matchup strategy (1 Viewer)

[gagull]

Scenario:

You have 2 WRs ranked very closely, you lean towards one, but your opponent has his QB. All TDs are equal, so your WR is essentialy negated by his QB. Do you look at it like you are possibly negating some of his QB points, or do you go try to differentiate and go with the other WR?

 

[Road Warriors]

Honestly, I don't even consider it. I pick the guys that I think have the best chance to produce that day. Tossup WRs calls, I'll lean to the better QB, the better weather, the weaker pass D, and other such criteria. Whether the QB plays for my opponent never enters into it.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Honestly, I don't even consider it. I pick the guys that I think have the best chance to produce that day. Tossup WRs calls, I'll lean to the better QB, the better weather, the weaker pass D, and other such criteria. Whether the QB plays for my opponent never enters into it.

 

[Black]

Scenario:You have 2 WRs ranked very closely, you lean towards one, but your opponent has his QB. All TDs are equal, so your WR is essentialy negated by his QB. Do you look at it like you are possibly negating some of his QB points, or do you go try to differentiate and go with the other WR?

There is some semblance of a strategy here I think...and I have done it before. But not sure if it really makes sense.What if you start Marshall over Boldin to counter Cutler, and Cutler decides to hit Royal all day? (and Boldin goes off while on your bench).If the matchup and skill seems equal, I prefer to look at:1. Who has the best QB?2. Who is most likely to end up in a shootout? Or what if there team can just run the ball all day and doesn't need the passing game?3. Could weather (wind, rain) dampen the passing game?4. Any recent injury to either that *could* have them taken out early5. Home or Away game (really affects the DEF, IMO).

 

[AAABatteries]

There is some semblance of a strategy here I think...and I have done it before. But not sure if it really makes sense.What if you start Marshall over Boldin to counter Cutler, and Cutler decides to hit Royal all day? (and Boldin goes off while on your bench).

This has been discussed on several occassions and I agree that this scenario doesn't necessarily work because as you state you can't depend on a WR getting the ball thrown his way. Where it does work IMO, is the reverse. NOTE - the following is a hypothetical, please treat it as such:Say you are playing someone who has Owens, Roy Williams and Witten (possible because of the RW trade) and they are starting all 3. Say your QBs are Romo, Campbell and Brad Johnson and for arguments sake we'll say that Wash is playing Pit (which they are), but let's say Dallas is playing Det. Maybe the rankings still have Campbell slightly ahead of Johnson for the week and everyone agress that in a vacuum, he's the play. Well, there's no way you can convince me that the right play is to play Campbell ahead of Johnson. You play Johnson and simple negate all the TDs that the other teams WRs will have.Now could this strategy backfire too? Sure, it could, but it's the obvious play to me and really is the only time I would consider taking the team I'm playing starters in to account.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Scenario:You have 2 WRs ranked very closely, you lean towards one, but your opponent has his QB. All TDs are equal, so your WR is essentialy negated by his QB. Do you look at it like you are possibly negating some of his QB points, or do you go try to differentiate and go with the other WR?

You are attempting to outscore your opponent. In most leagues, a 75 yard TD is worth more to a WR than a QB, whether through 4 pt passing TDs, less yards for passing TDs, or using PPR. You field the lineup that will maximize your points unless the benefit to his team exceeds your own.

 

[ratbast]

I have posted in my past forums (and laughed at) with more detail but here goes:

I believe there are some factors that may influence choosing to combo off an opponent's QB.

1. Your opponent has a topnotch QB.

2. It's a H2H league with playoffs. (is there really any others anymore?)

3. You have a better team after the WR than he has after the QB.

Another thing to consider is in dynasty/keeper and with a stud QB I believe it is even more of positive strategy.

Here's why:

Connecting Wayne to his Manning.

Good game for Manning should equal good game for Wayne. And the rest of your team should outperform his.

Bad game by Manning and Wayne is countered by your perspective better team.

I have seen this in action in a partial dynasty league. We would meet every year in the division playoffs. Now I own the QB and WR.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I have posted in my past forums (and laughed at) with more detail but here goes:I believe there are some factors that may influence choosing to combo off an opponent's QB. 1. Your opponent has a topnotch QB. 2. It's a H2H league with playoffs. (is there really any others anymore?)3. You have a better team after the WR than he has after the QB. Another thing to consider is in dynasty/keeper and with a stud QB I believe it is even more of positive strategy.Here's why:Connecting Wayne to his Manning. Good game for Manning should equal good game for Wayne. And the rest of your team should outperform his.Bad game by Manning and Wayne is countered by your perspective better team.I have seen this in action in a partial dynasty league. We would meet every year in the division playoffs. Now I own the QB and WR.

But were you benching Wayne if you weren't playing an opponent with Peyton? No. We're looking strictly at guys you'd normally consider benching save the fact you were facing the team with his QB that week. Ginn, Stuckey, Ike Bruce and Breaston. The team you submit each week, has ZERO impact on the team your opponent fields each week. Trying to match pts from your WR vs. his QB is irrelivent. If I have Ginn and Stuckey and my opponent has Favre - if both Ginn and Stuckey score exactly 13pts that week, it's a wash. I've had no impact on how many pts Favre scored him. I can see the argument that you want to lean toward Stuckey to help buffer the impact in case Favre has that BLOWUP game. But the types of WR's we're talking about? Favre could have a blowup game with or without Stuckey.

 

[ratbast]

I have posted in my past forums (and laughed at) with more detail but here goes:I believe there are some factors that may influence choosing to combo off an opponent's QB. 1. Your opponent has a topnotch QB. 2. It's a H2H league with playoffs. (is there really any others anymore?)3. You have a better team after the WR than he has after the QB. Another thing to consider is in dynasty/keeper and with a stud QB I believe it is even more of positive strategy.Here's why:Connecting Wayne to his Manning. Good game for Manning should equal good game for Wayne. And the rest of your team should outperform his.Bad game by Manning and Wayne is countered by your perspective better team.I have seen this in action in a partial dynasty league. We would meet every year in the division playoffs. Now I own the QB and WR.

But were you benching Wayne if you weren't playing an opponent with Peyton? No. We're looking strictly at guys you'd normally consider benching save the fact you were facing the team with his QB that week. Ginn, Stuckey, Ike Bruce and Breaston. The team you submit each week, has ZERO impact on the team your opponent fields each week. Trying to match pts from your WR vs. his QB is irrelivent. If I have Ginn and Stuckey and my opponent has Favre - if both Ginn and Stuckey score exactly 13pts that week, it's a wash. I've had no impact on how many pts Favre scored him.

Like I said. He has to have a stud QB and he also has to be a formidable opponent. I wouldn't be benching whatever WR we are talking about because they have to be top caliber as well. I would have to trade for them or draft them and they would have to at least be my 2b. This is why it works in keeper/dynasty.The most important factor here is the essence of this hobby: we don't know who will score more points.Actually if all the previous factors mentioned are true, and your choice is between Ginn, Stuckey, Ike Bruce and Breaston and you really can't separate them through other analysis (key aspect), I say choose the WR connected to his QB for the same reasons. Your WR should have a good game if his QB does. If his QB doesnt, well your risk has been lessened because his QB hasnt performed, he's down 1 player too. Obviously when we are talking about this caliber of WR, then the chance of his QB having a good game and your WR not reaping any benefits is greater.

 

[gagull]

Wow!! Fantastic posts, all with valid arguements.

In case it matters, my situation this week is this: I can choose between Avery or Deshean Jackson and they are ranked within a couple of positions.

Both have favorable pass matchups (Cards and Seahawks respectively).

Plus for Avery is the cards have a decent run D and the Rams may have to pass more

Minus for Avery, Bulger is not as good as McNabb, but I play against Bulger, hence my original post

Plus for Jackson, see McNabb

Minus for Jackson, the hawks run D is nearly as bad as their pass D and Westy could run all over them.

Sorry, my intent was not to turn this into a "WDIS" post, just curious because the situation has come up before and wanted some input.

Thanks again for your opinions

 

[FantasyTrader]

I wouldn't be benching whatever WR we are talking about because they have to be top caliber as well.

Then I'm not sure what you're talking about. I've never in my life been faced with having to choose who to start between Reggie Wayne and a similarly valued WR.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Wow!! Fantastic posts, all with valid arguements. In case it matters, my situation this week is this: I can choose between Avery or Deshean Jackson and they are ranked within a couple of positions. Both have favorable pass matchups (Cards and Seahawks respectively).Plus for Avery is the cards have a decent run D and the Rams may have to pass moreMinus for Avery, Bulger is not as good as McNabb, but I play against Bulger, hence my original postPlus for Jackson, see McNabbMinus for Jackson, the hawks run D is nearly as bad as their pass D and Westy could run all over them.Sorry, my intent was not to turn this into a "WDIS" post, just curious because the situation has come up before and wanted some input.Thanks again for your opinions

See, to me - your situation wouldn't come into play because I think Avery is a straight up better play. Very recently, the offense switched to make him a focal point in the passing game. DeSean is still a compliment.

 

[gonzobill5]

let's get mathematical...

fantasy points of qb's and wr's on the same team have a positive correlation. More often than not, they will, in some sense, "cancel each other out." Assume they do cancel each other out. This crosses one player off of each squad thus lowering the variance of both of your projected totals (because there's one less player). This is a good thing if you have the better remaining squad (its more likely that you'll hit your projected total). Bad thing, however, if you have the worse remaining squad. Its the same idea as playing that hit or miss WR instead of the consistently average WR when you are going up against a superior opponent.

With all that said, the effect is small. No way I use this over other strategies like comparing QBs, Home vs. Away, who's on a streak, injuries to the player or defense, etc.

 

[ratbast]

Yes I understand how I confused the situation. My example was more driven by the upper tier and the general idea of the combo and building a squad with it. If you wanted to go out and trade for a WR such as Deshawn Jackson and Eddie Royal and after all things considered you like them equal and the price will be the same but your rival has Cutler, then Royal is the pick, IF you have a team that can win.

Many argue this strategy with: "I play who I think will score more, period." But that negates the facts surrounding the acquisition of players and limited roster sizes. It also seems to ignore the fact that we actually don't know. I tier my preseason rankings now because I cant tell the difference between #29 and #30 and I won't even try.

The combo is not a pristine strategy at all. It has holes everywhere. But when you build a team and you know you'll contend with the Manning owner, you'll want a part of that action if Manning goes off against you in the playoffs. It has worked against me every year for the last so many. (Harrison, Clark, Indy K)

 

[FantasyTrader]

let's get mathematical...fantasy points of qb's and wr's on the same team have a positive correlation. More often than not, they will, in some sense, "cancel each other out." Assume they do cancel each other out. This crosses one player off of each squad thus lowering the variance of both of your projected totals (because there's one less player). This is a good thing if you have the better remaining squad (its more likely that you'll hit your projected total). Bad thing, however, if you have the worse remaining squad. Its the same idea as playing that hit or miss WR instead of the consistently average WR when you are going up against a superior opponent.With all that said, the effect is small. No way I use this over other strategies like comparing QBs, Home vs. Away, who's on a streak, injuries to the player or defense, etc.

When I get mathematical, there's usually numbers involved.

 

[gonzobill5]

let's get mathematical...fantasy points of qb's and wr's on the same team have a positive correlation. More often than not, they will, in some sense, "cancel each other out." Assume they do cancel each other out. This crosses one player off of each squad thus lowering the variance of both of your projected totals (because there's one less player). This is a good thing if you have the better remaining squad (its more likely that you'll hit your projected total). Bad thing, however, if you have the worse remaining squad. Its the same idea as playing that hit or miss WR instead of the consistently average WR when you are going up against a superior opponent.With all that said, the effect is small. No way I use this over other strategies like comparing QBs, Home vs. Away, who's on a streak, injuries to the player or defense, etc.

When I get mathematical, there's usually numbers involved. :(

Technically, that would be getting numerical.

 

[hove]

pick the guys that [...] have the best chance to produce that day.

All you need to know is the quote right above...