Keeper league strategy: Domination or Consistency? (1 Viewer)

[Keys Myaths]

I'm running through a ton of mock drafts for one of the leagues I'm in, which I happen to keep Larry Johnson and LaDainian Tomlinson.

I've seen a few other people in this kind of fantastic situation as well, but as you run through the draft, you're consistently faced with two options.

1. Do I want to take the player with upside and dominate the league?

2. Or do I just want to take the player who's going to be consistent--and let my keepers take me to the championship?

It's interesting. For example, in the 3rd round of a 10 team league, you could be faced with Antonio Gates vs. Randy Moss, or in the 4th, faced with Donald Driver vs. Roy Williams...and so on.

What would be YOUR strategy? Take the players with the high upside, or go after players with a limited downside?

I think it's interesting, especially for this situation--because it's a realistic question. You're already ahead of the rest of your leaguemates, so how do you proceed?

 

[Couch Potato]

Take it to the ACF, buddy. I hear that Keys Myaths guy likes to answer a lot of questions over there.

OK, but seriously...

You already have a huge leg up on everyone else. As with anything where you are far ahead, the wise move is to proceed with steady solid picks, taking fewer risky picks than if you had to play catch-up. You have no need for the extra risk, and it may end up costing you the advantage you have.

 

[Keys Myaths]

Take it to the ACF, buddy. I hear that Keys Myaths guy likes to answer a lot of questions over there.

Heh, this is actually a general question--I'm using my individual team in order to generate a broader discussion. I know you were being facetious, but I wanted to head that off before it even got to that point.

You already have a huge leg up on everyone else. As with anything where you are far ahead, the wise move is to proceed with steady solid picks, taking fewer risky picks than if you had to play catch-up. You have no need for the extra risk, and it may end up costing you the advantage you have.

I happen to agree with this. I'd like to hear arguments from the side that would take Roy Williams over Donald Driver (for example). I think there is an argument to be made there.

 

[Z-Dog]

I think that you go for low-risk, consistent, primary backups. Save the risky stuff for the bottom of your roster.

 

[Pictus Cat]

Do you want to win, or do you want to try for the best fantasy team ever?

I would take a shot at the latter and adjust during the season if it seemed out of reach.

 

[barndog]

The pessimistic way to look at it--which I don't normally do but anything's possible in FF--is that you're two blown knees away from being an also-ran. You still need to get the best possible team out of your other starters.

I actually don't think I would take a very different approach than I already do--I have my projection-based cheatsheets and I either believe them or don't. I wouldn't move people up or down based on greater perceived risk.