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.
Technically speaking, Conklin could have fumbled. Or in the extremely rare situation, could have thrown a pick on a trick play. We've all seen it before when non-QBs are asked to throw.At the risk of having missed something, you played the guy that had zero chance of getting negative points, and that guy outscored the other guy anyway?
Also BYE weeks would play hell with such a format. If I have 5 starters out on BYE, my bench will be 0s.
That seems extremely specific to your format.
Sure but when you have a -3 for turnovers that swings the scrub QB significantly down in the hierarchy of who to play...........even without the slim lead. In the -3 for turnover situation here I likely would never start Wilson due to the catastrophic negative possibilities that are very real.
Winner winner chicken dinner. I just said that prior to seeing this post.
Better than using bench points is to just go to "potential points" That takes lineup decisions completely out of the equation as PP equates to the optimal lineup for your team each week. That way a team that is trying to tank by leaving better players on the bench don't get rewarded for doing so. This also evens out the benches because it only counts the starting lineup positions rather than all bench spots.
IDP makes the bolded a maddening weekly issue - even with a very good or great team, it's just so incredible how often I start the wrong IDPers.
It's not.In summary, he played the lineup that he thought ensured him the best chance of a win. I don’t see how that’s any different than what I did in swapping out Zach Wilson for Tyler Conklin.
Easy solution to this is to cut 3 safeties and only have the starters plus one (or maybe two for byes). DB's are the kickers of the IDP world. No need to carry that many...hahahaha
50 man rosters! BYE weeks!
I'm fascinated by that myself. I was surprised when it got to 2!
99% of the time its not gonna matter anyhow. even bad players rarely get a negative score.
Can't believe it took 4 pages for this.
actually.... adding "all play" to leagues in a hybrid format is 100% the way to go.....
,.....but "let's be honest" normally the opposite would be true....so you would have a decision to make....it wouldn't be so clear cut.....
That's an interesting format - I appreciate you sharing that.actually.... adding "all play" to leagues in a hybrid format is 100% the way to go.....
1. you still have your "main" HTH matchup each week which goes towards your division record..... and the 3 division winners automatically advance to the playoffs
2. in that same week you are also playing all 11 teams in all play and end each week there with a 11-0, or 10-1, 9-2, 8-3,7-4,6-5, 5-6, 4-7,3-8, 2-9,1-10,0-11 record...other 3 playoff teams come from this group at end of year.....
so in this case, you could choose to do what HSG....and secure that "main" HTH win that week......BUT....it could cost you in your all play standings if you choose to play a guy (Conklin) who may not score as much (Wilson)....obviously in a weird twist of fate that didn't happen here cause Conklin outscored Wilson...
we have talked about switching entirely to "all play" as it is truly the best week to week assessment of the best teams/owners/lineup setters.....but guys want to hang on to the "main HTH matchup" each week....so this was our compromise...
Hmmmm... this feels more like a "hot take" rather than advice from a guy who ask other folks to pay him money for fantasy football advice.
He's allowed to have hot takes imo. This is his job, but also his hobby, and his passion like the rest of us. Let him take the "expert" hat off once in a while and just be a guy sharing his opinion sometimes.
It's within the rules and smart game management. You can vote on it next year. Don't waste your time with him on something that's perfectly within the rules.
What is there to vote on? That you have to play a QB in the flex?
Lol
yeah and the fact that he would do differently in a "life or death " situation is all you really need to hear.....not sure what "life or death" is in fake football....I'm assuming he means something like getting in the playoffs or winning it all type of scenario....but throwing out that "disclaimer" pretty much says it all...
Yeah, that’s a little silly since it’s a SF. we are not a start 2 QB format.
I have no idea what a “life or death” situation would be for a lineup decision. I found that as logical/relevant as the Ted Williams anecdote.
Rule: You can play QB, RB, WR, TE in Superflex spot EXCEPT when you're team is winning on MNF AND the QB is projected for more points than the non-QB. Then you HAVE to play the QB.
Now that is the best post in this thread.Rule: You can play QB, RB, WR, TE in Superflex spot EXCEPT when you're team is winning on MNF AND the QB is projected for more points than the non-QB. Then you HAVE to play the QB.
It's total points of starters and bench (and we include taxi) over the full course of the regular season so all owners bye weeks are all included. Really the only thing it doesn't capture are good players who are on IR, so like I have Dobbins, Mike Williams, Bourne, and Waller on IR right now so it's making my team look worse than it is. But no other format I've come across accounts for this either, and again, I think including bench points means how line ups are set don't really matter. So really, there is no tanking. The only real way to tank, is to literally drop good players who are putting up points, thereby actually making your team worse. We've been doing it for 6 years now, and it's really worked out very well. The worst rosters really do wind up getting the higher picks and most of the variables (like the IR thing I pointed out) equalize across the league. We also give a compensatory pick (pick 2.13) to the winner of the consolation bracket. So it keeps people motivated to play out the season even when they aren't going to make the playoffs. A few other small rules balance things out, but it's all easily enforceable (like you always need a full roster) and now we basically never have to worry/care about how people manage their teams. Add in that you need to pay for future seasons where you are trading picks and it's the most stable league I've been a part of. We had someone declare they were leaving after last season and had traded away their 2023 1st and 2024 2nd, and we quickly got a new owner when they found out they are basically playing for free the next two years as they rebuild.
While it hasn't worked out great for me this year lol, I own Barkley, Dobbins, AJones, Mixon, Pollard, Rhamondre, and a few other less consequential RBs but who still are started in the flex in a few leagues. We only start 2 RBs. So I like a system that accounts for the depth of that bench and counts it towards the overall strength of my team. Because it's obviously a stronger team than one that has CMC and Bijan but then nothing behind them. But not including bench points in the tally completely misses that, Just my opinion though, everyone has a system that they think works best for their league.
We don't do divisions, but do everything else this way and it is fantastic. Trying to get all my leagues on board with it. Everyone has had those weeks where they are the 2nd highest scorer but had the bad luck of playing the 1st highest and this helps a ton with that. Fantasy will always come down to a ton of luck, but trying to remove it where possible has lead to much more enjoyable leagues for me.actually.... adding "all play" to leagues in a hybrid format is 100% the way to go.....
1. you still have your "main" HTH matchup each week which goes towards your division record..... and the 3 division winners automatically advance to the playoffs
2. in that same week you are also playing all 11 teams in all play and end each week there with a 11-0, or 10-1, 9-2, 8-3,7-4,6-5, 5-6, 4-7,3-8, 2-9,1-10,0-11 record...other 3 playoff teams come from this group at end of year.....
so in this case, you could choose to do what HSG....and secure that "main" HTH win that week......BUT....it could cost you in your all play standings if you choose to play a guy (Conklin) who may not score as much (Wilson)....obviously in a weird twist of fate that didn't happen here cause Conklin outscored Wilson...
we have talked about switching entirely to "all play" as it is truly the best week to week assessment of the best teams/owners/lineup setters.....but guys want to hang on to the "main HTH matchup" each week....so this was our compromise...
Start 10 17 man roster. We had a guy week 7 that had 9 guys on bye that week. Guy did an admirable job of fielding an entire team but of corse got trampled.
If you can only play 2 RB's then I wouldn't necessarily put your team as "better" than the CMC team. You can only play two guys. As long as those guys stay healthy that team is better for the purposes of winning. Your team is considered deeper but I wouldn't say better. I also don't think that your bench should have any bearing on your standings. They get incorporated if/when injuries hit so you are in good shape for that but if the other guy doesn't get hit with injuries why do they get punished for having a studs/duds approach?
Yep. And further if my league’s rules allowed me to have an empty spot at SF, I would have had zero ethical issues with that either.
When people argue for the all play or total points methods they also point to the "I scored the 2nd most points and lost - that shouldn't happen" but they neglect the bonus of "I played the only team I could beat - this is awesome" aspect of H2H. There are two sides to the H2H coin and that is one of the things that makes that format superior in my eyes. Over the course of time it will even out (win when you shouldn't vs lose when you shouldn't) but you typically only remember the bad beats.We don't do divisions, but do everything else this way and it is fantastic. Trying to get all my leagues on board with it. Everyone has had those weeks where they are the 2nd highest scorer but had the bad luck of playing the 1st highest and this helps a ton with that. Fantasy will always come down to a ton of luck, but trying to remove it where possible has lead to much more enjoyable leagues for me.actually.... adding "all play" to leagues in a hybrid format is 100% the way to go.....
1. you still have your "main" HTH matchup each week which goes towards your division record..... and the 3 division winners automatically advance to the playoffs
2. in that same week you are also playing all 11 teams in all play and end each week there with a 11-0, or 10-1, 9-2, 8-3,7-4,6-5, 5-6, 4-7,3-8, 2-9,1-10,0-11 record...other 3 playoff teams come from this group at end of year.....
so in this case, you could choose to do what HSG....and secure that "main" HTH win that week......BUT....it could cost you in your all play standings if you choose to play a guy (Conklin) who may not score as much (Wilson)....obviously in a weird twist of fate that didn't happen here cause Conklin outscored Wilson...
we have talked about switching entirely to "all play" as it is truly the best week to week assessment of the best teams/owners/lineup setters.....but guys want to hang on to the "main HTH matchup" each week....so this was our compromise...
I concur.
I agree here, too.
I would've taken no chances. Even with Conklin you took a risk. Completely eliminate the risk by starting a player who is guaranteed not to even dress out (like Aaron Rodgers).
That came up as well. This league is waiver claim only, so I had to go with what I had. It was fortunate I had another Jet to start.
Bye weeks would be the major other time bench depth comes into play. And I feel like you're HUGELY underselling injuries. But to each their own, maybe injuries have never had much of an impact on how things play out in your leagues. They have in mine every single year. And the people who don't have depth, tend not to fair well. Cheers!
Injuries are always huge. I adhere to the get depth approach over the studs/duds approach for sure. My point was when comparing what team is "better" bench points really don't matter. Your starting lineup is your team for the purposes of winning and losing. If a studs/duds team stays healthy (it has happened and is extremely lucky) then their team is good.
good one. wonder if TW the manager ever replaced his starting pitcher in a game his team was winning? nah, that would be playing not to lose. cheap.
Agreed with standings. But I do like using potential points for draft slot.When people argue for the all play or total points methods they also point to the "I scored the 2nd most points and lost - that shouldn't happen" but they neglect the bonus of "I played the only team I could beat - this is awesome" aspect of H2H. There are two sides to the H2H coin and that is one of the things that makes that format superior in my eyes. Over the course of time it will even out (win when you shouldn't vs lose when you shouldn't) but you typically only remember the bad beats.We don't do divisions, but do everything else this way and it is fantastic. Trying to get all my leagues on board with it. Everyone has had those weeks where they are the 2nd highest scorer but had the bad luck of playing the 1st highest and this helps a ton with that. Fantasy will always come down to a ton of luck, but trying to remove it where possible has lead to much more enjoyable leagues for me.actually.... adding "all play" to leagues in a hybrid format is 100% the way to go.....
1. you still have your "main" HTH matchup each week which goes towards your division record..... and the 3 division winners automatically advance to the playoffs
2. in that same week you are also playing all 11 teams in all play and end each week there with a 11-0, or 10-1, 9-2, 8-3,7-4,6-5, 5-6, 4-7,3-8, 2-9,1-10,0-11 record...other 3 playoff teams come from this group at end of year.....
so in this case, you could choose to do what HSG....and secure that "main" HTH win that week......BUT....it could cost you in your all play standings if you choose to play a guy (Conklin) who may not score as much (Wilson)....obviously in a weird twist of fate that didn't happen here cause Conklin outscored Wilson...
we have talked about switching entirely to "all play" as it is truly the best week to week assessment of the best teams/owners/lineup setters.....but guys want to hang on to the "main HTH matchup" each week....so this was our compromise...
I am all for using total points (or to a lesser extent all play as this is typically the same as total points) as a tie break and/or as wild card playoff teams. But not using H2H for the base standings and moving to all play seems like a roto style league which just isn't as fun to me.
Truly the best way to prevent tanking.
The best way to prevent tanking is don't play with bums who tank. I don't like this for draft order because you more often than not just punish the guy with the worst lineup/matchup luck a 2nd time.
Well yeah, but when you’re in a 16 team dynasty format, sometimes it’s unavoidable.
How is this punishing for a second time? The idea behind the NFL style draft order is that the worst teams get the better picks. Using potential points as the order (reverse order of course) is that the actual worst team will get the first pick. It takes schedule luck out of the equation and also disincentivizes playing a less than optimal lineup which helps the teams still competing to get into a playoff spot or move up the standings by having teams trying to win their matchup because there is no incentive to lose the matchup.
