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!
Fantasy football myths? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fsufan
- Start date
gigantor
Footballguy
Just got Rivers in the 9th.I'm looking at the QB's this year.......and I'm not seeing it. I'm not seeing this depth of talent that is enabling people to wait until the later rounds to get QB's. I think alot of guys are going be tearing their hair out playing the weekly matchup game with two mediocre QB's whose downside are a lot greater than their upside.i was just fixing to post this
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
myth: that your friends, family or co-workers are interested in listening to you talk about your fantasy football team
GregR_2
Footballguy
I have been giving this more thought for the past day and I'm having trouble figuring out what kind of data you could show that would indicate this. You don't even need to know what players scored for a simple proof, as follows:For any given player who does not put up fantasy significant stats unless the starter goes down (i.e. a true backup and not RBBC), there is a time SOMEWHERE if the rosters are large enough at which for any team he is worth drafting based on the chance he will become a starter.Should he emerge as a starter with fantasy relevant stats for some number of weeks, there is a good likelihood that on some weeks the player has fantasy relevant stats, they won't be needed as the team's normal starters will be available to play and expected to pay more.However, for the team who considers him a handcuff to one of their starters, there is a perfect correlation between games our player in question may produce fantasy relevant stats, and the weeks that said fantasy team needs to replace one of their starters. So right there, we've proven that the player has more value to the team that considers him a handcuff since they are assured of getting his fantasy points at a time that they need them. Therefore the player is worth more to the handcuffing team, and the player should be taken earlier than by a non-handcuffing team.I don't know what data could be looked at to change that.I hope you do. I have an extremely hard time envisioning that when the players left worth drafting are down to NFL backup RBs, that your own backups aren't more valuable to you than are someone else's.My freelance article was on this exact topic....but it does seem it was not selected....should it not be posted...I can post in the forums for anyone interested in the raw data showing why handcuffing is not getting the most value out of your draft.I'm interested to hear the reasoning for why this is a myth.Edit to add: Though handcuffing "your studs" isn't an appropriate way to put it, in my opinion. Handcuffing can be a useful thing to do whether it's a stud or not.
chook
Footballguy
Brilliant!
Couldn't let this go by without showing a little bit of appreciation.
P.S. Hopefully there will be a better effort on their part if they're going to post here.
nygiants56
Footballguy
the starting TE in Denver is a great fantasy option.
Shanahan knows RBs, while Billick knows QB's.
Shanahan knows RBs, while Billick knows QB's.
Crusaderfan
Footballguy
This is one of those things that ticks me off. The elitist attitude some have towards others leagues. I play in 3 leagues and the size of all of them is determined by the number of friends in that group. Just because we have a 10 team league we don't feel pressured to find 2 more teams to get to the magic "12" number. IMHO - it takes just as much skill to decide which good player gets benched in a 10 team league as it does to "find" a Buckhalter that gets 3 carries in a 16 teamer.
Gonzo Stokes
Footballguy
Take the big 3 last year, for example. One of them went down and his replacement got extensive work. Maurice Morris did not provide much protection for his owner. People are talking on this board about taking Turner in the eighth round this year. There are receivers in the eighth round with 80 projected catches.I do not disagree that your backups are worth more to you than your opponents. I just think that there are better options to plug potential holes on your team than your backups.I have been giving this more thought for the past day and I'm having trouble figuring out what kind of data you could show that would indicate this. You don't even need to know what players scored for a simple proof, as follows:For any given player who does not put up fantasy significant stats unless the starter goes down (i.e. a true backup and not RBBC), there is a time SOMEWHERE if the rosters are large enough at which for any team he is worth drafting based on the chance he will become a starter.Should he emerge as a starter with fantasy relevant stats for some number of weeks, there is a good likelihood that on some weeks the player has fantasy relevant stats, they won't be needed as the team's normal starters will be available to play and expected to pay more.However, for the team who considers him a handcuff to one of their starters, there is a perfect correlation between games our player in question may produce fantasy relevant stats, and the weeks that said fantasy team needs to replace one of their starters. So right there, we've proven that the player has more value to the team that considers him a handcuff since they are assured of getting his fantasy points at a time that they need them. Therefore the player is worth more to the handcuffing team, and the player should be taken earlier than by a non-handcuffing team.I don't know what data could be looked at to change that.I hope you do. I have an extremely hard time envisioning that when the players left worth drafting are down to NFL backup RBs, that your own backups aren't more valuable to you than are someone else's.My freelance article was on this exact topic....but it does seem it was not selected....should it not be posted...I can post in the forums for anyone interested in the raw data showing why handcuffing is not getting the most value out of your draft.I'm interested to hear the reasoning for why this is a myth.Edit to add: Though handcuffing "your studs" isn't an appropriate way to put it, in my opinion. Handcuffing can be a useful thing to do whether it's a stud or not.
GregR_2
Footballguy
But the part you're not disagreeing with is the entire theory of handcuffing. There are no better options you are passing up if you're using any kind of sound decision making process. Handcuffing never calls for you to do so.It doesn't mean pass up a proven producer (i.e. RBBC like Dunn) for an NFL backup who only produces in case of injury. It doesn't even mean take the handcuff over a backup of obvious greater potential like Michael Turner, who if he does assume the starting role may become uber studly. It means Maurice Morris is worth more to you than Maurice Morris is worth to someone else. And that Maurice Morris is worth more to you than a guy who you'd have similarly ranked if you didn't consider either a handcuff. So take him an amount earlier appropriate for that extra value he has for you since he's a handcuff.If receivers with 80 projected catches are worth much more than NFL backup RBs who don't otherwise get touches, they should get taken ahead of them regardless. Using your example of Morris, if you look at what Morris actually did, he put up about 7.6 FPG while SA was out. You'll be hard pressed to find many RBs who could have been taken as late as he could have that scored that well over those exact same 5 games an SA owner had need. You'd be harder pressed to have guessed right from the pool of non-RBBC backup RBs to get any of the few who might have outperformed him over those same 5 games.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ummm, this isn't a myth, assuming equal quality players, you have a 10% chance to win a 10 team league an 8.33% chance to win a 12 team league etc. So you need to have more "skill factor" to overcome in larger leagues to have equal chance winning. To have a 15% chance in a 10 team league an increase in 5%, in a 12 team league 6.7%. Since these aren't measurable in real life, the skill it takes is so close that they are the same.
Here is a snippet from my article that relates directly to the Morris example you brought up:Baring an injury to these studs, their handcuff is basically useless. But, what if your stud does get hurt, then how much relative value does your handcuff have? Shaun Alexander was a consensus top 3 pick last year, and when he went down with his broken foot in week 3, the textbook reason why people handcuff their starter came into play. Their investment in Alexander was protected, because they had his immediate backup who would be getting all his carries. With an ADP of 212 Maurice Morris had to represent value, right? Since Morris was the last running back listed on the 9/4 ADP list published by footballguys, for comparison I took a look at one player that was selected after Morris in the above draft with the Maroney/Williams/Foster scenario, and not listed on the ADP list of 9/4 (Justin Fargas), and one popular waiver wire pickup (Leon Washington).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Morris 2.9 5.2 1.8 3.7 B 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.3 4.7
Week Total 8.1 21 13.7 3.7 0 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 4.4 20.7 15.9 8.9 14.7 26.5 21.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Fargas 3.5 1 B 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 6.4 4.8 11.8 3.9 5.3 9.7 8.8
Week Total 8.7 16.8 11.9 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 10.3 24.9 27 12.1 18.6 35.9 25.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Washington 0 0 7.7 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 B 3.6 2.9 2.4 12.6 8.3 0.5 13.4 13
Week Total 5.2 15.8 19.6 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 0 3.6 6.8 22.5 27.8 16.5 13.8 39.6 29.6
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
When looking at the above numbers we see that Morris struggled upon Alexander’s return from injury in week 11, as his numbers took a sharp decline once he headed back to the bench. We can see that he is handily beat by both Fargas and Washington from week 11 on. But, the important focus for this example should be between weeks 4 and 10, when Alexander was out. What is revealed is that despite the handcuff being placed in the staring spot of a top 3 stud running back, he was still on some weeks beat by a guy selected in the 20th round, and a waiver wire pickup. Both Fargas and Washington managed to beat out Morris 3 out of the 5 weeks, that Alexander was hurt (excluding the bye weeks). The numbers show that in the weeks that Alexander was hurt you could have survived starting Justin Fargas, or Leon Washington over Maurice Morris, and would have actually got better production from them, then the handcuffed insurance.
GreenNGold
Footballguy
The Madden curse is a myth.
Gonzo Stokes
Footballguy
Using Morris, I can further say that I probably would have gotten frustrated and dropped him before his 'big' weeks 9 and 10, getting even less value from him.The argument against will be that you're cherrypicking.
GregR_2
Footballguy
That isn't constructing a test that isolates the benefit of the player being a handcuff vs not being a handcuff. I'm guessing if the article wasn't chosen this is probably a big part of why. To elaborate, comparing Morris to "a guy not in the ADP who was a popular waiver wire pickup." Why was he a popular waiver wire pickup? Because took over the starting job. Does that make him a representative sample of those players selected around Morris? It should be pretty clear that he's one of the outlier points of how guys selected around Morris performed. He shouldn't be excluded from the data set, but it should be clear if he's the only player after Morris being used, that he isn't even close to a representative sample and we need more players to get a feeling for what is representative. Unless we're going to assume that if we don't take Morris we always end up with a guy who was a hot waiver pickup because he emerged as a starter. That doesn't seem a very logical assumption to base this on.
If we want to do a test with real numbers, then grab some number of RBs on both sides of him and I don't just mean 1 on each side. Test 3 on each side, then 5 on each side, then 10 on each side. Test 2 rounds of drafting above and below. See what each reveals and then from those results try to objective see what conclusions can be drawn.
The same sort of problem exists with the conclusions incidentally. The first thing that leaps out just glancing at those numbers was that Morris outscored both guys during the weeks that SA would have normally started for the fantasy team but didn't due to injury. For Washington it was close, but Fargas was more than doubled up. Morris outscored Washington 46.2 to 44.3, and Fargas, 46.2 to 19.9.
The heart of the handcuffing strategy is that you get the points the weeks you need them. Even with a biased data set, Morris still came out on top for the weeks the SA owner needed him. I think a better constructed test that actually takes into account the odds of having gotten a Washington from the draft instead of Morris will show it's even more overwhelming in favor of the handcuff.
One other thing that also stands out to me is the role of bye weeks. There's a gamble either way. If you have the handcuff you obviously can't use him on your stud's bye, though you should also have already accounted for that in your backups since you had to get someone to play that week even if SA was playing.
But, if you drafted some other team's RB, he could very well have a bye on the week that SA ends up injured. Knowing in advance which bye you have to cover for and knowing for sure you have a starter if your stud is injured on other weeks is probably a better situation to be in than not knowing what weeks your backup may even be worth starting, and possibly having his bye fall on the week you need him but not being able to know that in advance since you don't know when the injury will happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR_2
Footballguy
SFTD.
Actually in talking about a representative data set, using a single handcuff is as big a problem as having 50% of the players you compare him to be undrafted guys who turned into starters.
I can go find a single example that will support either way. The existence of such isn't meaningful. What's meaningful is the overall trend. The true test would be taking several years worth of data, identifying RBs who were workhorse ball carriers (so the backup was truly a backup and not RBBC) and had a clearly identifiable backup. And then compare them to a full spectrum of players that were considered comparable that year if the player was not being taken as a handcuff.
Actually in talking about a representative data set, using a single handcuff is as big a problem as having 50% of the players you compare him to be undrafted guys who turned into starters.
I can go find a single example that will support either way. The existence of such isn't meaningful. What's meaningful is the overall trend. The true test would be taking several years worth of data, identifying RBs who were workhorse ball carriers (so the backup was truly a backup and not RBBC) and had a clearly identifiable backup. And then compare them to a full spectrum of players that were considered comparable that year if the player was not being taken as a handcuff.
Last edited by a moderator:
Skinsfansince72
Footballguy
Yea, that only works if everybody else in your league is going along with the program.
AnonymousBob
Footballguy
Myth: LHUCKS knows what he's doing.
Gates isn't worth a top pick-it's better to wait for an "equal" TE in the later rounds.
Gates isn't worth a top pick-it's better to wait for an "equal" TE in the later rounds.
BigRed
Footballguy
OK tell you what: you and I will play in a 2-team league. You draft your players by picking names out of a hat ie luck (we'll even discount for positions you've already filled) and I'll draft however I want. When it comes to picking up FAs, same method. FYI your odds of winning are extremely slim.There are a number of things in this thread which IMO aren't true or aren't even myths at all, but this is by far the most idiotic. Of course there's some luck in FF, but to say there's no skill is ridiculous.GregR you do make a good point that my study may have been too isolated to only one year....and perhaps that is why the article was not chosen..... For the rest of examples I studied I did use a handcuff back in comparison to other backs around his ADP. Here is the complete article for you to have a look at.
In one particular draft last year I found myself sitting with the last pick of the 6th round with two young stud running backs starring me in the face, Laurence Maroney and D’Angelo Williams. With Deshaun Foster already in my stable, I made what I felt was the logical choice and went with Laurence Maroney. At the conclusion of the draft one of my opponents commented that in that position he would have handcuffed Foster, with Williams, to which I could only think, WHY? Why waste a pick in the 6th round for a handcuff, when you can roll the dice on a running back on another team who might have the potential to explode for a huge season. Rolling the dice would give you the chance at landing two explosive backs rather then just one. The conflicting theory on how to approach this pick intrigued me to dig deeper into the raw data to see if my mentality held true, are we handcuffed by handcuffs?
It’s a popular belief amongst many fantasy owners that if you draft a starting running back, then it is a MUST to also pickup his backup to protect your investment, but why? When you handcuff a running back you are essentially protecting yourself in the case of an injury. I equate this mentality to getting insurance in blackjack. In both cases you are placing an investment to protect yourself against a worse case scenario that may never arise. Just as the dealer may not have a blackjack, your stud running back may not get hurt. If the dealer does not have blackjack you just wasted valuable chips, and if that stud running back doesn’t get hurt, you wasted a pick on a player who occupied a roster spot, but probably never was inserted into your starting lineup. Basically it is an illusion that appears to offer you value, but in reality all you are doing is throwing away your money, or in this case your draft pick. By investing in a handcuff you lose an opportunity to select someone in that round who may turn out to be an explosive player for you. In any fantasy football draft you attempt to get the most value in each round of your draft, I believe that by handcuffing we are not doing this.
With a starter and a handcuff you have two players and one starting position. You would very rarely start both your starter, and your handcuff in a given week, but you could very well start your starter, and the other option selected in place of the handcuff. To further clarify the value we are missing out on when we handcuff I will analyze various handcuffed duos from last year, in comparison to alternate options around their ADP. Logically we will start with the Maroney/Williams and Foster duo from above.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Foster 7.4 4.3 8.9 17.1 11.8 7 7.9 14.1 B 5.7 6.3 0 0 2.6 4.7 10.7 15.1
Williams 0.8 15.8 -0.1 7.1 0.4 0 0 0 B 3 13.8 8.6 23.5 4.6 1.3 8.7 5.9
Week Total 8.2 20.1 8.8 24.2 12.2 7 7.9 14.1 0 8.7 20.1 8.6 23.5 7.2 6 19.4 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Foster 7.4 4.3 8.9 17.1 11.8 7 7.9 14.1 B 5.7 6.3 0 0 2.6 4.7 10.7 15.1
Maroney 8.6 12.5 7.9 26 3.8 B 3 6.7 6.2 3.7 17.6 13.8 1.4 0 0 11.8 12.9
Week Total 16 16.8 16.8 43.1 15.6 7 10.9 20.8 6.2 9.4 23.9 13.8 1.4 2.6 4.7 22.5 28
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
If we take out the two bye weeks (week 6 and 9), we can see the duo of Foster/Maroney would have outscored the duo of Foster/Williams 11 out of 15 weeks. If we further isolate the numbers to omit when one of the two running backs scored zero points (which means excluding week 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 15) the Foster/Maroney duo outscored the Foster/Williams duo 9 of 11 times. In those 9 wins the Foster/Maroney duo beat the Foster/Williams duo by an average of 6.5 fantasy points. One could argue that this is just a case of Maroney being the better player in 2006, and is not a reflection that handcuffing your starter is a bad value. With that being said lets look at a few more examples in 2006, to see if my theory holds true.
Warrick Dunn had an ADP of 26 (All ADP information is based on Footballguys last ADP ranking of 9/4) last year, in order to get his handcuff Jerious Norwood you would have had to invest a 10th round pick (127 ADP). To evaluate the value of this handcuff in relation to other options around that same draft position as Norwood, I looked at the next 3 running back after pick 127. As Greg Jones was lost for the season with an injury we will use only Brandon Jacobs, and Vernard Morency for this comparison.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Norwood 6.6 5.7 0 16.6 B 1.1 6.9 7 3.9 0 0.2 6.1 16.7 3.6 0 2 9.1
Week Total 20.8 19.1 4.6 23.1 0 21.7 19.8 14.3 17 10.8 5.9 17.3 25.4 10.8 7.5 5.8 22.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Jacobs 11.4 3.5 1.8 B 4.1 11.3 10 10.1 4 12.9 2.9 18.8 8.1 1.6 8.2 0 0
Week Total 25.6 16.9 6.4 6.5 4.1 31.9 22.9 17.4 17.1 23.7 8.6 30 16.8 8.8 15.7 3.8 13.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Morency 1.9 0 0.3 11.8 2.4 B 1.2 10.1 0 0 1.4 3.9 5.7 7 17.4 0.4 3.7
Week Total 16.1 13.4 4.9 18.3 2.4 20.6 14.1 17.4 13.1 10.8 7.1 15.1 14.4 14.2 24.9 4.2 17.2
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
I think most people would have predicted that the Jacobs/Dunn duo would have been superior on a per game basis then the Norwood/Dunn duo, based on Jacobs 9 rushing touchdowns. Jacobs/Dunn were better then the handcuffed duo of Norwood/Dunn 10 out of 15 weeks (minus bye weeks), this includes the two games Jacobs missed at the end of the year. If we eliminate the zero point games on both side, Jacobs was better then Norwood in 6 of 9 games, and by an average margin of 6.11 points in those weeks.
What I think is surprising is that fantasy fringe player Vernard Morency who ranked as RB50 was just as productive on a per week basis then the productive handcuffed duo. To the naked eye you would think Norwood who was a productive back for most of the year, would have blown Morency out, but he was only better on a per week basis by one game over Morency (minus bye weeks, and the two games Morency missed in week 9 and 10).
One of the most popular handcuffs, and the one perceived to be a need more then any other is the stud handcuff. Fantasy owners have been brained washed into thinking that if you draft a Tomlinson or Larry Johnson, that you have to grab their handcuff. This leads to in many cases owners reaching for the handcuff a round or two earlier then their ADP to insure they have them on their team. Let’s take a look at last year stats and see how these handcuff fared, in comparison to other running backs around their ADP.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Bennett 0 1.9 B 0 0 0 0 3.8 1.4 0 5.3 7.6 4.7 1.9 0 0 1.1
Week Total 14.8 18.6 0 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 45.9 24.6 14.9 32.7 29.9 18.3 14.3 9.3 19.5 35.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Pittman 0.6 1.7 2.8 B 5.8 3.1 3.7 4 3 0 4.8 2.1 0.6 7.7 3.5 16.7 10.9
Week Total 15.4 18.4 2.8 26.2 26 12.3 31.8 46.1 26.2 14.9 32.2 24.4 14.2 20.1 12.8 36.2 44.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Jones-Drew 0.8 1 19.5 11.6 17.9 B 12.8 9.7 8.5 12.7 12.1 18.5 10.6 30.1 20.5 29.2 12.2
Week Total 15.6 17.7 19.5 37.8 38.1 9.2 40.9 51.8 31.7 27.6 39.5 40.8 24.2 42.5 29.8 48.7 46.2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Turner 9.7 15.5 B 4.6 5.6 0 1.8 8.8 2.1 0.1 1.2 0 0 0 5.8 2.9 8.8
Week Total 30.6 39.7 0 15.1 12.6 37.5 25.6 50.8 39.3 39.9 43.1 28.4 31.2 29.2 38.2 16.2 16.8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Henry 14.4 0 7 0 13.3 24.1 B 2.9 6.7 16.7 21.1 5.1 10.2 21.5 3.9 13.5 10.5
Week Total 35.3 24.2 7 10.5 20.3 61.6 23.8 44.9 43.9 56.5 63 33.5 41.4 50.7 36.3 26.8 18.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Betts 5.3 9.7 21.1 4.1 1.7 1.6 9.3 B 3.8 9.1 6.6 10.8 23.3 18.5 16.2 28.4 20.4
Week Total 26.2 33.9 21.1 14.6 8.7 39.1 33.1 42 41 48.9 48.5 39.2 54.5 47.7 48.6 41.7 28.4
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
Analysis of the above numbers shows that my handcuff theory continues to hold true, and we continue to expose the weakness in value when we handcuff our running backs.
Michael Bennett was a popular handcuff in 2006, as many people were all over the KC handcuff after the success of Larry Johnson in that same role in 2005. The prospect of LJ going down, and Bennett getting the bulk of carries in that offence led to many using a 15th rounder on him (ADP 190), clearly he did not live up to that billing. Selected right behind Bennett based on ADP numbers was Michael Pittman a safe backup running back that always seems to put up good numbers as a spot starter because of his receiving skills. Pittman paired with Larry Johnson outscored the handcuff option of Johnson/Bennett 10 out of 14 weeks (excluding byes and ties).
The thing that will really make L.J. owners from last year kick themselves is knowing that if they didn’t handcuff Bennett, they could have instead rolled the dice on a small bowling ball of a running back by the name of Maurice Jones-Drew. Jones-Drew with an ADP of 197 went off the board on average only 7 picks after Michael Bennett, but as we can see from the above numbers pairing him with Larry Johnson destroyed the handcuff numbers of Johnson/Bennett. The Jones-Drew duo would have beat the Bennett one in all but one week. After week 3 the Jones-Drew duo with L.J. outscored the handcuff pairing by a whopping 13.89 points. For all you L.J. owners last year who handcuffed him with Bennett, just think for a moment how potent your team would have been if you simply decided not to handcuff L.J. and rolled the dice on Jones-Drew. That one decision probably would have paved your way to a fantasy championship, especially seeing that Jones-Drew put up 16.1, and 27.6 points in the fantasy football playoffs. It’s small decisions like these that determine fantasy champions.
Most people would assume Michael Turner had a lot of value on his own despite never starting a single game last year. But as the stats show the perceived best handcuff in 2006, and the top one entering the 2007 season, was not as valuable as one might think. With an ADP of 157 Turner would have cost you an early 13th round pick. The next pick behind Turner, at 158 was Travis Henry. All Henry did was win the Tennessee starting job on way to a RB ranking of 22. The Henry/Tomlinson duo outscored the handcuffed option of Turner/Tomlinson in 11 of 15 weeks by a margin of 12.15 points/game in those weeks
Again the real sting for these L.T. owners who handcuffed him with Turner, is when we take a look a few picks down and see that only 13 picks later at the ADP of 170 Ladell Betts was selected. Turner/Tomlinson would outscore Betts/Tomlinson in the first 4 non bye weeks. But, after that Betts would go on to outscore the handcuff duo in every week after week 6, and he did it by an average week margin of 11.39 points. In the final 5 weeks that average win margin increased to 16.69 points. Most L.T. owners won their league, but, for those who lost it in week 16 when L.T. put up only 13.3 points in fantasy “super bowl” week, think about how nice Ladell Betts week 16 total of 28.4 points would have been. Betts’s presence in week 16 would have had you drinking champagne, instead of the sparkling wine you had watching Micheal Turner sit on your bench.
Another stat worth noting is that both Tomlinson and Johnson started all 16 games, reinforcing my above point that when you handcuff you are investing in a player that you may never use. Call me superstitious, but I think that making a handcuff pick is just bad karma for your fantasy squad. Because when it comes down to it you are predicting your starter will get hurt, or not play all 16 games. If your stud RB stays healthy he requires so many touches that there are barely any left to be had by the handcuff to put up good fantasy production on a weekly basis. You’re more likely to have success on rolling the dice on a backup from a team other then your starter. Players you should target from other teams are backs in a RBBC scenario that may break away to become a featured back, a backup where the starters job is on thin ice, or a backup behind an injury prone starter.
Baring an injury to these studs, their handcuff is basically useless. But, what if your stud does get hurt, then how much relative value does your handcuff have? Shaun Alexander was a consensus top 3 pick last year, and when he went down with his broken foot in week 3, the textbook reason why people handcuff their starter came into play. Their investment in Alexander was protected, because they had his immediate backup who would be getting all his carries. With an ADP of 212 Maurice Morris had to represent value, right? Since Morris was the last running back listed on the 9/4 ADP list published by footballguys, for comparison I took a look at one player that was selected after Morris in the above draft with the Maroney/Williams/Foster scenario, and not listed on the ADP list of 9/4 (Justin Fargas), and one popular waiver wire pickup (Leon Washington).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Morris 2.9 5.2 1.8 3.7 B 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.3 4.7
Week Total 8.1 21 13.7 3.7 0 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 4.4 20.7 15.9 8.9 14.7 26.5 21.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Fargas 3.5 1 B 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 6.4 4.8 11.8 3.9 5.3 9.7 8.8
Week Total 8.7 16.8 11.9 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 10.3 24.9 27 12.1 18.6 35.9 25.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Washington 0 0 7.7 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 B 3.6 2.9 2.4 12.6 8.3 0.5 13.4 13
Week Total 5.2 15.8 19.6 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 0 3.6 6.8 22.5 27.8 16.5 13.8 39.6 29.6
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
When looking at the above numbers we see that Morris struggled upon Alexander’s return from injury in week 11, as his numbers took a sharp decline once he headed back to the bench. We can see that he is handily beat by both Fargas and Washington from week 11 on. But, the important focus for this example should be between weeks 4 and 10, when Alexander was out. What is revealed is that despite the handcuff being placed in the staring spot of a top 3 stud running back, he was still on some weeks beat by a guy selected in the 20th round, and a waiver wire pickup. Both Fargas and Washington managed to beat out Morris 3 out of the 5 weeks, that Alexander was hurt (excluding the bye weeks). The numbers show that in the weeks that Alexander was hurt you could have survived starting Justin Fargas, or Leon Washington over Maurice Morris, and would have actually got better production from them, then the handcuffed insurance.
I think the Morris case brings up a very important point. The myth around handcuffing is that the only way we can protect our investment on using a high pick on a running back is to select his handcuff, but this is not the case. The Maurice Morris case shows us using a handcuff is not the only way we can protect ourselves if an injury occurs to our starter. We can replace the injured player with a running back from another team, and in the process get as good, or better production from that starting spot.
In conclusion, as we see from the above scenarios from last year it does seem that my theory holds true, and selecting a handcuff running back does handcuff the potential for success of our fantasy teams. Selecting a backup running back from another team will net you a greater chance at getting that breakout value that takes you from a fringe team to a championship one. So, while your opponents are handcuffing their own running backs, go in another direction and take a backup from another squad that you think has the potential to break out. That pick can provide you just as much insurance policy as the handcuff would, but offers something the handcuff does not, the potential of an explosive duo with your current starter. So, give it a try in your next draft, you just might land the next Maurice Jones-Drew, Travis Henry or Ladell Betts. Its little savvy moves like this, which go against the grain of what many fantasy players believe, that will help you have a better chance at a fantasy football championship.
In one particular draft last year I found myself sitting with the last pick of the 6th round with two young stud running backs starring me in the face, Laurence Maroney and D’Angelo Williams. With Deshaun Foster already in my stable, I made what I felt was the logical choice and went with Laurence Maroney. At the conclusion of the draft one of my opponents commented that in that position he would have handcuffed Foster, with Williams, to which I could only think, WHY? Why waste a pick in the 6th round for a handcuff, when you can roll the dice on a running back on another team who might have the potential to explode for a huge season. Rolling the dice would give you the chance at landing two explosive backs rather then just one. The conflicting theory on how to approach this pick intrigued me to dig deeper into the raw data to see if my mentality held true, are we handcuffed by handcuffs?
It’s a popular belief amongst many fantasy owners that if you draft a starting running back, then it is a MUST to also pickup his backup to protect your investment, but why? When you handcuff a running back you are essentially protecting yourself in the case of an injury. I equate this mentality to getting insurance in blackjack. In both cases you are placing an investment to protect yourself against a worse case scenario that may never arise. Just as the dealer may not have a blackjack, your stud running back may not get hurt. If the dealer does not have blackjack you just wasted valuable chips, and if that stud running back doesn’t get hurt, you wasted a pick on a player who occupied a roster spot, but probably never was inserted into your starting lineup. Basically it is an illusion that appears to offer you value, but in reality all you are doing is throwing away your money, or in this case your draft pick. By investing in a handcuff you lose an opportunity to select someone in that round who may turn out to be an explosive player for you. In any fantasy football draft you attempt to get the most value in each round of your draft, I believe that by handcuffing we are not doing this.
With a starter and a handcuff you have two players and one starting position. You would very rarely start both your starter, and your handcuff in a given week, but you could very well start your starter, and the other option selected in place of the handcuff. To further clarify the value we are missing out on when we handcuff I will analyze various handcuffed duos from last year, in comparison to alternate options around their ADP. Logically we will start with the Maroney/Williams and Foster duo from above.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Foster 7.4 4.3 8.9 17.1 11.8 7 7.9 14.1 B 5.7 6.3 0 0 2.6 4.7 10.7 15.1
Williams 0.8 15.8 -0.1 7.1 0.4 0 0 0 B 3 13.8 8.6 23.5 4.6 1.3 8.7 5.9
Week Total 8.2 20.1 8.8 24.2 12.2 7 7.9 14.1 0 8.7 20.1 8.6 23.5 7.2 6 19.4 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Foster 7.4 4.3 8.9 17.1 11.8 7 7.9 14.1 B 5.7 6.3 0 0 2.6 4.7 10.7 15.1
Maroney 8.6 12.5 7.9 26 3.8 B 3 6.7 6.2 3.7 17.6 13.8 1.4 0 0 11.8 12.9
Week Total 16 16.8 16.8 43.1 15.6 7 10.9 20.8 6.2 9.4 23.9 13.8 1.4 2.6 4.7 22.5 28
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
If we take out the two bye weeks (week 6 and 9), we can see the duo of Foster/Maroney would have outscored the duo of Foster/Williams 11 out of 15 weeks. If we further isolate the numbers to omit when one of the two running backs scored zero points (which means excluding week 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 15) the Foster/Maroney duo outscored the Foster/Williams duo 9 of 11 times. In those 9 wins the Foster/Maroney duo beat the Foster/Williams duo by an average of 6.5 fantasy points. One could argue that this is just a case of Maroney being the better player in 2006, and is not a reflection that handcuffing your starter is a bad value. With that being said lets look at a few more examples in 2006, to see if my theory holds true.
Warrick Dunn had an ADP of 26 (All ADP information is based on Footballguys last ADP ranking of 9/4) last year, in order to get his handcuff Jerious Norwood you would have had to invest a 10th round pick (127 ADP). To evaluate the value of this handcuff in relation to other options around that same draft position as Norwood, I looked at the next 3 running back after pick 127. As Greg Jones was lost for the season with an injury we will use only Brandon Jacobs, and Vernard Morency for this comparison.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Norwood 6.6 5.7 0 16.6 B 1.1 6.9 7 3.9 0 0.2 6.1 16.7 3.6 0 2 9.1
Week Total 20.8 19.1 4.6 23.1 0 21.7 19.8 14.3 17 10.8 5.9 17.3 25.4 10.8 7.5 5.8 22.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Jacobs 11.4 3.5 1.8 B 4.1 11.3 10 10.1 4 12.9 2.9 18.8 8.1 1.6 8.2 0 0
Week Total 25.6 16.9 6.4 6.5 4.1 31.9 22.9 17.4 17.1 23.7 8.6 30 16.8 8.8 15.7 3.8 13.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Dunn 14.2 13.4 4.6 6.5 B 20.6 12.9 7.3 13.1 10.8 5.7 11.2 8.7 7.2 7.5 3.8 13.5
Morency 1.9 0 0.3 11.8 2.4 B 1.2 10.1 0 0 1.4 3.9 5.7 7 17.4 0.4 3.7
Week Total 16.1 13.4 4.9 18.3 2.4 20.6 14.1 17.4 13.1 10.8 7.1 15.1 14.4 14.2 24.9 4.2 17.2
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
I think most people would have predicted that the Jacobs/Dunn duo would have been superior on a per game basis then the Norwood/Dunn duo, based on Jacobs 9 rushing touchdowns. Jacobs/Dunn were better then the handcuffed duo of Norwood/Dunn 10 out of 15 weeks (minus bye weeks), this includes the two games Jacobs missed at the end of the year. If we eliminate the zero point games on both side, Jacobs was better then Norwood in 6 of 9 games, and by an average margin of 6.11 points in those weeks.
What I think is surprising is that fantasy fringe player Vernard Morency who ranked as RB50 was just as productive on a per week basis then the productive handcuffed duo. To the naked eye you would think Norwood who was a productive back for most of the year, would have blown Morency out, but he was only better on a per week basis by one game over Morency (minus bye weeks, and the two games Morency missed in week 9 and 10).
One of the most popular handcuffs, and the one perceived to be a need more then any other is the stud handcuff. Fantasy owners have been brained washed into thinking that if you draft a Tomlinson or Larry Johnson, that you have to grab their handcuff. This leads to in many cases owners reaching for the handcuff a round or two earlier then their ADP to insure they have them on their team. Let’s take a look at last year stats and see how these handcuff fared, in comparison to other running backs around their ADP.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Bennett 0 1.9 B 0 0 0 0 3.8 1.4 0 5.3 7.6 4.7 1.9 0 0 1.1
Week Total 14.8 18.6 0 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 45.9 24.6 14.9 32.7 29.9 18.3 14.3 9.3 19.5 35.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Pittman 0.6 1.7 2.8 B 5.8 3.1 3.7 4 3 0 4.8 2.1 0.6 7.7 3.5 16.7 10.9
Week Total 15.4 18.4 2.8 26.2 26 12.3 31.8 46.1 26.2 14.9 32.2 24.4 14.2 20.1 12.8 36.2 44.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Johnson 14.8 16.7 B 26.2 20.2 9.2 28.1 42.1 23.2 14.9 27.4 22.3 13.6 12.4 9.3 19.5 34
Jones-Drew 0.8 1 19.5 11.6 17.9 B 12.8 9.7 8.5 12.7 12.1 18.5 10.6 30.1 20.5 29.2 12.2
Week Total 15.6 17.7 19.5 37.8 38.1 9.2 40.9 51.8 31.7 27.6 39.5 40.8 24.2 42.5 29.8 48.7 46.2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Turner 9.7 15.5 B 4.6 5.6 0 1.8 8.8 2.1 0.1 1.2 0 0 0 5.8 2.9 8.8
Week Total 30.6 39.7 0 15.1 12.6 37.5 25.6 50.8 39.3 39.9 43.1 28.4 31.2 29.2 38.2 16.2 16.8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Henry 14.4 0 7 0 13.3 24.1 B 2.9 6.7 16.7 21.1 5.1 10.2 21.5 3.9 13.5 10.5
Week Total 35.3 24.2 7 10.5 20.3 61.6 23.8 44.9 43.9 56.5 63 33.5 41.4 50.7 36.3 26.8 18.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Tomlinson 20.9 24.2 B 10.5 7 37.5 23.8 42 37.2 39.8 41.9 28.4 31.2 29.2 32.4 13.3 8
Betts 5.3 9.7 21.1 4.1 1.7 1.6 9.3 B 3.8 9.1 6.6 10.8 23.3 18.5 16.2 28.4 20.4
Week Total 26.2 33.9 21.1 14.6 8.7 39.1 33.1 42 41 48.9 48.5 39.2 54.5 47.7 48.6 41.7 28.4
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
Analysis of the above numbers shows that my handcuff theory continues to hold true, and we continue to expose the weakness in value when we handcuff our running backs.
Michael Bennett was a popular handcuff in 2006, as many people were all over the KC handcuff after the success of Larry Johnson in that same role in 2005. The prospect of LJ going down, and Bennett getting the bulk of carries in that offence led to many using a 15th rounder on him (ADP 190), clearly he did not live up to that billing. Selected right behind Bennett based on ADP numbers was Michael Pittman a safe backup running back that always seems to put up good numbers as a spot starter because of his receiving skills. Pittman paired with Larry Johnson outscored the handcuff option of Johnson/Bennett 10 out of 14 weeks (excluding byes and ties).
The thing that will really make L.J. owners from last year kick themselves is knowing that if they didn’t handcuff Bennett, they could have instead rolled the dice on a small bowling ball of a running back by the name of Maurice Jones-Drew. Jones-Drew with an ADP of 197 went off the board on average only 7 picks after Michael Bennett, but as we can see from the above numbers pairing him with Larry Johnson destroyed the handcuff numbers of Johnson/Bennett. The Jones-Drew duo would have beat the Bennett one in all but one week. After week 3 the Jones-Drew duo with L.J. outscored the handcuff pairing by a whopping 13.89 points. For all you L.J. owners last year who handcuffed him with Bennett, just think for a moment how potent your team would have been if you simply decided not to handcuff L.J. and rolled the dice on Jones-Drew. That one decision probably would have paved your way to a fantasy championship, especially seeing that Jones-Drew put up 16.1, and 27.6 points in the fantasy football playoffs. It’s small decisions like these that determine fantasy champions.
Most people would assume Michael Turner had a lot of value on his own despite never starting a single game last year. But as the stats show the perceived best handcuff in 2006, and the top one entering the 2007 season, was not as valuable as one might think. With an ADP of 157 Turner would have cost you an early 13th round pick. The next pick behind Turner, at 158 was Travis Henry. All Henry did was win the Tennessee starting job on way to a RB ranking of 22. The Henry/Tomlinson duo outscored the handcuffed option of Turner/Tomlinson in 11 of 15 weeks by a margin of 12.15 points/game in those weeks
Again the real sting for these L.T. owners who handcuffed him with Turner, is when we take a look a few picks down and see that only 13 picks later at the ADP of 170 Ladell Betts was selected. Turner/Tomlinson would outscore Betts/Tomlinson in the first 4 non bye weeks. But, after that Betts would go on to outscore the handcuff duo in every week after week 6, and he did it by an average week margin of 11.39 points. In the final 5 weeks that average win margin increased to 16.69 points. Most L.T. owners won their league, but, for those who lost it in week 16 when L.T. put up only 13.3 points in fantasy “super bowl” week, think about how nice Ladell Betts week 16 total of 28.4 points would have been. Betts’s presence in week 16 would have had you drinking champagne, instead of the sparkling wine you had watching Micheal Turner sit on your bench.
Another stat worth noting is that both Tomlinson and Johnson started all 16 games, reinforcing my above point that when you handcuff you are investing in a player that you may never use. Call me superstitious, but I think that making a handcuff pick is just bad karma for your fantasy squad. Because when it comes down to it you are predicting your starter will get hurt, or not play all 16 games. If your stud RB stays healthy he requires so many touches that there are barely any left to be had by the handcuff to put up good fantasy production on a weekly basis. You’re more likely to have success on rolling the dice on a backup from a team other then your starter. Players you should target from other teams are backs in a RBBC scenario that may break away to become a featured back, a backup where the starters job is on thin ice, or a backup behind an injury prone starter.
Baring an injury to these studs, their handcuff is basically useless. But, what if your stud does get hurt, then how much relative value does your handcuff have? Shaun Alexander was a consensus top 3 pick last year, and when he went down with his broken foot in week 3, the textbook reason why people handcuff their starter came into play. Their investment in Alexander was protected, because they had his immediate backup who would be getting all his carries. With an ADP of 212 Maurice Morris had to represent value, right? Since Morris was the last running back listed on the 9/4 ADP list published by footballguys, for comparison I took a look at one player that was selected after Morris in the above draft with the Maroney/Williams/Foster scenario, and not listed on the ADP list of 9/4 (Justin Fargas), and one popular waiver wire pickup (Leon Washington).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Morris 2.9 5.2 1.8 3.7 B 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 1.4 0.3 4.7
Week Total 8.1 21 13.7 3.7 0 8 5.8 2.5 13.8 12.4 4.4 20.7 15.9 8.9 14.7 26.5 21.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Fargas 3.5 1 B 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 6.4 4.8 11.8 3.9 5.3 9.7 8.8
Week Total 8.7 16.8 11.9 5.4 6.8 1.1 6.6 5.5 -0.2 1.5 10.3 24.9 27 12.1 18.6 35.9 25.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Alexander 5.2 15.8 11.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 20.1 15.2 8.2 13.3 26.2 16.6
Washington 0 0 7.7 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 B 3.6 2.9 2.4 12.6 8.3 0.5 13.4 13
Week Total 5.2 15.8 19.6 4.1 10.9 5.8 25.7 5.1 0 3.6 6.8 22.5 27.8 16.5 13.8 39.6 29.6
Better Week By Handcuff Duo Better Week By Alternate Option Duo
When looking at the above numbers we see that Morris struggled upon Alexander’s return from injury in week 11, as his numbers took a sharp decline once he headed back to the bench. We can see that he is handily beat by both Fargas and Washington from week 11 on. But, the important focus for this example should be between weeks 4 and 10, when Alexander was out. What is revealed is that despite the handcuff being placed in the staring spot of a top 3 stud running back, he was still on some weeks beat by a guy selected in the 20th round, and a waiver wire pickup. Both Fargas and Washington managed to beat out Morris 3 out of the 5 weeks, that Alexander was hurt (excluding the bye weeks). The numbers show that in the weeks that Alexander was hurt you could have survived starting Justin Fargas, or Leon Washington over Maurice Morris, and would have actually got better production from them, then the handcuffed insurance.
I think the Morris case brings up a very important point. The myth around handcuffing is that the only way we can protect our investment on using a high pick on a running back is to select his handcuff, but this is not the case. The Maurice Morris case shows us using a handcuff is not the only way we can protect ourselves if an injury occurs to our starter. We can replace the injured player with a running back from another team, and in the process get as good, or better production from that starting spot.
In conclusion, as we see from the above scenarios from last year it does seem that my theory holds true, and selecting a handcuff running back does handcuff the potential for success of our fantasy teams. Selecting a backup running back from another team will net you a greater chance at getting that breakout value that takes you from a fringe team to a championship one. So, while your opponents are handcuffing their own running backs, go in another direction and take a backup from another squad that you think has the potential to break out. That pick can provide you just as much insurance policy as the handcuff would, but offers something the handcuff does not, the potential of an explosive duo with your current starter. So, give it a try in your next draft, you just might land the next Maurice Jones-Drew, Travis Henry or Ladell Betts. Its little savvy moves like this, which go against the grain of what many fantasy players believe, that will help you have a better chance at a fantasy football championship.
Mohawk
Footballguy
OH MY GOODNESS! Even reading that post was too much like homework. I love FF and all that but you guys make it seem like rocket science. Can you somehow somehow summarize that for me? Post an absrtract or something?Oh- My FF myth is that you should not have players from the same NFL team on your fantasy roster.I would like to hear a bit (not a statistical treatise) of why that is or is not true beyond the idea that if a QB has a bad day the WR will have to as well.
Oh- My FF myth is that you should not have players from the same NFL team on your fantasy roster.
I would like to hear a bit (not a statistical treatise) of why that is or is not true beyond the idea that if a QB has a bad day the WR will have to as well.
Actually I read somewhere, probably on Football Outsiders or Doug Drinen's blog, that in fact the opposite is true. In head to head competition it is excellent to have two player combos QB-RB, RB-WR. On days when Brady has a mediocre day, its likely because Maroney had a great day and the Pats were running instead of passing. When Maroney is down, Brady is up. Having that type of combo on a good offensive team gives much smoother consistent results then equal players from other teams. Another article showed that in leagues that pay off for weekly wins, having the QB-WR combination from a good passing team increases your chances of winning weekly pools
I would like to hear a bit (not a statistical treatise) of why that is or is not true beyond the idea that if a QB has a bad day the WR will have to as well.
Actually I read somewhere, probably on Football Outsiders or Doug Drinen's blog, that in fact the opposite is true. In head to head competition it is excellent to have two player combos QB-RB, RB-WR. On days when Brady has a mediocre day, its likely because Maroney had a great day and the Pats were running instead of passing. When Maroney is down, Brady is up. Having that type of combo on a good offensive team gives much smoother consistent results then equal players from other teams. Another article showed that in leagues that pay off for weekly wins, having the QB-WR combination from a good passing team increases your chances of winning weekly pools
