Line-up strategy - thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[Fat Nick]

So I wasn't sure where to post this, but this forum says it's also for strategy talk, so wanted to get people's take.  I'm going to leave names out of this so as to keep it to strategy and not WSIS.

In my playoffs, I'm in the semi-finals and both teams are having a bad week (standard scoring).  I currently have 63 points to my opponents 33.

I currently have left to play:

• RB on team 1
  
• WR on team 2
  
• TE on team 3
  

My opponent has:

• QB on team 1
  
• WR on team 4
  
• K on team 4
  

My only concern for closing the gap on my current lead is his QB.  Both his QB and my RB are on the same team.  The only way things go really south is if that game turns into a passing contest and my RB does very little, and his QB goes off.  My WR on team 2 is average.  I could pick up the #2 WR on team 1 and start him in place of my current WR.  This WR and my current WR are relatively close in rankings (4-5 apart on most consensus rankings)

Has anyone ever considered this strategy?  All things equal, I'd start my current WR...but I don't need to widen the lead I have, only maintain it.  By picking up the #2WR on team 1, the same team as his QB and my RB, I largely ensure that there are limited options to his QB having a great game and me not having a big game too.  Essentially, if his QB has a big week by throwing to my WR, we neutralize each other.  He'd have to have a big week throwing only to WR1 to gain ground on me.  

Is it worth picking up a WR on team 1 or should I just run with my current WR and hope his QB doesn't have a big game?

 

[Gally]

Interesting concept and it has merit.  Since you say both WR choices are basically equal I would look to make the change.   If the two WR's are not basically equal then I play the one that I have viewed as the better play.  

My only other question would be to know how likely it is that his team can make up the 30 pts.   Based on the scores to date it doesn't seem like you have a high scoring format (or maybe everyone was just bad).   The reason this question is important is because on the off chance his QB throws everything to WR1 and your WR gets shut down because it all goes elsewhere you get double dinged (although unlikely).  

One other thing I would factor if for no other reason than enjoyment of game watching is when does his QB play in relation to the other WR (WR on team 2) play.  If Team 2 plays before the QB then I would probably rather keep my hope for cancellation and play the player in the later game.  There is nothing worse than watching a game when his player is going off and just reeling you in when you have no chance to extend/protect the lead.  

Again all of this is based on your two WR choices being even players.  If they are not just play the one you think is best (if an obvious choice).  

 

[Houston turmOiler]

I'm pretty beat up at WR, so it worked for me yesterday when I inserted Gabriel Davis while facing Josh Allen. As a general rule of thumb, however, I usually just try to field the best lineup possible. Davis also fit into that category for me when weighing my options, so I really only used the "cancel out" strategy as a de facto tiebreaker. 

 

[da_budman]

The goal is to outscore the other team NOT to score the most points,.  That concept is kind of hard for some to grasp.  .  Akt this point you have a good lead. Adjusting to that by playing the variance game is a good strategy.   IF the 2 wrs are equal the switch makes perfect sense. One other consideration is which wr is more likely to score a td....  I would be interested in the names of the wrs,  I think its still a strategy post even if we know some of the players names.  Good luck with the decision but yes adjusting to variance in a game,  especially after you know  so much information, is a good idea.  

 

[BassNBrew]

So I wasn't sure where to post this, but this forum says it's also for strategy talk, so wanted to get people's take.  I'm going to leave names out of this so as to keep it to strategy and not WSIS.

In my playoffs, I'm in the semi-finals and both teams are having a bad week (standard scoring).  I currently have 63 points to my opponents 33.

I currently have left to play:

• RB on team 1
  
• WR on team 2
  
• TE on team 3
  

My opponent has:

• QB on team 1
  
• WR on team 4
  
• K on team 4
  

My only concern for closing the gap on my current lead is his QB.  Both his QB and my RB are on the same team.  The only way things go really south is if that game turns into a passing contest and my RB does very little, and his QB goes off.  My WR on team 2 is average.  I could pick up the #2 WR on team 1 and start him in place of my current WR.  This WR and my current WR are relatively close in rankings (4-5 apart on most consensus rankings)

Has anyone ever considered this strategy?  All things equal, I'd start my current WR...but I don't need to widen the lead I have, only maintain it.  By picking up the #2WR on team 1, the same team as his QB and my RB, I largely ensure that there are limited options to his QB having a great game and me not having a big game too.  Essentially, if his QB has a big week by throwing to my WR, we neutralize each other.  He'd have to have a big week throwing only to WR1 to gain ground on me.  

Is it worth picking up a WR on team 1 or should I just run with my current WR and hope his QB doesn't have a big game?

i would like to have the names. Of the players. You aren’t violating forum rules since I asked. 

 

[Gold Fox]

I failed to modify the variance on a game last year and it almost cost me. I had the lead and had Pit’s QB, TE, and DEF going against Pit’s WR. The only way I could be beat is for the WR to soak up all the targets (which he did). I still wound up winning, but having the Pit TE in my lineup was wrong. I should’ve swapped TE’s and provided another obstacle for my opponent.

 

[Fat Nick]

Interesting concept and it has merit.  Since you say both WR choices are basically equal I would look to make the change.   If the two WR's are not basically equal then I play the one that I have viewed as the better play.  

My only other question would be to know how likely it is that his team can make up the 30 pts.   Based on the scores to date it doesn't seem like you have a high scoring format (or maybe everyone was just bad).   The reason this question is important is because on the off chance his QB throws everything to WR1 and your WR gets shut down because it all goes elsewhere you get double dinged (although unlikely).  

One other thing I would factor if for no other reason than enjoyment of game watching is when does his QB play in relation to the other WR (WR on team 2) play.  If Team 2 plays before the QB then I would probably rather keep my hope for cancellation and play the player in the later game.  There is nothing worse than watching a game when his player is going off and just reeling you in when you have no chance to extend/protect the lead.  

Again all of this is based on your two WR choices being even players.  If they are not just play the one you think is best (if an obvious choice).  

The league is a standard scoring (no PPR) 1 QB, 2 WR, 2 RB, 1 TE, 1 Flex, 1 K, 1D league.  12 teams.  it's just an absurdly low scoring week for both of us.  An "average" team score in this league is 90 or so.  

I guess throwing names in won't kill things.  

His QB is K. Cousins.

I have D. Cook and am currently starting Van Jefferson (LAR).  I have Thielen, but he's likely out, so I'd pick up K. J. Osborne.  All things equal, I'd start V. Jefferson over Osborne as he's slightly higher ranked...but in this case, I almost think it's worth flipping.  I don't care about absolute points anymore as I have a lead...I just care about point differential.  The only way Cousins could hurt me if I had Osborne is via passes to J. Jefferson or other guys not named Cook or Osborne.

I don't see his remaining WR and K outscoring my TE by 30 points.  None of the 3 are ideal options.

I get your point re. enjoyment - I'm not too concerned.  I just want the   if I win.  

 

[Fat Nick]

I'm pretty beat up at WR, so it worked for me yesterday when I inserted Gabriel Davis while facing Josh Allen. As a general rule of thumb, however, I usually just try to field the best lineup possible. Davis also fit into that category for me when weighing my options, so I really only used the "cancel out" strategy as a de facto tiebreaker. 

This is probably the 1st time in 20+ years playing fantasy that I am legitimately considering doing this.  I've always been 100% in the "start your best guys" camp.  I think the increased number of Monday/Tuesday games due to COVID make it a bit more feasible to have these thoughts.

 

[Fat Nick]

Names below for all - my thought is swap V. Jefferson for KJ Osborne.  Full transparency, I also have Adam Thielen on my bench and could pivot to him if for some reason he plays.

RB on team 1 - Dalvin Cook (Min)

WR on team 2 - Van Jefferson (LAR)

TE on team 3 - R. Seals-Jones (WAS)

My opponent has:

QB on team 1 K. Cousins (Min)

WR on team 4 H. Renfrow (LVR)

K on team 4 D. Carlson (LVR)

 

[Leroy Hoard]

The goal is to outscore the other team NOT to score the most points,.  That concept is kind of hard for some to grasp.  .  Akt this point you have a good lead. Adjusting to that by playing the variance game is a good strategy.   IF the 2 wrs are equal the switch makes perfect sense. One other consideration is which wr is more likely to score a td....  I would be interested in the names of the wrs,  I think its still a strategy post even if we know some of the players names.  Good luck with the decision but yes adjusting to variance in a game,  especially after you know  so much information, is a good idea.  

The best explanation of this in just one sentence is the first sentence.

I used to be in the duh, just score the most points possible crowd. But the last games of the week do give us one last chance to adjust. For instance I have Stafford and my opponent has 2 of his receivers. Lucky for me I have the lead, so now it's his turn to make moves and I don't think he will.

 

[Gally]

Names below for all - my thought is swap V. Jefferson for KJ Osborne.  Full transparency, I also have Adam Thielen on my bench and could pivot to him if for some reason he plays.

RB on team 1 - Dalvin Cook (Min)

WR on team 2 - Van Jefferson (LAR)

TE on team 3 - R. Seals-Jones (WAS)

My opponent has:

QB on team 1 K. Cousins (Min)

WR on team 4 H. Renfrow (LVR)

K on team 4 D. Carlson (LVR)

If Thielen is active then I would play Jefferson.  Too big a risk to have Thielen start and get re-injured and be out plus it negates the Osborne vs Jefferson closeness.  

I think if Thielen is inactive then it makes it closer so I think pivoting to Osborne is the correct choice.   I would not think until recently as OBJ is seemingly  getting more comfortable and more targets which hurts Jefferson.  

 

[da_budman]

The best explanation of this in just one sentence is the first sentence.

I used to be in the duh, just score the most points possible crowd. But the last games of the week do give us one last chance to adjust. For instance I have Stafford and my opponent has 2 of his receivers. Lucky for me I have the lead, so now it's his turn to make moves and I don't think he will.

exactly....  If you are behind in that situation and you have choices you want to opt out the wr's on that team to other options (if the choices are  reasonable)  

 

[Ardbeg4ever]

Based on VJefferson and KJOsborn's ECR,  26 vs 33, I would expect on average a 1.2 point (HPPR) advantage for VJ but those spots have a week to week stand deviation of about 6 points.  Bottom line, if Thielen sits and he starts Cousins, I would go Osborn.  Good luck

 

[wlwiles]

Based on VJefferson and KJOsborn's ECR,  26 vs 33, I would expect on average a 1.2 point (HPPR) advantage for VJ but those spots have a week to week stand deviation of about 6 points.  Bottom line, if Thielen sits and he starts Cousins, I would go Osborn.  Good luck

Agree with the bolded

 

[da_budman]

If Thielen is active then I would play Jefferson.  Too big a risk to have Thielen start and get re-injured and be out plus it negates the Osborne vs Jefferson closeness.  

I think if Thielen is inactive then it makes it closer so I think pivoting to Osborne is the correct choice.   I would not think until recently as OBJ is seemingly  getting more comfortable and more targets which hurts Jefferson.  

If Thienelen is out it would be a no brainer for me.  I prefer a 2nd wr playing against a pretty poor Chi pass defense vs a 2nd wr playing against a pretty tough sea pass defense.  Absent that I think you are looking at a 2 point difference according to the projections that I depend on....I would probably STILL make that trade..... with the caveat that Osbourne thus far has been more TD dependent  than Jefferson....but isnt that the thing we are trying to "cancel out"   Osbourne not scoring a td means Cousins is less likely to have had a big game.   

 

[da_budman]

Thinking about this more.....Just as a who should I start  issue without  regard to the other team and its implication I have pretty much convinced myself I would start Osbourn  over Jefferson anyway based on opponents defenses.  

 

[Marauder]

If Thienelen is out it would be a no brainer for me.  I prefer a 2nd wr playing against a pretty poor Chi pass defense vs a 2nd wr playing against a pretty tough sea pass defense.  Absent that I think you are looking at a 2 point difference according to the projections that I depend on....I would probably STILL make that trade..... with the caveat that Osbourne thus far has been more TD dependent  than


Jefferson


....but isnt that the thing we are trying to "cancel out"   Osbourne not scoring a td means


Cousins


is less likely to have had a big game.   

That last statement is only true if Thielen is out IMO.   Cousins has 27 TD passes on the year and Osborn has caught 4 of them.   Cousins could easily have a big game with Osborn doing nothing.    If Thielen is out I think starting Osborn is an easy choice.  If Thielen is in, Jefferson is the easy choice IMO.   I get your argument but you also have to be careful not to overthink it.  With Thielen in the game, starting Osborn purely as a tool to cancel out Cousins is a Hail Mary at best.

 

[Gally]

Thinking about this more.....Just as a who should I start  issue without  regard to the other team and its implication I have pretty much convinced myself I would start Osbourn  over Jefferson anyway based on opponents defenses.  

With Adams out I am no so sure the Seattle pass defense is that much better than the Bears

 

[Fat Nick]

Post-mortem

Both Osborn and Jefferson didn't put up squat.  Neither did Seals-Jones on my side.

On his side, Carlson did decent, but H. Renfrow didn't do much.

Ultimately I still won on the basis of the lead I took into the Mon/Tues night games, Dalvin Cook's decent yardage, and the fact that Cousins spent most of the night on his back aside from the 2 TD's.  It was ugly, but a W is a W. 

Thanks all - it was a fun case study in this as a strategy.