Kicker Strategy (1 Viewer)

[steelwind]

The idea is if your QB throws a TD, your kicker throws in an extra point for your team. If your QB does not throw a TD, then your kicker will score 3 (depending on the distance, some leagues reward 4 or 5 points for longer FGs). If the team offense rushes for a TD, your kicker scores 1 point. Will this work on a good offensive team? For example, is Peyton/Vinatieri a good combo? Everytime they march down the field, you are guaranteed 1, 3, 4, 5 or 6 points by Vinatieri.

 

[Resident A]

I pick-up the Kicker I think has the best chance to score the most points. I wouldn't even consider whether I had other players from the same team.

Kickers are the least predictable position in fantasy football. As long as you have a kicker who isn't on 1 of the bottom-5 teams in the NFL, or playing a monsoon/blizzard, you're fine. Don't overthink it, it's a kicker.

 

[steelwind]

I wonder how Kickers are ranked week in and week out then.

 

[videoguy505]

It's a strategy for reducing variance.

But it's not worth using unless you're in a situation where you want reduced variance. Almost all the time, you're just better off starting whoever you think will do better.

 

[supersportniner]

might not be a bad stradegy to use the kicker of your opponnet's quarterback I sometimes do this with recievers to take away their quarterback's reciever options but only when your iffy about who to play in that situation.

 

[The Jerk]

might not be a bad stradegy to use the kicker of your opponnet's quarterback I sometimes do this with recievers to take away their quarterback's reciever options but only when your iffy about who to play in that situation.

Playing your opponent's kicker is a different, more "high-risk" strategy however. If you're playing against Brady and starting Gostkowski to "counter" him, then it's doubly good for you if NE is forced to settle for FGs all day long, but it's doubly bad for you if Brady converts all their drives into TDs, especially if they are mostly/all passing TDs. I don't think this strategy really counters anything. I do agree that there is some merit with the WR/TE theory of negation you mentioned, as a big day passing in NE should see players like Welker, etc. have good numbers to help counter Brady's big day. However, my personal approach is to use this countering strategy only as far as making a choice among fairly similar players. I'm not going to bench Andre Johnson to play Deion Branch in case Brady blows up.

 

[supersportniner]

might not be a bad stradegy to use the kicker of your opponnet's quarterback I sometimes do this with recievers to take away their quarterback's reciever options but only when your iffy about who to play in that situation.

Playing your opponent's kicker is a different, more "high-risk" strategy however. If you're playing against Brady and starting Gostkowski to "counter" him, then it's doubly good for you if NE is forced to settle for FGs all day long, but it's doubly bad for you if Brady converts all their drives into TDs, especially if they are mostly/all passing TDs. I don't think this strategy really counters anything. I do agree that there is some merit with the WR/TE theory of negation you mentioned, as a big day passing in NE should see players like Welker, etc. have good numbers to help counter Brady's big day. However, my personal approach is to use this countering strategy only as far as making a choice among fairly similar players. I'm not going to bench Andre Johnson to play Deion Branch in case Brady blows up.

I totally agree ^^^ I have never tried the kicker strategy but have found the WR position does work to counter his QB but I would never sit a stud WR.

 

[FavreCo]

No. You want kickers on teams where the QB stalls out in FG range.

 

[NinerFan49]

might not be a bad stradegy to use the kicker of your opponnet's quarterback I sometimes do this with recievers to take away their quarterback's reciever options but only when your iffy about who to play in that situation.

Playing your opponent's kicker is a different, more "high-risk" strategy however. If you're playing against Brady and starting Gostkowski to "counter" him, then it's doubly good for you if NE is forced to settle for FGs all day long, but it's doubly bad for you if Brady converts all their drives into TDs, especially if they are mostly/all passing TDs. I don't think this strategy really counters anything. I do agree that there is some merit with the WR/TE theory of negation you mentioned, as a big day passing in NE should see players like Welker, etc. have good numbers to help counter Brady's big day. However, my personal approach is to use this countering strategy only as far as making a choice among fairly similar players. I'm not going to bench Andre Johnson to play Deion Branch in case Brady blows up.

If your opponent's QB scores a TD, the K will give you a point after.

 

[videoguy505]

might not be a bad stradegy to use the kicker of your opponnet's quarterback I sometimes do this with recievers to take away their quarterback's reciever options but only when your iffy about who to play in that situation.

Playing your opponent's kicker is a different, more "high-risk" strategy however. If you're playing against Brady and starting Gostkowski to "counter" him, then it's doubly good for you if NE is forced to settle for FGs all day long, but it's doubly bad for you if Brady converts all their drives into TDs, especially if they are mostly/all passing TDs. I don't think this strategy really counters anything. I do agree that there is some merit with the WR/TE theory of negation you mentioned, as a big day passing in NE should see players like Welker, etc. have good numbers to help counter Brady's big day. However, my personal approach is to use this countering strategy only as far as making a choice among fairly similar players. I'm not going to bench Andre Johnson to play Deion Branch in case Brady blows up.

Playing the same K as your QB is a low-variance move. The two will more or less cancel each other out over time... if there's a lot of TD's you'll get a high score for the QB and a lower score for the K. If there's fewer TDs but more FGs, the K will make up some of the lack of production from the QB.Playing the same K as your opponents QB is a high variance move. If his QB does well, you'll get a low K score and lose by more. If his QB bombs, not only will your opponent's team have a lower-than-expected score, but the FGs will push your kicker to better than expected. It's a high risk/high reward scenario that won't work even half the time, but when it does, you'll reap the reward.Thinking like this is purely situational. 99% of the time, just start the best team. Only if you understand 1) what variance is, and 2) whether a low- or high- variance strategy is appropriate for your situation, should you let this kind of thinking into your thought process.

 

[steelwind]

I appreciate input. Thanks.