND you're superior to your opponent? My point is QB is such a critical position (there being only 1 in most leagues and their potential ceiling exceeding other positions considerably in most scoring) that there will almost never be a situation where that comes into play- either:- you dont have a team strong enough to lean on anyone (because your QB is too weak)
- or you do have a strong QB, which makes the possibility of having 2 equally strong QBs pretty unlikely
In my experience QB is the one position most likely to jump up and bite your ankles. I've won a lot of games where you WR1 laid an egg, but far fewer where my QB did. I think statistically that will bear out. I agree that 'all things being equal' this strategy is fine, but i suspect that circumstance is very seldom. Certainly much less common than the opportunity to trump your opponents QB with your WR as above.
Last edited by a moderator:
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I'm sure some Rodgers owners last week may have had to hit the wire and even debated between starting Flynn and Stanton. A superior team would have gone with Stanton and gotten enough points to exploit their strengths elsewhere. An inferior team would have started Flynn and hit one of the two things needed to win...Flynn having a good day and CJ having an off day. It's the coin flip situations relative to team strength where you just have to go with your gut and ignore whose playing who.
UTLonghorn31
Footballguy
Yeah, because it is realistic to play against Calvin every week.... but if you have Ryan vs White, Schaub vs AJ, Det QB vs CJ (good matchups), Rivers vs VJax, Manning vs Wayne, etc. it works when the WR is the opponents best player. There is more to it than this decision, and combining strategies to minimize your risk vs what your opponent is doing gives you great success as mentioned above.
I don't think it works unless you have two QBs you would flip a coin between, and that should rarely happen. Even when a WR is your opponents best player, they still dont consistently outscore the QB in most formats. If his WR and your QB have an off day, but his QB posts 50 on you, can you expect your WR to make up for it?
UTLonghorn31
Footballguy
You tell me the odds of a QB putting up 50 points that isn't the best player on his team. It is a positional by positional matchup. Thus, QBs get the highest scores sure, but the point differential is less in more scoring systems than when a WR1 that gives you below a WR3 score against a WR1 score. That is why you see RBs go first, WRs go next, and QBs 3rd off the draft in most drafts. Who cares about total points? Point differential matters otherwise kickers would go before the last round. My track record speaks for itself so you are free to do what you do, and I will stick with what has given me huge success in high stakes leagues. If you are unable to understand risk concepts, then I am not going to be able to help you.
Oh.. I wasn't aware you had a 'track record'.
Pro tip- every swinging **** on this board has a track record. Its too bad because I so needed your help.And for the record I was exaggerating with 50, by FBG scoring only Mike Vick has done that this season (week 10), and he probably wasn't the best guy on most of the teams that he did it for (at least considered so at the time).
On the other hand the list of guys that have posted 35 plus has 8 names and includes Rothlisberger, Garrard, Schaub, and Cassel, and if any of those guys are the best on your team you lineup is pretty much irrelevant.
So my point that you don't want to get beat by David Garrard having a big day because you benched Matt Ryan to play Chad Henne, I stand by.
UTLonghorn31
Footballguy
I have an 83.7% all play record this year with Schaub and Cassel, go figure... and I have a career record of 84.78% and a H2H of 85.71% this year. I have done it with good QBs in the past and with WW flavor of the week QBs. This is only one strategy in a multitude that reduces risk in your favor.... the more that are applicable, the better your odds. Again, the biggest scoring differentials are not usually at the QB position. Typically it is RB and WR, and thus you are in better shape if your opponents best player is a WR and you have his QB. It would force some of his other better players to match and exceed what they do just to compensate... and this goes on down the line. The odds are heavily against them. As per your example, Marshall is a mid WR2 in my scoring system this year so the odds of me benching Ryan for Henne is about 0%. I would certainly take my chances against a team starting Garrard beating me if his WR1 tanked and it was his best player. I would believe that I would win that 90% of the time.Oh.. I wasn't aware you had a 'track record'.
Dismattle
Footballguy
that sounds like some good strategy (I actually never even thought about it) I would say starting the WR of the opposing QB pays off @ 20 to 30 % of the time, 50% of the time its not really relevant...
TonyRockyHorror
Footballguy
Scoring system has an influence as well...Have Kitna vs. his Austin and Witten...QB gets 4 pts. per TD pass/Receivers get 6pts. Also, get .5 per reception...Actually hoping Kitna has a "bad" day, or the RB's score. I think I can make the points up at other positions.
Breaking out in a cold sweat...May have to go with Tebow or Grossman. OUCH!...There's that "Over-Thinking" bug biting my ###. Must stop reading these posts...
Good Luck everyone!!
Breaking out in a cold sweat...May have to go with Tebow or Grossman. OUCH!...There's that "Over-Thinking" bug biting my ###. Must stop reading these posts...
Good Luck everyone!!
