Having your oponents top guys covered (1 Viewer)

[BUTTER]

ie: so you have Rogers and Rivers, your opponent has Driver or V. Jax

it could be any, like Garrard/MSW, or Warner/Fitz/Boldin

Any of you ever set your lineup based on that?

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

A lot of people do that.

I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

 

[firstseason1988]

A lot of people do that. I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

Yeah, always play the lineup you think will net you the most points.

 

[BUTTER]

A lot of people do that. I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

I agree with you unless it is very close then it is ok. Like Sanchez/Edwards or Cotchery would not be ok to play over like a top 10 QB IMO.

 

[FairWarning]

A lot of people do that. I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

 

[thatguy]

If you are a heavy underdog (your players at the positions not in question are significantly worse than your opponents), it's best not to do this, as the players in question are likely to cancel each other out. If you're a heavy favorite, it's a solid strategy. It's been discussed quite a lot on these boards, actually.

 

[paydrt]

This week my opponent and myself are going to have a little fun and match our WRs -

Jennings vs Driver,

Holt vs Sims-Walker

Maclin vs D.Jackson

I have Jennings, Holt, Maclin

 

[sparkky]

I field my best team regardless of what my opponent does.

 

[tomarken]

ie: so you have Rogers and Rivers, your opponent has Driver or V. Jaxit could be any, like Garrard/MSW, or Warner/Fitz/BoldinAny of you ever set your lineup based on that?

I explained in another thread recently how there are situations where this is actually a viable, intelligent strategy, although most people predictably and nonsensically disagreed with me.

 

[LittlePhatty]

I think this strategy is only useful in very special circumstances, and one in particular only happens if your QBs or WRs are playing the late games (Sunday Night or Monday Night). This involves a decision between "play it safe" or "need a big swing".

Take your Rodgers and Rivers example and say your opponent is starting Vincent Jackson.

Both GB and SD are playing late games (doesn't matter if they play each other).

Your decision depends on the score once afternoon games have finished.

A) If you have a lead, the "play it safe" move is to start Rivers. You protect your lead because in the event that Vincent Jackson goes off for 40 points, it will be Rivers throwing those TDs to him so he'll have a good game too.

B) If you are behind and you need a "big points swing" you have to roll the dice with Rodgers and hope V. Jax puts up a goose egg. A big points swing can happen starting Rivers/V. Jax too, if Rivers throws 4 TDs to other receivers and V. Jax doesn't get a catch - but it is less likely.

 

[Knobs]

I do this a lot. It's a solid strategy if used properly. It won't be the sole difference between a win and a loss but it's a small something.

I'm currently in the process of trading one stud wr for another stud wr, just so I can start 'canceling out' my division qb's.

Basically, if the owner I view to be my biggest threat has Kurt Warner, I'll go trade Wayne to get Fitz.

 

[DoubleG]

This week my opponent and myself are going to have a little fun and match our WRs -Jennings vs Driver, Holt vs Sims-Walker Maclin vs D.JacksonI have Jennings, Holt, Maclin

Congrats to your opponent on his week 8 victory.

 

[cstu]

I think this strategy is only useful in very special circumstances, and one in particular only happens if your QBs or WRs are playing the late games (Sunday Night or Monday Night). This involves a decision between "play it safe" or "need a big swing".

Take your Rodgers and Rivers example and say your opponent is starting Vincent Jackson.

Both GB and SD are playing late games (doesn't matter if they play each other).

Your decision depends on the score once afternoon games have finished.

A) If you have a lead, the "play it safe" move is to start Rivers. You protect your lead because in the event that Vincent Jackson goes off for 40 points, it will be Rivers throwing those TDs to him so he'll have a good game too.

B) If you are behind and you need a "big points swing" you have to roll the dice with Rodgers and hope V. Jax puts up a goose egg. A big points swing can happen starting Rivers/V. Jax too, if Rivers throws 4 TDs to other receivers and V. Jax doesn't get a catch - but it is less likely.

I agree, but it also applies if you can tell that your team is a big favorite going in. Also, if you are a big underdog then you don't want to start the QB of your opponent's WR if you have the option of starting a similar QB.

 

[ScottyFargo]

This week my opponent and myself are going to have a little fun and match our WRs -Jennings vs Driver, Holt vs Sims-Walker Maclin vs D.JacksonI have Jennings, Holt, Maclin

Congrats to your opponent on his week 8 victory.

Good luck this week pal! Fun but I wouldn't want to be in your shoes.

 

[SCT]

I started Garrard over Brady the week I played the MSW owner. Cost me the game.

 

[two_dollars]

I started Garrard over Brady the week I played the MSW owner. Cost me the game.

Probably wouldn't have if you went into the game with a big lead and no other players left to go, which is the only situation where I would cover my but with Garrard over Brady.

 

[glumpy]

I do play matchups like that when it seems appropriate, but I look at these situations in reverse of what this thread is addressing--in that I like to play the WR to match the opponent's QB, and not the other way around. With the way yardage adds up sometimes the WR will outscore his own QB. Can't say I'm happy when my opponent has my QB's best WR in a good matchup.

 

[Sarnoff]

Thank you for taking the time to be the poster that started this thread for this week.

Who has dibs for asking this next week?

 

[tomarken]

I started Garrard over Brady the week I played the MSW owner. Cost me the game.

Wasn't that the week Sims-Walker was suspended?

 

[bcr8f]

This comes up every year and in my opinion is dumb.

Just start your best players. If you are playing by fear of what your opponent is doing go ahead and try this but it rarely works.

 

[NeverEnough]

A lot of people do that. I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

Yeah, always play the lineup you think will net you the most points.

x2

 

[tomarken]

A lot of people do that. I think it's a flawed strategy and you should play your own line-up without regard for your opponent's starters.

Yeah, always play the lineup you think will net you the most points.

x2

Let's say, after all the games today are over, you are winning by ten points. Your opponent still has Roddy White left to play on Monday. You have Drew Brees and Matt Ryan, with Brees projected to score 22 points and Ryan projected to score 15. Who do you start and why?

 

[Lash]

can we just sticky a thread titled "Should you start the WR or QB of your opponent's QB or WR to cover a huge game by your opponent's player?"

you can set the earth's orbit by these appearance of these threads, every new moon LOL