High-risk, high reward playoff lineup decisions (1 Viewer)

[Jene Bramel]

I'm a big believer in managing risk during playoff weeks given the luck involved in a one week H2H matchup. I'm much more likely to take a chance on a high risk-high reward matchup in a playoff game than I am during the regular season if I see my lineup as a big underdog to my opponent's lineup. Similarly, I'm much more likely to take the surer, less sexy player if I see my lineup as a heavy favorite or in close matchups.

I've been advocating this philosophy a lot this week in the lineup advice thread. For example, if you're a heavy underdog this week, it's the perfect time to run Mark Anderson (vs TB) out there ahead of say, Robert Mathis (vs CIN) or Charles Grant (vs WAS). Mathis and Grant are facing matchup issues on paper, while Anderson could thrive in garbage time again. A routine Grant game without a sack doesn't help you catch an opponent's stud lineup; a 2.5 sack game from Anderson does. And a donut from Anderson doesn't kill you much if you're likely to be behind anyway.

Similar idea behind starting Ed Reed (vs CLE) over Madieu Williams (vs IND).

Paralysis by over-analysis or smart risk-reward strategy? WWAFBGIDP do?

 

[Marino13]

I'm a big believer in managing risk during playoff weeks given the luck involved in a one week H2H matchup. I'm much more likely to take a chance on a high risk-high reward matchup in a playoff game than I am during the regular season if I see my lineup as a big underdog to my opponent's lineup. Similarly, I'm much more likely to take the surer, less sexy player if I see my lineup as a heavy favorite or in close matchups.I've been advocating this philosophy a lot this week in the lineup advice thread. For example, if you're a heavy underdog this week, it's the perfect time to run Mark Anderson (vs TB) out there ahead of say, Robert Mathis (vs CIN) or Charles Grant (vs WAS). Mathis and Grant are facing matchup issues on paper, while Anderson could thrive in garbage time again. A routine Grant game without a sack doesn't help you catch an opponent's stud lineup; a 2.5 sack game from Anderson does. And a donut from Anderson doesn't kill you much if you're likely to be behind anyway.Similar idea behind starting Ed Reed (vs CLE) over Madieu Williams (vs IND).Paralysis by over-analysis or smart risk-reward strategy? WWAFBGIDP do?

Wow, I was going to say the exact same thing when I saw the subject title... you even used the same analogy I would have used with Ed Reed. I don't think Grant is that big of degradation to Anderson though. Anderson has only had 1 big game in the last 6 games. He can surely put up a big game. I really like Mathias out of NYG. He's gonna be a stud. God, I tried to get Schoebel early this season in all my leagues, but the owners wouldn't budge. He's been amazing of late.

 

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

I think it is easier to take a higher risk on IDP then offense. in the playoffs On my offensive lineup I think the philosophy is go with what got you there and don't try to get cute. On IDP I think there is better chance for any player to blow up, especially in leagues that reward more pts for big plays. I know in my case my Def lineup has more variabliity then offense, especially in the DL. I seem to always have the DL blow up on my bench. With that being said if you feel there is more "blow up " potential in one player v another I think playoffs is the time to take that risk. Just stick to the mantra-never bench your studs