Countering your Opponents QB with your WR start... (1 Viewer)

[stp-d]

These players are just an EXAMPLE for clarity you should consider both WR's equally viable starts, thx: Your opponent is starting Philip Rivers at QB

You can start either Vincent Jackson or Sidney Rice as your #3 WR, who have very similar projected scores for the week and you just can't determine who has the edge.

Do you start VJAX over Rice to counteract your opponents points received from Rivers performance? Or is this more of a danger if Rivers leans towards Gates & Floyd all day?

I run into this situation quite often and I usually go with the guy to counteract my opponents QB pt total, interested to see what others think about these type situations. Remember, the players are just an example and should be considered equally Viable WR starts, i know its hard to do.

 

[PatsFanCT]

This again?

VJax scores 10pts

Rice scores 25 pts

Who was the better start?

 

[stp-d]

This again?VJax scores 10ptsRice scores 25 ptsWho was the better start?

read the question, the players are only an example...

 

[PatsFanCT]

This again?VJax scores 10ptsRice scores 25 ptsWho was the better start?

read the question, the players are only an example...

Oh, well if you can guarantee they will score the exact same points, then I see your dilemma.

 

[packersfan]

I think this is a very good topic for discussion. The problem I see with your example, though, is you have one player who is playing well (Rice) and another who is currently not producing (Jackson). So if that's the case, the choice for me is easy and it would be Rice. No way I start an unproductive player over a productive player just to try and offset a QB matchup. If the two players are producing at similar levels, however, and both have the same type of matchup I would very likely choose the player who my opponent has the QB with.

 

[FallenHero32]

All things being equal, start the counter WR to his QB. That being said, Sidney Rice is hot and Vincent has been a dud lately. If you are willing to risk it, by all means start Vincent, but I think Sidney is the safer bet.

 

[Trig2U]

I know this comes up once in a while, and maybe someone has done the stats to show otherwise, but I say in the example you gave (ie all things being more or less equal) you go with Jackson.

There's very likely a correlation between Rivers and V-Jax scoring, right? If Rivers has a bad day the odds of V-Jax also having a bad day are increased a lot. And vice versa.

Now, if V-Jax scores 33% of what Rivers does, maybe it's a wash. But if he gets 75% of Rivers' score, or makes the most of a lot of targets and outscores his own QB, you've probably got a fairly serious advantage with your QB matched up vs your fantasy opponent's WR.

Of course all things are seldom exactly equal when comparing two players (is Revis covering your guy? What's the weather like, etc.). But I'd start Vincent Jackson in this example. Sure, why not?

 

[PahtyTom]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

 

[Phurfur]

Play the player YOU think will score the most points.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

sticky, plz

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

These players are just an EXAMPLE for clarity you should consider both WR's equally viable starts, thx: Your opponent is starting Philip Rivers at QB

You can start either Vincent Jackson or Sidney Rice as your #3 WR, who have very similar projected scores for the week and you just can't determine who has the edge.

Do you start VJAX over Rice to counteract your opponents points received from Rivers performance? Or is this more of a danger if Rivers leans towards Gates & Floyd all day?

I run into this situation quite often and I usually go with the guy to counteract my opponents QB pt total, interested to see what others think about these type situations. Remember, the players are just an example and should be considered equally Viable WR starts, i know its hard to do.

At the end of the day, it's your team's overall points versus his. You put out the players you think will score the most points for your team. That is it, it doesn't get any more complex than that. There's no If's, Ands or Buts.........If Player A scores more than Player B, you want player A in there. I know you're trying to say something like they're tied in your head going into the matchup, why not start the WR that's on the QB's side to offset some potential big day. The problem is they are not tied. Just block that out and pick the player you think will score the most and that's the guy you go with.

 

[BassNBrew]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

Wrong.You play the lineup that will give you the best chance to win.And for those saying you counter your opponents QB when choosing between equal players, that is wrong also. If you're the favorite then you employ the counter. If you're a decided underdog you do everything you can to avoid starting players who may have linked outcomes.

 

[BassNBrew]

These players are just an EXAMPLE for clarity you should consider both WR's equally viable starts, thx: Your opponent is starting Philip Rivers at QB

You can start either Vincent Jackson or Sidney Rice as your #3 WR, who have very similar projected scores for the week and you just can't determine who has the edge.

Do you start VJAX over Rice to counteract your opponents points received from Rivers performance? Or is this more of a danger if Rivers leans towards Gates & Floyd all day?

I run into this situation quite often and I usually go with the guy to counteract my opponents QB pt total, interested to see what others think about these type situations. Remember, the players are just an example and should be considered equally Viable WR starts, i know its hard to do.

At the end of the day, it's your team's overall points versus his. You put out the players you think will score the most points for your team. That is it, it doesn't get any more complex than that. There's no If's, Ands or Buts.........If Player A scores more than Player B, you want player A in there. I know you're trying to say something like they're tied in your head going into the matchup, why not start the WR that's on the QB's side to offset some potential big day. The problem is they are not tied. Just block that out and pick the player you think will score the most and that's the guy you go with.

So you are saying the someone should change their weekly projections when they project them the same???

 

[Rovers]

I am in the camp of never even looking at, nevermind considering what players you will go up against until you set your best line up. The ONLY time I might look at this is in leagues that only award 4 points for passing TD's and 6 for recieving TD's. I am in a couple of leagues like that.

If projections are very close, do more work. Find out what DB is likely to cover which WR. Look at the team's pass rush, and pass protection. If WR A is a deep threat type, Like a D Jackson (Philly) and the defense has a very strong pass rush, the QB may well go to his possession WR and RB's more often.

Harvin may be out... that would bump S Rice a bit. Start the players who you think will score the most points. Sounds silly, but to allow your opponent's line up to make you get defensive when setting your line up to offset his is a faulted strategy IMO. Start the players you think will score the most. It's that simple, and has little to do with what players you go up against in a given week.

 

[D'OHtis]

Start the players you think will score the most.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dumb.if we all knew who would score the most points, it would be a pretty straightforward selection, but we don't.every player has a spectrum of potential points associated with him, as well as a spectrum of probabilities.if you think you know who will score the most points, you are bs'ing yourself.

 

[BassNBrew]

Let's discuss a specific example...lineups with Dodds projections

Team A is starting

QB: Warner 22

RB: CJ 20, Rice 19

WR: AJ 15, Welker 13, Moss 13

TE: Davis 12

D: BAL 11

Team B has the following choices.

QB: Brady 22, Schuab 22, Romo 22

RB: Moroney 11, Forte 10, Hightower 9

WR: Boldin 12, Austin 11, Rice 10, Crabtree 10

TE: Watson 4, Scheffler 4

D: SD 7, SF 6

Start 1/2/3/1. Who does Team B start???

Let's assume that you agree with Dodd's projections within +/- 10%.

 

[Dragon1952]

Hopefully Team B would start Boldin no matter what. It's not like you'd start him just to offset Warner. As for QB, those are 3 pretty good choices, I would lean Brady or Schaub depending on match-up. Probably Brady, though. I wouldn't worry about Team A's WR's. Who's to say they get the pts anyway.

 

[BassNBrew]

Hopefully Team B would start Boldin no matter what. It's not like you'd start him just to offset Warner.

Nope.Hint, Team B is a 40 point underdog. Two points won't make up that difference.

 

[Dragon1952]

I guess agreeing with the projections would be by downfall...sorry.

 

[PahtyTom]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

Wrong.You play the lineup that will give you the best chance to win.And for those saying you counter your opponents QB when choosing between equal players, that is wrong also. If you're the favorite then you employ the counter. If you're a decided underdog you do everything you can to avoid starting players who may have linked outcomes.

The players that give you the best chance to win are the players that you project to score the most points. The fact that your opponent has the QB to your WR does not affect how many points your WR projects to score. If you do your projections correctly, and account for risk and reward along with every other factor, then all that matters is the final numbers. End of story.

 

[Dragon1952]

Last week, Boldin 7/98/2. Was that projected?

 

[BassNBrew]

I guess agreeing with the projections would be by downfall...sorry.

The premise of the thread was that you're deciding between players that are virtually equal in your mind.

 

[PahtyTom]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dumb.if we all knew who would score the most points, it would be a pretty straightforward selection, but we don't.every player has a spectrum of potential points associated with him, as well as a spectrum of probabilities.if you think you know who will score the most points, you are bs'ing yourself.

It is our job to determine, using those probabilities, which players will average the most points in their respective situations.

 

[Dragon1952]

I guess agreeing with the projections would be by downfall...sorry.

The premise of the thread was that you're deciding between players that are virtually equal in your mind.

Whatever. Problem is, it hardly ever works out that way.

 

[BassNBrew]

Last week, Boldin 7/98/2. Was that projected?

Last week, Gradkowski 308/3 plus 20 rush. Was that projected?

 

[5-ish Finkle]

And for those saying you counter your opponents QB when choosing between equal players, that is wrong also. If you're the favorite then you employ the counter. If you're a decided underdog you do everything you can to avoid starting players who may have linked outcomes.

Start 1/2/3/1. Who does Team B start???Let's assume that you agree with Dodd's projections within +/- 10%.

If you believe your first quote, then Team B starts Romo the 3 WRs not named Boldin and the Cincy D. The other guys really won't matter much unless you buy into the theory that if Warner does well then Hightower absolutely won't(not even remotely a given) or that if Moss/Welker struggle then Watson/Maroney should benefit(again, not necessarily a given).It's a crapshoot either way and can burn you just as often as it works. Play the players the you're projecting to score the most points.

 

[BassNBrew]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dumb.if we all knew who would score the most points, it would be a pretty straightforward selection, but we don't.every player has a spectrum of potential points associated with him, as well as a spectrum of probabilities.if you think you know who will score the most points, you are bs'ing yourself.

It is our job to determine, using those probabilities, which players will average the most points in their respective situations.

Correct. And sometimes these probabilites correlate to a degree. Knowing your probability of winning, it becomes your job to link or unlinked the probabilities that will impact your probability of winning.

 

[PahtyTom]

Hopefully Team B would start Boldin no matter what. It's not like you'd start him just to offset Warner.

Nope.Hint, Team B is a 40 point underdog. Two points won't make up that difference.

I see what you are saying, but starting a player that you project to score less points still has a lower probability of helping you win. If you need 12 catches for 200 yards and a couple scores, and Boldin projects the highest, then you play Boldin.

 

[PahtyTom]

Last week, Boldin 7/98/2. Was that projected?

Last week, Gradkowski 308/3 plus 20 rush. Was that projected?

That is variance and luck, which is a huge part of fantasy and sports in general even though no professional athletes or coaches or analysts ever admit it.

 

[BassNBrew]

And for those saying you counter your opponents QB when choosing between equal players, that is wrong also. If you're the favorite then you employ the counter. If you're a decided underdog you do everything you can to avoid starting players who may have linked outcomes.

Start 1/2/3/1. Who does Team B start???Let's assume that you agree with Dodd's projections within +/- 10%.

If you believe your first quote, then Team B starts Romo the 3 WRs not named Boldin and the Cincy D. The other guys really won't matter much unless you buy into the theory that if Warner does well then Hightower absolutely won't(not even remotely a given) or that if Moss/Welker struggle then Watson/Maroney should benefit(again, not necessarily a given).It's a crapshoot either way and can burn you just as often as it works. Play the players the you're projecting to score the most points.

That's the general ine of thinking. You're going to get crushed at RB, TE, and D. You're on par at QB and slightly lagging at WR. A couple of Romo to Austin hookups levels the playing field. If Warner has a stinker, you're back in the game.

 

[PahtyTom]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dumb.if we all knew who would score the most points, it would be a pretty straightforward selection, but we don't.every player has a spectrum of potential points associated with him, as well as a spectrum of probabilities.if you think you know who will score the most points, you are bs'ing yourself.

It is our job to determine, using those probabilities, which players will average the most points in their respective situations.

Correct. And sometimes these probabilites correlate to a degree. Knowing your probability of winning, it becomes your job to link or unlinked the probabilities that will impact your probability of winning.

Hmmmm...interesting. Is it possible to quantify though? How linked are certain players?

 

[Dragon1952]

Last week, Boldin 7/98/2. Was that projected?

Last week, Gradkowski 308/3 plus 20 rush. Was that projected?

That's what I'm saying.

 

[stp-d]

OK, for everyone who said use the player who you think will score the most pts, i thank you and your I DON'T READ INSTRUCTIONS VERY WELL sign is waiting for you.

You are kidding yourselves if you think you know if Brandon Marshall or Ocho Cinco will score more from one week to another. It's all a guessing game once you've looked at DEF matchups, pass rush, injuries, weather...etc.

The idea is Currently both players are projected to score exactly the same pts, there is ZERO indication that one will score more than the other going into the week given all information. Considering both players can score more than other from week to week (variance), and there is no clarity which player will be on the high side of the +/-, do you go with the guy who is catching the balls for your Opponents QB or do u just flip a coin?

 

[BassNBrew]

Hopefully Team B would start Boldin no matter what. It's not like you'd start him just to offset Warner.

Nope.Hint, Team B is a 40 point underdog. Two points won't make up that difference.

I see what you are saying, but starting a player that you project to score less points still has a lower probability of helping you win. If you need 12 catches for 200 yards and a couple scores, and Boldin projects the highest, then you play Boldin.

Team B has limped into the playoffs on a tiebreaker with a 7-6 record. Team A has run the table. Team B doesn't have a huge probability of winning, let's say 20% when starting Boldin and garnering his expect 1 point advantage. Let's say replacing Boldin with Austin at one less point reduces that chance to 19%. Now let's look at Boldin exceeding expectations by 10 points. Odds are that Warner netted some of pie and has now exceeded his projection by 4 pts for the sake of argument. Maybe you've increased you chance of winning to 23% as you've reduced a 40 point expected deficit to 34 points. The last scenario involves Austin exceeding his project by 10 points and increasing Romo's output by 4 pts. Now you've reduced that expected deficit to 26 pts. Let's say Warner underperforms but you didn't start Boldin. Now that deficit is down to 20 points and there are many more scenarios where you have a chance of winning this week.

 

[stp-d]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

Wrong.You play the lineup that will give you the best chance to win.And for those saying you counter your opponents QB when choosing between equal players, that is wrong also. If you're the favorite then you employ the counter. If you're a decided underdog you do everything you can to avoid starting players who may have linked outcomes.

this is along the lines of a strategy to employ considering

 

[BassNBrew]

I've always thought this is one of the dumbest theories in ff. You play the guys on your team that you think will score the most points. That is it.

just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dumb.if we all knew who would score the most points, it would be a pretty straightforward selection, but we don't.every player has a spectrum of potential points associated with him, as well as a spectrum of probabilities.if you think you know who will score the most points, you are bs'ing yourself.

It is our job to determine, using those probabilities, which players will average the most points in their respective situations.

Correct. And sometimes these probabilites correlate to a degree. Knowing your probability of winning, it becomes your job to link or unlinked the probabilities that will impact your probability of winning.

Hmmmm...interesting. Is it possible to quantify though? How linked are certain players?

To an extent. How linked??? Not enough that it would matter unless one team is a decided underdog or favorite. If we're dealing with teams that are equally matched, linking or unlinking players probably doesn't help much.Some general thoughts. A Moroney TD likely is 3/4 less of TD for Brady and 1/2 less of a TD for Moss/Welker/Watson.A Warner pick is definately -2 points for him and +2 for the opposing D. Maybe 1/10 of the time it's another 6 points for the D.A 0 TD day for Warnerr is 99% a 0 TD day for Boldin.A 5 TD day for Warner is 80%+ a 1+ TD day for Boldin, 40% a 2+ TD day for Boldin.

 

[stp-d]

Hopefully Team B would start Boldin no matter what. It's not like you'd start him just to offset Warner.

Nope.Hint, Team B is a 40 point underdog. Two points won't make up that difference.

I see what you are saying, but starting a player that you project to score less points still has a lower probability of helping you win. If you need 12 catches for 200 yards and a couple scores, and Boldin projects the highest, then you play Boldin.

Team B has limped into the playoffs on a tiebreaker with a 7-6 record. Team A has run the table. Team B doesn't have a huge probability of winning, let's say 20% when starting Boldin and garnering his expect 1 point advantage. Let's say replacing Boldin with Austin at one less point reduces that chance to 19%. Now let's look at Boldin exceeding expectations by 10 points. Odds are that Warner netted some of pie and has now exceeded his projection by 4 pts for the sake of argument. Maybe you've increased you chance of winning to 23% as you've reduced a 40 point expected deficit to 34 points. The last scenario involves Austin exceeding his project by 10 points and increasing Romo's output by 4 pts. Now you've reduced that expected deficit to 26 pts. Let's say Warner underperforms but you didn't start Boldin. Now that deficit is down to 20 points and there are many more scenarios where you have a chance of winning this week.

well done

 

[BassNBrew]

Inviting some folks to pick a lineup for Team B. You're also welcome to pick any players that Dodd's has projected within +/- 1 point as long as they don't have any link to Team A's players. Let's see who can take down Team A. I'll post my lineup for Team B latter.

 

[GiantsRule]

The cancellation theory doesn't work. Period. Doesn't matter who the players are or what the circumstances are. You play your best players who you think will score the most points and your opponent will do the same.

Don't know why this comes up every single season and there's always an intense discussion about it when the answer is clear that you simply can't cancel out your opponent's players.

 

[stp-d]

The cancellation theory doesn't work. Period. Doesn't matter who the players are or what the circumstances are. You play your best players who you think will score the most points and your opponent will do the same.Don't know why this comes up every single season and there's always an intense discussion about it when the answer is clear that you simply can't cancel out your opponent's players.

You've already considered every little factor, and both are projected to score 12.2, it doesn't matter who you start at WR?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The cancellation theory doesn't work. Period. Doesn't matter who the players are or what the circumstances are. You play your best players who you think will score the most points and your opponent will do the same.

what % of players exactly equal your projections?for all the people that think the obvious answer is to start the guy with the most points, we should do an experiment ---- come up with a list of, say, 20 players, have them post projections, and we'll see how many they get right.

 

[ready5]

the same people who think this question is pointless are the same people who put too much stock in projections. even ignoring injuries and weather, everyone recognizes that an individual's performance (fantasy-wise) is highly dependent on a host of factors -- football is a team game. as such, projections should really be presented as ranges.

now think of all the boom/bust players out there -- what would their projected range be? if you're facing a QB with a lot of upside, why not try to offset that risk with that QB's upside WR/TE/whatever (ceteris paribus)? think of it in terms of matching probablistic acceleration -- if your boom/bust player doesn't have the same kind of upside as their boom/bust player, it doesn't work.

in other words, 99% of the time this strategy is flat-out inapplicable... but the other 1% of the time, it can consistently win games.

 

[JerseyPaul]

The answer is easy.

It depends on the rest of the matchups with your opponent. Counterfeiting will decrease the spread with your opponent. If you feel your team (as a whole) is better than your opponent's team, then decrease the variability and play his WR. If you feel you need to get a little lucky to beat your opponent, then increase the variability by staying away from his teams. If his QB has a bad day, you smile and win.

 

[craxie]

The cancellation theory doesn't work. Period.

and your proof of this is?

You play your best players who you think will score the most points and your opponent will do the same.

bzzztit's called playing smart and hedging your betsas others have mentioned, the main scenario i see this being useful is when you are clear favorite and the ONLY way your opponent is going to win is if their star player completely blows upto hedge/cover such a situation, you select a player that is linked with their playerif your player scores nothing, their player probably didn't do so well and you still winbut if their player does blow up, hopefully your player will get enough of it to keep you in the lead

 

[PahtyTom]

What about when you sit boldin, and Warner throws tds to him that would have been cancelled out? I'm on my phone now so I can't type more but I think there is a lot more to be discussed.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Correct. And sometimes these probabilites correlate to a degree. Knowing your probability of winning, it becomes your job to link or unlinked the probabilities that will impact your probability of winning.

Hmmmm...interesting. Is it possible to quantify though? How linked are certain players?

Here's an article that outlines the mathematical theory.As I've said before, applying these ideas can probably net you an extra two or three wins per decade if used properly, but could net you two or three losses per year if you apply them too ambitiously.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

What about when you sit boldin, and Warner throws tds to him that would have been cancelled out? I'm on my phone now so I can't type more but I think there is a lot more to be discussed.

so, you think there's a lot more to be discussed about the dumbest theory in ff?

 

[ready5]

The answer is easy.

It depends on the rest of the matchups with your opponent. Counterfeiting will decrease the spread with your opponent. If you feel your team (as a whole) is better than your opponent's team, then decrease the variability and play his WR. If you feel you need to get a little lucky to beat your opponent, then increase the variability by staying away from his teams. If his QB has a bad day, you smile and win.

what do you mean by "counterfeiting"?and i agree, it's easy:

-- if you're facing a weak opponent, hedge your bets by starting your studs and more consistent players

-- if you're facing a strong opponent, consider both NFL and FF matchups to see if you can stack your odds

how aggressive/conservative you need to be with your lineup will always only ever depend on your FF opponent (in head-to-head, at least), not on some projected high score. what if your opponent has a bad day? put yourself in a position to win. what if he has a good day? put yourself in a position to win.

for those of you looking only at projections, i encourage you to go through and look at all your close games (especially your bad beats). ignoring everything that happened on the field, was your lineup strategy the best? yes, there's a risk of overthinking it... but there's also a risk of underthinking it.

given that sometimes bad strategies are lucky and even good strategies can fail, i'm never convinced by some over-powered team always starting their studs. i'm more impressed by people who can put even an under-powered team in a position to win -- which is something that will never happen if one has an over-reliance on projections.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Suppose that you've got a pretty solid team, but that your opponent, due to byes and injuries, has only one player in his lineup: Joe Flacco.

Do you start Derrick Mason or Larry Fitzgerald?