Having 2 WR on the same team (Hill/Waddle) (1 Viewer)

[C-Bound]

Tua Tagovailoa is still the QB and likely to miss a couple games and that's being optimistic he doesn't sustain another concussion

That's a lot of risk and I like Tyreek Hill in the 1st Rd vs others going around him

Possibly. But in a large best ball tournament you need to risk and need an edge. Also Mike White is a bit of a gunslinger himself.

 

[C-Bound]

They're independent stats/players.

That's not true. If one is catching a pass or scoring a TD that means, by definition, the other is not.

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays. QB/WR stack is ceiling. Most other combos (QB/RB, RB/RB, WR/WR) are floor.

I think statistically this is overblown. If you take D. Smith in the 2nd instead of Waddle there's no assurance that AJ Brown isn't scoring all the TDs that week.

 

[humpback]

so discussing their biggest weeks of the season

You discussed 1 week. But not a hill I need to die on.

Random nature of football, there will be some dual spike weeks. There will likely be some dual dud weeks. And then everything in between.

Honestly not sure if the likelihood of Higgins/AJB or Waddle/Hill having spike weeks is, or is one is more likely than the other.

It seems like it would be harder for a tandem on 1 team to simultaneously have boom weeks with frequency because (as others have said) there’s only 1 football. The QB is only going to throw so many times. WR’s get a % of those targets & the 1-2 receivers in particular get a subset % of those targets.

Then there’s the defense, particularly pass rush & secondary. Is the QB getting pressured / sacked all day? Is the coverage tight? Is it a defensive battle?

Those are all pretty common things, any of which could stymie you with the tandem. If you only have 1 receiver from each team that would seem to negate that risk.

Again, I don’t have statistical proof of this, nor time to find it, but it seems logical that the tandem could produce a negative effect more often than a positive.

Of course, all that really matters here is that your WR1 & your WR2 are the best players you can draft. Hopefully the stats will take care of themselves.

If I get to a point where I have that decision, I’m still not what I’ll do.

I mean, I very clearly discussed two weeks in both of my posts that you quoted, just look up. Both of their best and 2nd best weeks came in the same 2 games.

Yep, plenty of factors that go into FF performance, but the WR playing next to you also doing well certainly doesn't seem to be a hinderance for Hill and Waddle. I know it may seem like it would be harder for both to have big weeks, but their performance should put those fears to rest.

Think about it- Hill goes off in a game, why does that mean Waddle shouldn't have as much of a chance to go off as say Higgins that week? Can't Chase also go off the same week? Don't the Bengals have the same questions around only one football to go around, how many times the QB is going to throw, % of targets, pass rush, defensive battle, etc?

If it makes people "feel" better knock yourself out, I just don't think there's any statistical advantage to avoiding or targeting WR pairings. Points are points.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

If it makes people "feel" better knock yourself out, I just don't think there's any statistical advantage to avoiding or targeting WR pairings. Points are points.

1st, my bad. You did mention 2 weeks. It’s still an extremely small sample size.

That said, I didn’t argue against the quoted section at all. I even said as much - all that matters is that the players you drafted score points.

But…and it’s relevant…

Having the teammate tandem allows for additional scenarios in which both of your players are shut down. Maybe it’s a torrential downpour like that SF/CHI game. You obviously don’t want both of your WR in that game, right? And that’s just 1 scenario.

QBs & OL get hurt, your tandem could be facing a top defense, etc, etc, etc

Diversification narrows the odds of both your players getting hosed. So given a coin flip draft choice, I’m diversifying.

 

[humpback]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

Drake London scored 2 total touchdowns versus the Panthers on January 5.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

These are irrelevant to the proof you asked for. You asked for proof that WR's on different teams are more likely to have boom weeks together than two WR's on the same team. I gave you that. Do with it what you want.

Uh, it's entirely relevant. Of course there are going to be more WRs in the entire NFL that have more 2 TD games than 2 players from the same team since it's a much larger sample size. That's neither proof nor is it how FF works. And again, TDs are only one part of the equation.

 

[Gally]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

Drake London scored 2 total touchdowns versus the Panthers on January 5.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

These are irrelevant to the proof you asked for. You asked for proof that WR's on different teams are more likely to have boom weeks together than two WR's on the same team. I gave you that. Do with it what you want.

Uh, it's entirely relevant. Of course there are going to be more WRs in the entire NFL that have more 2 TD games than 2 players from the same team since it's a much larger sample size. That's neither proof nor is it how FF works. And again, TDs are only one part of the equation.

The whole point of the discussion was is their a risk of taking 2 WR off the same team. My caution was you lose a bit of ceiling on a weekly basis but have a higher floor. So the fact WR from different teams are more likely to each have big games (I used 2+TD games as an example of ceiling games) the same week over both WR from the same team doing that the same week shows that hitting their ceiling the same week is less. That was the point.

 

[humpback]

If it makes people "feel" better knock yourself out, I just don't think there's any statistical advantage to avoiding or targeting WR pairings. Points are points.

1st, my bad. You did mention 2 weeks. It’s still an extremely small sample size.

That said, I didn’t argue against the quoted section at all. I even said as much - all that matters is that the players you drafted score points.

But…and it’s relevant…

Having the teammate tandem allows for additional scenarios in which both of your players are shut down. Maybe it’s a torrential downpour like that SF/CHI game. You obviously don’t want both of your WR in that game, right? And that’s just 1 scenario.

QBs & OL get hurt, your tandem could be facing a top defense, etc, etc, etc

Diversification narrows the odds of both your players getting hosed. So given a coin flip draft choice, I’m diversifying.

Well, it's really 4 weeks (the two best from two different WRs), it just so happens that they each had their top 2 weeks in the same 2 games.

Again, I agree, there are tons of variables and I don't fault anyone for diversifying. It does narrow the odds of both your players getting hosed, but it also increases the odds of 1 of your players getting hosed, so that's a factor as well. I don't think there's much of a statistical difference, mostly comes down to personal preference.

The irony is that you're arguing the exact opposite of the other posters- they're saying that you have a higher floor (and lower ceiling) with 2 WRs from the same team. Which makes me even more confident that it really doesn't matter.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

but it also increases the odds of 1 of your players getting hosed, so that's a factor as wel

I’m sorry, how does it increase the odds of 1 getting hosed?

 

[humpback]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

Drake London scored 2 total touchdowns versus the Panthers on January 5.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

These are irrelevant to the proof you asked for. You asked for proof that WR's on different teams are more likely to have boom weeks together than two WR's on the same team. I gave you that. Do with it what you want.

Uh, it's entirely relevant. Of course there are going to be more WRs in the entire NFL that have more 2 TD games than 2 players from the same team since it's a much larger sample size. That's neither proof nor is it how FF works. And again, TDs are only one part of the equation.

The whole point of the discussion was is their a risk of taking 2 WR off the same team. My caution was you lose a bit of ceiling on a weekly basis but have a higher floor. So the fact WR from different teams are more likely to each have big games (I used 2+TD games as an example of ceiling games) the same week over both WR from the same team doing that the same week shows that hitting their ceiling the same week is less. That was the point.

I know exactly what you're saying. I also know that you're looking at it entirely wrong. There are way more WRs from different teams than there are teammates, you can't possibly think that's a legit comparison do you?

Hill had exactly 1 game with 2 TDs last season. Waddle also had 2 TDs that game. Something like 5/100 NFL WRs had 2 TDs that week. What's better, 1/1 or 5/100? Obviously not saying that "proves" anything either, just making a point.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The irony is that you're arguing the exact opposite of the other posters- they're saying that you have a higher floor (and lower ceiling) with 2 WRs from the same team. Which makes me even more confident that it really doesn't matter.

Actually I’m not. I’m arguing that all things being equal (e.g. you drafted a WR1, and a WR2 1-2 and you need points from them both relative to their draft stock) there’s less risk of failure.

I wasn’t saying anything about ceiling or floor.

 

[humpback]

but it also increases the odds of 1 of your players getting hosed, so that's a factor as wel

I’m sorry, how does it increase the odds of 1 getting hosed?

Not really important, but twice the chance for bad weather, bad match up, QB getting hurt, etc.

 

[Truebluey]

For what it's worth, one of my best ship winning teams ever featured both Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders. Course they did have Peyton Manning throwing them the ball.

My only hesitation, as others have expressed, is the Tua injury problem.

 

[humpback]

The irony is that you're arguing the exact opposite of the other posters- they're saying that you have a higher floor (and lower ceiling) with 2 WRs from the same team. Which makes me even more confident that it really doesn't matter.

Actually I’m not. I’m arguing that all things being equal (e.g. you drafted a WR1, and a WR2 1-2 and you need points from them both relative to their draft stock) there’s less risk of failure.

I wasn’t saying anything about ceiling or floor.

You said having teammates allows for "additional scenarios where both of your players are shut down". That's not saying anything about a floor?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

but it also increases the odds of 1 of your players getting hosed, so that's a factor as wel

I’m sorry, how does it increase the odds of 1 getting hosed?

Not really important, but twice the chance for bad weather, bad match up, QB getting hurt, etc.

I think you have this one backwards, friend. If both are in the same game, it's twice the chances of bad weather, etc. It would be a much lower chance of it happening in 2 separate games, or to two separate QBs, no?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The irony is that you're arguing the exact opposite of the other posters- they're saying that you have a higher floor (and lower ceiling) with 2 WRs from the same team. Which makes me even more confident that it really doesn't matter.

Actually I’m not. I’m arguing that all things being equal (e.g. you drafted a WR1, and a WR2 1-2 and you need points from them both relative to their draft stock) there’s less risk of failure.

I wasn’t saying anything about ceiling or floor.

You said having teammates allows for "additional scenarios where both of your players are shut down". That's not saying anything about a floor?

I guess in a round about way you could arrive at that - I was speaking to risk, but sure - your risk for a lower floor is increased by having both in the same game.

I did not address ceiling.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

For what it's worth, one of my best ship winning teams ever featured both Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders. Course they did have Peyton Manning throwing them the ball.

My only hesitation, as others have expressed, is the Tua injury problem.

I was out at a night market one beautiful Thursday in San Rafael.

My opponent had PM, DT & ES. My week was over before a single one of my players took the field.

 

[humpback]

but it also increases the odds of 1 of your players getting hosed, so that's a factor as wel

I’m sorry, how does it increase the odds of 1 getting hosed?

Not really important, but twice the chance for bad weather, bad match up, QB getting hurt, etc.

I think you have this one backwards, friend. If both are in the same game, it's twice the chances of bad weather, etc. It would be a much lower chance of it happening in 2 separate games, or to two separate QBs, no?

No. With only 1 QB, you only need 1 to avoid being injured. With 2, you need both to avoid it. Same with weather, O-line, tough D, etc. The odds of a bad outcome are double but the downside half.

The irony is that you're arguing the exact opposite of the other posters- they're saying that you have a higher floor (and lower ceiling) with 2 WRs from the same team. Which makes me even more confident that it really doesn't matter.

Actually I’m not. I’m arguing that all things being equal (e.g. you drafted a WR1, and a WR2 1-2 and you need points from them both relative to their draft stock) there’s less risk of failure.

I wasn’t saying anything about ceiling or floor.

You said having teammates allows for "additional scenarios where both of your players are shut down". That's not saying anything about a floor?

I guess in a round about way you could arrive at that - I was speaking to risk, but sure - your risk for a lower floor is increased by having both in the same game.

I did not address ceiling.

Okay, round about, sure.

And I didn't say you did address ceiling, I put that in () because they did address it.

 

[Truebluey]

For what it's worth, one of my best ship winning teams ever featured both Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders. Course they did have Peyton Manning throwing them the ball.

My only hesitation, as others have expressed, is the Tua injury problem.

I was out at a night market one beautiful Thursday in San Rafael.

My opponent had PM, DT & ES. My week was over before a single one of my players took the field.

I remember that game. Fondly.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I remember that game. Fondly.

I’ve never had a more brutal beat down. What was it, 6 TD? Doubles on all 6 for my opponent. I needed a mercy rule.

 

[Penguin]

This is my current list of each team's top 2 WR grouping. I am not ranking WR groups within the same tier at this time. Consider them the same, we will tighten up the rankings going forward



Tier 1
---------
T.Hill - J.Waddle
J.Chase - T.Higgins
J.Jefferson - J.Addison
AJ Brown - D.Smith
DK Metcalf - T.Lockett - J.Smith Njgiba


Tier 2
---------
D.Samuel - B.Aiyuk *
C.Ridley - C.Kirk
T.McLaurin - J.Dotson
M.Evans - C.Godwin
C.Olave - M.Thomas - R.Shaheed

Tier 3
---------
D.Adams - J.Myers - H.Renfrow
A.Cooper - E.Moore - D.Peoples Jones
D.Johnson - G.Pickens
S.Diggs - G.Davis
D.Hopkins - T.Burks
J.Jeudy - C. Sutton
K.Allen - M.Williams
Cee Dee Lamb - B.Cooks
A-Ra St.Brown - J.Williams
C.Kupp - V.Jefferson - Puka
G.Wilson - C.Davis - A.Lazard
D.P)arker - JuJu - T.Thorton
ODM - R.Bateman - .Flowers
N.Collins - R.Woods - J.Metchie - T.Dell
Tier 4
---------
DJ Moore - D.Mooney
J.Mingo - A.Theilen - DJ Chark
C.Watson - R.Doubs - J.Reed
M.Pittman - A.Pierce
M.Brown - R.Moore - M.Wilson
K.Toney - MVS - R.James - S.Moore - J.Ross
S.Shepard - D.Slayton - P.Cambell - I.Hodgins - J.Hyatt - W.Robinson
D.London - M.Hollins

 

[Penguin]

A lot of groups will have 3-5 WR's grouped into that 2nd/3rd position, this is due to early camp uncertainty
we will have a stronger hold a week from now after the week 2 preseaon games

 

[Penguin]

After this weekend games I'll update

 

[Penguin]

If you are looking at the Chiefs and Giants WR groups, yes they are rated low as there is no clear cut #1 or even #2, but as a whole they are not bad. Add in T.Kelce and D.Waller and the move is QB, D.Jones, any easy value pick. He's also got Barclay at RB

 

[zed2283]

I remember one year I ended up with L.Fitzgerald and A.Boldin (without really realizing what I had done at first). I added K.Warner late (I think he had just been named the starter over M.Leinart that day) and cruised to a championship.

 

[FairWarning]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

Drake London scored 2 total touchdowns versus the Panthers on January 5.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

These are irrelevant to the proof you asked for. You asked for proof that WR's on different teams are more likely to have boom weeks together than two WR's on the same team. I gave you that. Do with it what you want.

Uh, it's entirely relevant. Of course there are going to be more WRs in the entire NFL that have more 2 TD games than 2 players from the same team since it's a much larger sample size. That's neither proof nor is it how FF works. And again, TDs are only one part of the equation.

The whole point of the discussion was is they’re a risk of taking 2 WR off the same team. My caution was you lose a bit of ceiling on a weekly basis but have a higher floor. So the fact WR from different teams are more likely to each have big games (I used 2+TD games as an example of ceiling games) the same week over both WR from the same team doing that the same week shows that hitting their ceiling the same week is less. That was the point.

It depends on the size of your roster. If you have a deep roster and can afford to stash someone like KJ Osborn in 2022 while owning JJ, sure. If you are using two higher draft picks and starting Hill and Waddle, I’m not sure you are better off, especially in H2H. Game script is a big concern here. In one of the above posts, spreading the risk is a better idea IMO.

 

[Gally]

It depends on the size of your roster. If you have a deep roster and can afford to stash someone like KJ Osborn in 2022 while owning JJ, sure. If you are using two higher draft picks and starting Hill and Waddle, I’m not sure you are better off, especially in H2H. Game script is a big concern here. In one of the above posts, spreading the risk is a better idea IMO.

I believe it lowers your ceiling and raises your floor if you go Hill/Waddle (which was the original premise in the OP). My previous examples was to show proof that it is more likely that two WR's from different teams to hit their ceilings in a particular week than two WR's on the same team. A poster was asking proof of this as it seemed he didn't believe it to be true.

 

[Tanner9919]

don't do it. I had Andre Reed and JAmes Lofton at the same time, AND I had Jim Kelly. When the Bills sucked my team stunk it up.
spread things out , get WRs on good teams

 

[FairWarning]

We had a team load up on NE players the year Brady tore his knee.

 

[FFCollusion]

It's hard to run actual numbers on, because you have to make an arbitrary decision about which 2 WRs are good enough to even measure.

But in theory, it lowers your ceiling, but raises your floor. Tyreek and Waddle won't both have 200 yard, 3 TD days at the same time. But, it's also extremely unlikely that both WRs will have zero catches the same day.

Unfortunately, It simply doesn't seem to hold true, because it's the QB that defines the floor, and in any given week, the QB can feed a TE, WR3, RB or rush for the TD.

Tyreek Hill didn't have many bad games last year, but if you isolate weeks 3, 5, 7, 18, WC where he scored 5, 13, 14, 4, and 14 fantasy points...(all his games under 15) And then we swap to Waddle... In those same games Waddle scored 15, 5, 13, 10, 8.

Now Tyreeks best games. Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13 where he scored 42, 26, 30, 31, 27, 30 points and we swap to Waddle in those same weeks scored: 40, 6, 19, 31, 19, 2.

Basically, their ups and downs don't actually balance out, but lows still come together and highs only come together if you think Tua can repeat 500/6 on any type of regular basis.

Tua can only throw 1 ball at a time, which means statistically every time Tua throws the ball, you can guarantee one of your WR isn't getting the target, catch, or touchdown.

The chance of Tyreek and Waddle both having top 5 weeks at the same time is incredibly low. But if you draft Tyreek and... Davonta, there is nothing stopping them from both having top 5 weeks at the same time.

So if we can theoretically agree the ceiling is real, the question is does the floor exist, and is it higher than any other combo? If Tyreek has 1 catch, what are the odds Waddle also had 1 catch? Pretty low, except... Oddly enough the stats show that both players had bad weeks simultaneously multiple times, meaning that a bad week for the offense or QB tanks the floor for both WRs and doesn't seem to increase your week to week floor.

So in a game that we know we play weekly, where we agree higher variance (we believe currently) can lead to more week winning potential, then why would you want 2 WRs on the same team? Because as we've talked about elsewhere, even if you have Waddle projected with more points than D.Smith, it's HOW and WHEN you score those points that matters. If Waddle only scores well on the weeks your #1 WR has down weeks, does it benefit your team? Whereas D.Smith has zero correlation of good\bad games to your WR1, so no ceiling, and an unknown floor that are unrelated.

It's really no different than RB committees. Maybe D.Mont and Gibbs both have top 12 seasons, but when you visualize how and when they will both score their points, owning/starting them both on a weekly basis, doesn't seem to be enjoyable, because only 1 of them is getting the TD per drive.

If the Lions only score 3 TDs in a week, your maximum TD total is 3. But if you own Gibbs and Bijan where ATL also scores 3 TD, your maximum TD total is now 6 from the same 2 positions on your roster. BUT it also increases the chance (on paper) of 0 TDs from either.

I employ this strategy with QB and Kicker. Because when the QB is scoring TDs, the kicker is only getting 1 points. When my kicker is getting 15 points, it's because the QB never got in the end zone. One offers an assumed floor, the other offers a higher ceiling.

Just remember, we're not talking about dropping players entire tiers or DND, we're only thinking of, well I have Waddle WR10, and Smith WR11, since I have Tyreek, I'll go Smith. No one should be doing mental gymnastics to drop players or adjust rankings, I would only use this is a tie breaker between players within the same tier.


Chase's best Week, Score, and Higgins score that same week:

7: 33 - 14

6: 32 - 11

1: 29 - 5

14: 29 - DNP

18: 23 - 2

WC: 23 - 7

DP: 17 - 6

Now let's go the opposite direction, Higgins best week, Score, and Chase score that same week:

16: 27 - 16

11: 24 - DNP

12: 24 - DNP

4: 25 - 12

CC: 21 - 13

2: 19 - 11

Every time Chase had a good game, Higgins scored less than 15 or Did Not Play.

Every time Higgins had a good game, Chase scored 16 or less, or DNP.

If you want to argue the "floor" I'm actually inclined to believe it. On paper it makes perfect sense to me. For these 2 WR it seems to be somewhat true, maybe because Burrow never COMPLETELY ****s the bed, whereas Tua...

But, for the moment, all I'm trying to provide is proof of concept, that the "ceiling" exists when you draft 2 WRs on the same team. We can argue the impact of that ceiling, if it even matters, we can argue whether the floor is a valuable enough benefit to counter the ceiling cap, whatever we want to do from here.

My only goal was to provide proof of concept, that 2 WR on the same team, does in fact (well, given our tiny sample size) appear to come at the expense of one another on any given week.

Higgins is more valuable when Chase doesn't play. That doesn't seem crazy to say. So it shouldn't be a hot take, to imply that owning Higgins AND Chase limits your potential ceiling on any given week.

How much that matters is up to each individual to decide, but I think it's a fallacy to imply it doesn't matter or has no effect or shouldn't even be considered or that it's some crazy complex concept.

Chase averaged 20.5ppg, Higgins averaged 13.7ppg. There is not a single week, in which both WRs scored equal to or above their own personal averaged. 3 of their best games all season, came when the other one wasn't on the field.

 

[JohnnyU]

It's hard to run actual numbers on, because you have to make an arbitrary decision about which 2 WRs are good enough to even measure.

But in theory, it lowers your ceiling, but raises your floor. Tyreek and Waddle won't both have 200 yard, 3 TD days at the same time. But, it's also extremely unlikely that both WRs will have zero catches the same day.

Unfortunately, It simply doesn't seem to hold true, because it's the QB that defines the floor, and in any given week, the QB can feed a TE, WR3, RB or rush for the TD.

Tyreek Hill didn't have many bad games last year, but if you isolate weeks 3, 5, 7, 18, WC where he scored 5, 13, 14, 4, and 14 fantasy points...(all his games under 15) And then we swap to Waddle... In those same games Waddle scored 15, 5, 13, 10, 8.

Now Tyreeks best games. Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13 where he scored 42, 26, 30, 31, 27, 30 points and we swap to Waddle in those same weeks scored: 40, 6, 19, 31, 19, 2.

Basically, their ups and downs don't actually balance out, but lows still come together and highs only come together if you think Tua can repeat 500/6 on any type of regular basis.

Tua can only throw 1 ball at a time, which means statistically every time Tua throws the ball, you can guarantee one of your WR isn't getting the target, catch, or touchdown.

The chance of Tyreek and Waddle both having top 5 weeks at the same time is incredibly low. But if you draft Tyreek and... Davonta, there is nothing stopping them from both having top 5 weeks at the same time.

So if we can theoretically agree the ceiling is real, the question is does the floor exist, and is it higher than any other combo? If Tyreek has 1 catch, what are the odds Waddle also had 1 catch? Pretty low, except... Oddly enough the stats show that both players had bad weeks simultaneously multiple times, meaning that a bad week for the offense or QB tanks the floor for both WRs and doesn't seem to increase your week to week floor.

So in a game that we know we play weekly, where we agree higher variance (we believe currently) can lead to more week winning potential, then why would you want 2 WRs on the same team? Because as we've talked about elsewhere, even if you have Waddle projected with more points than D.Smith, it's HOW and WHEN you score those points that matters. If Waddle only scores well on the weeks your #1 WR has down weeks, does it benefit your team? Whereas D.Smith has zero correlation of good\bad games to your WR1, so no ceiling, and an unknown floor that are unrelated.

It's really no different than RB committees. Maybe D.Mont and Gibbs both have top 12 seasons, but when you visualize how and when they will both score their points, owning/starting them both on a weekly basis, doesn't seem to be enjoyable, because only 1 of them is getting the TD per drive.

If the Lions only score 3 TDs in a week, your maximum TD total is 3. But if you own Gibbs and Bijan where ATL also scores 3 TD, your maximum TD total is now 6 from the same 2 positions on your roster. BUT it also increases the chance (on paper) of 0 TDs from either.

I employ this strategy with QB and Kicker. Because when the QB is scoring TDs, the kicker is only getting 1 points. When my kicker is getting 15 points, it's because the QB never got in the end zone. One offers an assumed floor, the other offers a higher ceiling.

Just remember, we're not talking about dropping players entire tiers or DND, we're only thinking of, well I have Waddle WR10, and Smith WR11, since I have Tyreek, I'll go Smith. No one should be doing mental gymnastics to drop players or adjust rankings, I would only use this is a tie breaker between players within the same tier.


Chase's best Week, Score, and Higgins score that same week:

7: 33 - 14

6: 32 - 11

1: 29 - 5

14: 29 - DNP

18: 23 - 2

WC: 23 - 7

DP: 17 - 6

Now let's go the opposite direction, Higgins best week, Score, and Chase score that same week:

16: 27 - 16

11: 24 - DNP

12: 24 - DNP

4: 25 - 12

CC: 21 - 13

2: 19 - 11

Every time Chase had a good game, Higgins scored less than 15 or Did Not Play.

Every time Higgins had a good game, Chase scored 16 or less, or DNP.

If you want to argue the "floor" I'm actually inclined to believe it. On paper it makes perfect sense to me. For these 2 WR it seems to be somewhat true, maybe because Burrow never COMPLETELY ****s the bed, whereas Tua...

But, for the moment, all I'm trying to provide is proof of concept, that the "ceiling" exists when you draft 2 WRs on the same team. We can argue the impact of that ceiling, if it even matters, we can argue whether the floor is a valuable enough benefit to counter the ceiling cap, whatever we want to do from here.

My only goal was to provide proof of concept, that 2 WR on the same team, does in fact (well, given our tiny sample size) appear to come at the expense of one another on any given week.

Higgins is more valuable when Chase doesn't play. That doesn't seem crazy to say. So it shouldn't be a hot take, to imply that owning Higgins AND Chase limits your potential ceiling on any given week.

How much that matters is up to each individual to decide, but I think it's a fallacy to imply it doesn't matter or has no effect or shouldn't even be considered or that it's some crazy complex concept.

Chase averaged 20.5ppg, Higgins averaged 13.7ppg. There is not a single week, in which both WRs scored equal to or above their own personal averaged. 3 of their best games all season, came when the other one wasn't on the field.

Do you have that in hardback?