Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I’m likely a buyer as a WR4-5 in redraft. Better 5 than 4. Better 6 even. Heh
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!
How cognitive bias affects your fantasy draft strategy (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BobbyLayne
- Start date
agreed
barackdhouse
Footballguy
I actually largely agree but feel compelled to challenge my presumptions - but perhaps to your point I do try not to spend too much time on this stuff. I probably get more out of just writing about this stuff than actually doing anything with it. I'm nowhere near a deep dive on all these players and situations. I'm more like a speed reader that only sees important words and sentences as I scan pages and turn them at Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting speed. I play a lot of poker, or used to, and the skill of being able to process multiple sources of information quickly and do your own internal risk/reward calculations while the clock is ticking on you to act, is not unlike the way I process FF info throughout the offseason, but on a remarkably slower timescale. So there is time to re-evaluate and look at some of these biases or try to. But also I manage a huge number of leagues and expect to win etc. Plus my science nerd background being taught by some of the best - I can yap about bias all day long most of us find it fascinating.Frankly its unavoidable.I'll respond with schtick but there is actually something to this - It is yet another kind of bias to look very deep at any one player, if it is being done at the expense of the rest of the pool. Unless we log every player's eye color then we run the risk of putting too much stock one way or the other in the guy we're taking that deeper dive with.Okay but he does have greenish looking eyes, it seems. Now what?
In all seriousness this is a thing, not they eye color bit but the question for example - "are we giving too much stock to stuff we see on Hard Knocks?" or if we are homers on a given NFL team or just happen to be plugged in more. that is a *great* thing as far as one's ability to have an informed reasonable take or set of takes on a given player or team or situation, but unless you're going that deep with every team and player and situation, then you're running a major bias risk.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
I think you're actually right on top of one of the biggest parts to understand about bias, that it can be a good thing.
I'm biased towards players that win me fantasy titles. Seriously. I like 2nd and 3rd year WRs I like redraft rookie RBs that are pushed down the board, I like X, Y and Z things that you or I or the next person might not agree about but that based on my own knowledge experience and wisdom will continue to be biased towards. And yes that is ok.
I am biased towards employees that don't lie on their resumes.
The real question is to examine which biases hold merit or not. I could try to explain what bias is a little better but what it isn't is a bad thing per se.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
maybe similar to poker players that choose to wear headphones - tune out all the noise and input and focus on what is right in front of them. you do have to be careful about how you filter this stuff.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
the thing is it might also reenforce or strengthen the stuff that we're right about, which is a great thing
cdclopper
Footballguy
Like you said above and I agree, I try to be biased towards things that help me win in fantasy. Or at least things I think will. In my experience, reacting to training camp "news" actively makes me worse. Maybe I'm just way bad at reading the tea leaves.
I still insist the news this time of year mostly serves as a feedback loop because we are much more likely to read a blurb about a player on our own team rather than a player on somebody elses. Of course I'm talking dynasty here.
pinkstapler
Footballguy
I think one great and extremely widespread example is people overvaluing their own players, especially ones they drafted themselves. We get take lock, reject new information because of wish casting, hold too long because of sunk cost fallacy, and pass up on some solid value trades because we ignore consensus valuations.
Now that I've been playing for quite a number of years and have had the opportunity to take over some dynasty orphan teams; I've found the biases in myself simply by how quickly and "easily" I'm able to turn around these orphan teams as opposed to my own OG drafted teams even when they are in a tank/rebuild status. I honestly believe it's because I take on a roster I have no personal attachment to, and also no historical baggage like "well I paid 'x' for this guy two years ago so now my value should be 'y'". In reality, that information doesn't matter anymore. Even if it does to you personally, it means 0 to your league mates, and will only hinder or outright put a stop to potential trades to better your team.
It's perfectly fine, and can be beneficial, to have your own personal rankings as well as your own flag plant players. But I think we need to put on a different set of glasses which include consensus ranks and standard/average values when viewing those players with regards to trades and team building in order to actually improve our team as a whole. If you're in it for fun, keep your guys who you like rooting for and have fun, maybe luck will give you the occasional championship. But if you're in it to win every year, IMO, you need to stay unattached to individual players and instead put the focus on building a roster as a whole. IOW, stop looking at the names and just see the numbers.
This leaks into the whole process of making excuses for why players over/under perform as well. It's not to say they are never valid; but those things are not transferable information. Statistics and trends are. And the latter are what will result in the best outcome the highest percentage of the time. I think people overestimate their own "scouting" abilities and put way too much time into trying to hit on outliers instead of just playing the numbers. I can't find the article rn, but an analyst wrote a great piece last year about the success he'd been having in "expert" leagues by just drafting ADP and nothing else. If a guy fell below their ADP and became a value, that was who he took, regardless of anything else. And he was crushing the "experts" by doing so.
Now that I've been playing for quite a number of years and have had the opportunity to take over some dynasty orphan teams; I've found the biases in myself simply by how quickly and "easily" I'm able to turn around these orphan teams as opposed to my own OG drafted teams even when they are in a tank/rebuild status. I honestly believe it's because I take on a roster I have no personal attachment to, and also no historical baggage like "well I paid 'x' for this guy two years ago so now my value should be 'y'". In reality, that information doesn't matter anymore. Even if it does to you personally, it means 0 to your league mates, and will only hinder or outright put a stop to potential trades to better your team.
It's perfectly fine, and can be beneficial, to have your own personal rankings as well as your own flag plant players. But I think we need to put on a different set of glasses which include consensus ranks and standard/average values when viewing those players with regards to trades and team building in order to actually improve our team as a whole. If you're in it for fun, keep your guys who you like rooting for and have fun, maybe luck will give you the occasional championship. But if you're in it to win every year, IMO, you need to stay unattached to individual players and instead put the focus on building a roster as a whole. IOW, stop looking at the names and just see the numbers.
This leaks into the whole process of making excuses for why players over/under perform as well. It's not to say they are never valid; but those things are not transferable information. Statistics and trends are. And the latter are what will result in the best outcome the highest percentage of the time. I think people overestimate their own "scouting" abilities and put way too much time into trying to hit on outliers instead of just playing the numbers. I can't find the article rn, but an analyst wrote a great piece last year about the success he'd been having in "expert" leagues by just drafting ADP and nothing else. If a guy fell below their ADP and became a value, that was who he took, regardless of anything else. And he was crushing the "experts" by doing so.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
One of my best high stakes teams from two years ago was one that I was forced to autodraft the first 7 rounds because of some emergency I forget what came up. I didn't program my ranks in the queue or anything it was just the site ADP list.
Good post above, I agree with most of it, and strongly so on the dynasty orphan sunk cost stuff. I also definitely agree that one should be paying close attention to the standard average values and consensus ranks and for multiple reasons etc...however I think there is a pretty big counter or caveat:
I have enough faith, confidence, in myself, or whatever it may be, but certainly based on my own success experience and positive results over a long period of time - that a cornerstone of my drafting strategy, to the extent that I can pull it off - is to outleverage the field, the market, ADP, the consensus standard average values. If you go over to the player pages for Chase Brown, Jameson Williams, Brian Robinson or others that I could write at more length about, you'll see that I am heavy on these guys (I play a lot of dynasty as well but I'm mostly speaking from a year to year general perspective as we're trying to keep this within the sphere of the nature of FF biases) because my experience (dare I call it a skill? I think that is actually the idea here) tells me that these guys are incredibly *under*valued by the market and therefore should be considered plant-my-flag guys or heavier exposure whatever you wanna call it. Or maybe just someone I'm willing to reach a round or two for depending on how a given draft unfolds. But I wouldn't be making that decision if I wasn't very much plugged into the market trends.
Other managers may not be as cocky or willing to take as much risk as me and I think that's fine and is appropriate for people to be playing within their own system of strategies or perspective. Someone above mentioned trying to avoid the offseason news. I said that isn't for me because I think I'm very good at filtering that stuff, but they didn't feel that way about their ability to do so. Well if someone feels that way, I say go with it. Put the headphones on and embrace that strategy.
It probably isn't too hard for any reader of this to say to themselves, ok barack you're looking biased on another level here. Self-skill rating bias. And yes that is true as well and so I try to also question just how much am I BSing myself on any of these players situations assumptions etc.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
It isn't like I hit on every call. Folks around here can tell you some of my legendary horrible calls I wasn't shy to be public about. Those receipts are around.
I think I'll do an article on this at some point but another huge area is how personal opinions of the player affect the ranking.
It's a known bias but still there.
I always Marshawn Lynch was drafted higher than he might normally be simply because everyone loved him. He was a fun player.
Not nearly as good. but Gardner Minshew is another. Once I'm that far down the draft list, I'll take him over a boring player.
On the negative side, you have Deshaun Watson. Or a host of other players who've done something off the field that makes you want to drop them some down the list.
It's an interesting thing I believe.
It's a known bias but still there.
I always Marshawn Lynch was drafted higher than he might normally be simply because everyone loved him. He was a fun player.
Not nearly as good. but Gardner Minshew is another. Once I'm that far down the draft list, I'll take him over a boring player.
On the negative side, you have Deshaun Watson. Or a host of other players who've done something off the field that makes you want to drop them some down the list.
It's an interesting thing I believe.
Last edited:
The value there of course is targeting players who are disliked.
Kurt Cousins is a another example. He's not liked by many as he's boring or a stiff or a Kohl's guy. No flash and tons of people don't like that. They'd rather go for the QB with six pack abs and the cool style. That's an opportunity for many.
Kurt Cousins is a another example. He's not liked by many as he's boring or a stiff or a Kohl's guy. No flash and tons of people don't like that. They'd rather go for the QB with six pack abs and the cool style. That's an opportunity for many.
pinkstapler
Footballguy
I largely agree with, and often employ that caveat as well haha. I think following that process to draft your team is 100% warranted. I only meant to say when trying to make later moves with that roster, we need to be open to the fact that our values aren't always consensus. Sometimes, that can work to a major advantage, and we can aquire players we feel are undervalued (normally not as cheap as we would in draft, because again, once they are owned they always seem to get that "ownership value bump" haha). But also if we are moving a player, or being asked to move a player, we value over consensus a lot of times it makes more sense to adhere closer to consesus if we want to actually get a deal done. Or at the very least, just say they aren't touchable. I try to be upfront and kind of make myself look bad to lighten the mood while getting my point across eg. "Hey, saw you included Jayden Reed in the counter offer. Just wanted to say I'm one of those crazies who thinks he's Stef Diggs lite and could be a WR1 in the next year or two so my valuation on him is WAY over what's reasonable or what I'd expect you to actually pay. Probably best to keep him out of the deal."
While I play in some bigger money leagues; I haven't done much best ball and only play in 8-12 leagues a year. So as much as I advocate for, and try to adhere to, a statistics and trends model; I do sometimes like to just "get my guys" and play some long shots based on gut feeling (I took Jermaine Burton in 100% of rookie drafts this year, sometimes way over ADP worried I'd miss him haha). If I was trying to purely maximize profits and just make money doing this though, I think I'd stop doing that as much. But then I also worry I'd stop having as much fun. I'm still pushing that boundary between fantasy being fun, without turning it into a part time job!
Zow
Footballguy
I prefer Kirk Cousins.
cdclopper
Footballguy
Who doesnt like kirk cousins?
LOL. I love him but tons don't. He's not flashy enough for most. Which is why the chain is so funny.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Jared Goff has provided good value in this area as well- especially for superflex. People think he's boring, bland and overrated. Meanwhile, he's got 3 QB1 seasons under his belt. 4 seasons of 4400+ yards.
Absolutely. He's another great example that fits in the Cousins mold.
