Wooderson
Fight The Power
I have Rodgers and Nelson.Posted Today, 10:06 PMDo we know yet the number of teams that own each player? Would love to see that.Jordy Nelson!!! Check page 16
ChampionshipI have Rodgers and Nelson.Posted Today, 10:06 PMDo we know yet the number of teams that own each player? Would love to see that.Jordy Nelson!!! Check page 16
ChampionshipI don't have either, yet I have a sneaky suspicion we will both survive the cuts this week.I have Rodgers and Nelson.Posted Today, 10:06 PMDo we know yet the number of teams that own each player? Would love to see that.Jordy Nelson!!! Check page 16Championship

if Mendenhall gets hurt. Feel good about this bunch.
on here seem to have realized and the bargain bin potential of Moore. Stayed away from Winslow who was my seriously unpopular pick last year but more because I think he's just a touch overpriced. Anyhow, this isn't the most unique group either now that I think about it, though I'm curious if I'm the only guy with exactly these 4.
Not really.Am I correct in the thinking that a unique team has a better chance at winning it all if it can make it to the final 250?
So what kind of team would be optimal? Finding the players that are going to have top ten years at their position no matter what % of ownership those players have? Then finding a couple unique players that will separate your team from the herd?Not really.Am I correct in the thinking that a unique team has a better chance at winning it all if it can make it to the final 250?
The optimal team will survive to the final 250, and score the most points in the finals. To survive to the final 250, you need consistent scoring. To score the most points in the finals, you need high scoring. Uniqueness is not a major factor in either case.So what kind of team would be optimal? Finding the players that are going to have top ten years at their position no matter what % of ownership those players have? Then finding a couple unique players that will separate your team from the herd?Not really.Am I correct in the thinking that a unique team has a better chance at winning it all if it can make it to the final 250?
Not a major factor, like value, but still a factor. How small of a factor is the debate. Some like uniqueness more than others.Uniqueness is not a major factor in either case.
Thanks for this post Iggy. The numbers that jump out the most to me are the extremely large percentage of RBs on bye week 5. I fully expected this from the posts before the lock, but this confirms it.Other interesting numbers:- 3859 entries with TE1 with bye week 11, around double the number of any other week.- 3962 entries with WR1 with bye week 6, around triple the number of any other week.Here are the number of players off each week, by position-rank. QB-1 means the team's most expensive QB; WR-4 means a team's 4th most expensive WR, etc. So QB1, RB1 RB2, WR1, WR2, WR3, etc. are like a team's "starters".
Code:Week: 5 6 7 8 9 11QB-1 925 2807 1629 1834 2156 1425QB-2 3307 1763 654 1633 2814 382QB-3 1960 618 499 289 651 12QB-4 299 73 86 18 94 4QB-5 42 20 14 7 25 1QB-6 13 5 6 5 2 1QB-7 8 3 2 3 3 1QB-8 3 3 1 1 6 QB-9 4 1 4 2 QB-10 3 1 1 QB-11 1 1 QB-12 1 QB-13 1 QB-14 1 QB-15 1 QB-16 1 QB-17 1 QB-18 1 QB-19 1 RB-1 3693 1199 930 2025 1378 1551RB-2 3732 2037 1199 2166 747 895RB-3 4001 3329 1416 912 359 669RB-4 3361 1753 1296 902 761 1957RB-5 1371 973 592 930 1096 2667RB-6 475 607 125 662 580 1892RB-7 171 300 22 430 189 1026RB-8 49 163 1 216 46 478RB-9 18 85 1 94 11 142RB-10 1 32 1 32 4 34RB-11 1 5 6 3 8RB-12 1 1 5RB-13 1 2RB-14 1 1WR-1 1005 3962 1359 1681 1099 1670WR-2 2200 2146 2761 1605 514 1550WR-3 2337 752 3036 2201 899 1538WR-4 2176 972 1769 2247 1804 1595WR-5 1739 1491 1127 2241 1624 1540WR-6 896 1229 676 2042 879 1391WR-7 454 711 325 1312 335 843WR-8 224 398 179 691 121 381WR-9 116 189 94 311 73 144WR-10 48 88 40 128 20 39WR-11 26 43 19 32 14 8WR-12 5 16 4 9 3 3WR-13 3 3 3 4 1 WR-14 3 2 2 1 WR-15 1 1 1 1WR-16 1 1 WR-17 1 WR-18 1 WR-19 1 WR-20 1 WR-21 WR-22 1 TE-1 748 758 2242 1692 1477 3859TE-2 3519 812 2155 537 2335 835TE-3 2525 254 429 84 618 321TE-4 547 43 49 3 98 83TE-5 60 10 12 13 19TE-6 12 2 2 2TE-7 3 2 PK-1 1976 1515 1963 3063 892 1367PK-2 2363 2037 1303 1448 1168 1631PK-3 777 1043 467 311 409 389PK-4 215 211 81 49 64 69PK-5 62 46 18 17 20 11PK-6 21 15 12 4 9 13PK-7 6 8 6 11 1 3PK-8 8 4 1 7 4 2PK-9 5 3 4 6 1PK-10 4 6 2 3 2 PK-11 3 1 2 5 3PK-12 1 3 2 1 2 3PK-13 2 3 2 2 1 PK-14 3 1 1 2 PK-15 1 3 1 1 PK-16 1 1 1 PK-17 1 1 1PK-18 1 1 1 PK-19 1 PK-20 1 DST-1 1549 973 2017 2154 1526 2557DST-2 2497 2647 1274 967 903 1639DST-3 706 1253 512 157 418 281DST-4 94 228 111 20 145 25DST-5 14 42 19 3 35 7DST-6 7 9 3 11 1DST-7 4 1 2 1 3 2DST-8 1 3 1 1 DST-9 2 1 TOTALS 52411 39719 32572 37216 28488 36980
If you look at your top five players, they will be unique, or at most one or two other people will have them. When you consider the entirety of a 30-person roster (because of course you're using 30 people, right?) you have to figure that the likelihood that your roster is meaningfully tied to anyone else's is infinitesimally small.Think about it this way: Player A is widely held (on 35% of teams). Is it better for you to have him or not to have him? It seems obvious that the answer depends on how many points Player A scores. If he's an above-average scorer, you want him on your team, because otherwise you'll be fighting against a large number of teams whenever he scores well. If he's a below-average scorer, you don't want him on your team, because you'll be able to use that roster spot to your advantage over all the teams who are stuck with an unproductive player.You want players who score points.Not a major factor, like value, but still a factor. How small of a factor is the debate. Some like uniqueness more than others.Uniqueness is not a major factor in either case.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Philip Rivers $24 0.00 bye Matthew Stafford $18 0.00 bye Mark Sanchez $14 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Felix Jones $23 0.00 bye Reggie Bush $15 0.00 bye Pierre Thomas $7 0.00 bye Jerome Harrison $5 0.00 bye Marion Barber $3 0.00 bye LaRod Stephens-Howling $2 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Vincent Jackson $25 0.00 bye Dez Bryant $21 0.00 bye Lance Moore $10 0.00 bye Nate Burleson $8 0.00 bye Malcom Floyd $8 0.00 bye Mohamed Massaquoi $4 0.00 bye Denarius Moore $3 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Owen Daniels $12 0.00 bye Aaron Hernandez $10 0.00 bye Lance Kendricks $6 0.00 bye Fred Davis $5 0.00 bye Evan Moore $2 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nick Folk $3 0.00 bye Lawrence Tynes $3 0.00 bye Shaun Suisham $3 0.00 bye Olindo Mare $2 0.00 bye Jay Feely $2 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dallas Cowboys $4 0.00 bye Carolina Panthers $3 0.00 bye Arizona Cardinals $3 0.00 bye Buffalo Bills $2 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CalBear's right. Points >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uniqueness.The fact is that there are like a quadrillion possible legal rosters in this contest, and only 10,000 entries. Every one of them is unique. That's why every year this thread is full of posts like, "I'm the only person who owns W, X, Y, and Z!" Everyone's unique if you look at just their top 8-10 players, not to mention the rest of their depth.You want the players that you think will score the most points. You shouldn't worry about how many others own that player.Everyone likes points, but uniqueness never hurts.![]()
Thanks Jayrod for the slight boost in confidence. Hopefully this will be a good year. On a side note maybe I should have picked up more Packers and Saints.#1 - I generally agree, but you are safer than most teams at QB with two quality starters.#2 - You are fine at TE and using a TE for flex is very common throughout the season. Most teams went cheaper because of the guys available.Pocketducks
Lessons learned:
Since this is my first time subscribing and doing this contest I learned a few things looking at other's rosters.
1. I think I might have spent too much on QB and probably could have gotten another RB or WR.
2. I also might have spent too much on TE thinking that getting my RB/WR/TE flex from my TE might not have been a good strategy.
3. I tried spreading out the bye weeks but did not think of staggering them to the earlier bye week. I think I am weak during week 11 and might miss the cut.
4. Finally, I had the strategy of targeting a lot of PPR WRs but they do not have upside and might not be best play in this contest.
Any thoughts?
#3 - You are fine in week 11 from what I can tell (only missing 2 quality players in Wallace & Daniels)
#4 - I think this is accurate. Best ball means a cheap player who scores 25 points two times a year is probably more valuable than a cheap player who scores 10 points every week. However, Brown and McCluster are more of the boom/bust type, IMO, so I think you are OK there.
Not a bad roster at all. But then again, I made the final 250 my first year (2008) and haven't been back since, so what do I know. (I think I've been out somwhere between weeks 8-11 each of the past two seasons)
Entry # 101157 Entry # 106098Ben Roethlisberger Ben RoethlisbergerMatthew Stafford Matthew StaffordFelix Jones Felix JonesCedric Benson Cedric BensonChris Wells Chris WellsTim Hightower Tim HightowerDeji Karim Deji KarimMarion Barber Marion BarberIsaac Redman Isaac RedmanMike Wallace Mike WallaceLee Evans Lee EvansNate Burleson Nate BurlesonBernard Berrian Bernard BerrianNate Washington Nate WashingtonHarry Douglas Harry DouglasDevery Henderson Devery HendersonAntonio Brown Antonio BrownDenarius Moore Denarius MooreDexter McCluster Dexter McClusterMichael Jenkins Michael JenkinsJermichael Finley Jermichael FinleyOwen Daniels Owen DanielsLance Kendricks Lance KendricksJay Feely Evan MooreMatt Bryant Matt BryantJosh Brown Josh BrownShaun Suisham Shaun SuishamMinnesota Vikings Minnesota VikingsArizona Cardinals Arizona CardinalsWashington Redskins Washington Redskins
Entry # 102140 Entry # 102150Eli Manning Eli ManningMatthew Stafford Matthew StaffordMark Sanchez Mark SanchezMark Ingram Mark IngramLeGarrette Blount LeGarrette BlountFelix Jones Felix JonesDelone Carter Delone CarterPierre Thomas Pierre ThomasJerome Harrison Jerome HarrisonBen Tate Ben TateSantana Moss Santana MossMike Sims-Walker Mike Sims-WalkerNate Burleson Nate BurlesonEarl Bennett Earl BennettBernard Berrian Bernard BerrianHarry Douglas Devery HendersonAntonio Brown Antonio BrownRandall Cobb Randall CobbDenarius Moore Denarius MooreAaron Hernandez Aaron HernandezLance Kendricks Lance KendricksEvan Moore Evan MooreMatt Bryant Matt BryantNick Folk Nick FolkRyan Longwell Ryan LongwellJay Feely Jay FeelySt. Louis Rams St. Louis RamsBuffalo Bills Buffalo BillsDenver Broncos Denver Broncos
1. I agree that Spiller has talent but I'm not sure if he'll get the opportunity behind FJax and besides their OL is terrible. Also, Johnny White is a really talented RB and might challenge Spiller for carries later in the year. 2. Starks could be a great value this year and looked good in this game but it is still 50/50 split with Grant this year. Starks looks great running but needs help picking up the blitz. Did you see that sack on Rodgers up the middle when Starks whiffed on his block? Also if the Packers were so sold on Starks why would they use such a high draft pick on Alex Green? Don't get me wrong I like Starks's talent and think long term he'll be the guy. Just not this year.I think the bargains were CJ Spiller & James Starks & Jerome Harrison & Montario Hardesty & Ben Tate (especially with Fosters Hammy)I really like Ryan Matthews and Mark Ingram but felt they were expensive (I used them anyway because you have to pick the correct players regardless of price)Pocketducks
-----------
LeGarrette Blount $25
Ahmad Bradshaw $25
Felix Jones $23
Marion Barber $3
Isaac Redman $2
RBs were the hardest to choose. There was no obvious bargains like last year’s Foster
Any thoughts?
Just MHO
Just noticed that # 106098 is a staff entry, and # 101157 isn't. Could this really have been two different people who submitted practically the exact same 30-man roster? Did a staffer pay to get his own real entry in the contest? I wonder if Drinen could confirm whether or not these entries were submitted by two different people, or if it's some kind of staffer experiment or something. I find it almost impossible to believe that two different people would submit 30-man entries that are almost exactly the same.ool, looking at uniqueness of teams in this contest. Of course none of the 10,776 entries are exactly the same, but I did find these two pairs of teams that differed by only one player. I'm assuming they are the same guy, submitting two different entries?
Code:Entry # 101157 Entry # 106098
I don't think so.Went through 4-5 pages and didn't find it.Has anyone set up a league where we can claim a team and enter our team to score our entries yet? If so, please send/show me a link.TIA
I thought about copying one of the teams posted in here just to mess with someone.Just noticed that # 106098 is a staff entry, and # 101157 isn't. Could this really have been two different people who submitted practically the exact same 30-man roster? Did a staffer pay to get his own real entry in the contest? I wonder if Drinen could confirm whether or not these entries were submitted by two different people, or if it's some kind of staffer experiment or something. I find it almost impossible to believe that two different people would submit 30-man entries that are almost exactly the same.ool, looking at uniqueness of teams in this contest. Of course none of the 10,776 entries are exactly the same, but I did find these two pairs of teams that differed by only one player. I'm assuming they are the same guy, submitting two different entries?
Code:Entry # 101157 Entry # 106098
Yes. This is because a staffer was logged in as a user to help with troubleshooting. I'll get it sorted out tonight or tomorrow and let you know what the exact deal was.Just noticed that # 106098 is a staff entry, and # 101157 isn't. Could this really have been two different people who submitted practically the exact same 30-man roster? Did a staffer pay to get his own real entry in the contest? I wonder if Drinen could confirm whether or not these entries were submitted by two different people, or if it's some kind of staffer experiment or something. I find it almost impossible to believe that two different people would submit 30-man entries that are almost exactly the same.ool, looking at uniqueness of teams in this contest. Of course none of the 10,776 entries are exactly the same, but I did find these two pairs of teams that differed by only one player. I'm assuming they are the same guy, submitting two different entries?
Code:Entry # 101157 Entry # 106098
Not sure I agree that it is a factor. Uniqueness is what will seperate the winner from the Top 5 or 10 teams. At that point, I'd imagine the top 10 teams or so will have a fairly significant commonness between them, the difference between winning and coming in 10th between this group will be those whose unique players score best. But each of those teams will have their own uniqueness, so it's not the uniqueness that sets them apart, its the fact that their unique player outperformed the other teams unique players.Not a major factor, like value, but still a factor. How small of a factor is the debate. Some like uniqueness more than others.Uniqueness is not a major factor in either case.
Yeah I agree. It was one of the reasons I also went Ryan (over Bradford) and Rivers.I really like my QB combo of Rivers/Ryan and especially their schedule down the stretch.Week 12 Ryan vs Minny / Rivers vs DenverWeek 13 Ryan @ Hou / Rivers @ Jack-------Week 14 Ryan @ CAR / Rivers vs BuffWeek 15 Ryan vs Jack / Rivers vs BaltWeek 16 Ryan @ NO / Rivers @ DetriotHopefully I can make it that far though, but if I can I like this combo for the 6 pts per TD pass
Have you guys seen Brady's playoff schedule? @WAS, @DEN, MIA looks nice as long as the weather is decent.Yeah I agree. It was one of the reasons I also went Ryan (over Bradford) and Rivers.I really like my QB combo of Rivers/Ryan and especially their schedule down the stretch.Week 12 Ryan vs Minny / Rivers vs DenverWeek 13 Ryan @ Hou / Rivers @ Jack-------Week 14 Ryan @ CAR / Rivers vs BuffWeek 15 Ryan vs Jack / Rivers vs BaltWeek 16 Ryan @ NO / Rivers @ DetriotHopefully I can make it that far though, but if I can I like this combo for the 6 pts per TD pass
Actually having players have big weeks when no one will be cut is a bad thing. Unless of course your player predictions for the year were wrong. If your predictions were right or with in reason, then if a player scored X of his Y points already in week 1, he will only be getting Z (Y-X) more points the rest of the year. Which split over 15 games instead of 16 now, is a smaller number per game. So a bigger chance for more dud weeks, which are the killers in this contest.Personally I'd love for my guys to not score any Tds this week, so long as they are participants in their offenses. Having other players I don't own do the scoring and be the offensive plan focus for this week works for me, since then my guys will be the offensive focuses in future weeks and get their Tds in future weeks, when I'll need their points to make the cut.I have Rodgers and Nelson.Posted Today, 10:06 PMDo we know yet the number of teams that own each player? Would love to see that.Jordy Nelson!!!Championship
This is fallacious. Whether Aaron Rodgers scored 10 points or 30 points in week 1 has no relation to how many points he's likely to score the rest of the year. And in Nelson's case, it certainly looks like the week 1 performance is indicative of greater things for him to come.'WisWolvrns said:Actually having players have big weeks when no one will be cut is a bad thing. Unless of course your player predictions for the year were wrong. If your predictions were right or with in reason, then if a player scored X of his Y points already in week 1, he will only be getting Z (Y-X) more points the rest of the year.
Not really...he has the qualifying statement in thereThis is fallacious. Whether Aaron Rodgers scored 10 points or 30 points in week 1 has no relation to how many points he's likely to score the rest of the year. And in Nelson's case, it certainly looks like the week 1 performance is indicative of greater things for him to come.'WisWolvrns said:Actually having players have big weeks when no one will be cut is a bad thing. Unless of course your player predictions for the year were wrong. If your predictions were right or with in reason, then if a player scored X of his Y points already in week 1, he will only be getting Z (Y-X) more points the rest of the year.
Which is another reason why I got Welker and Hernandez hoping for big production then.'Jayrod said:Have you guys seen Brady's playoff schedule? @WAS, @DEN, MIA looks nice as long as the weather is decent.'pocketducks said:Yeah I agree. It was one of the reasons I also went Ryan (over Bradford) and Rivers.'eaglezzz said:I really like my QB combo of Rivers/Ryan and especially their schedule down the stretch.Week 12 Ryan vs Minny / Rivers vs DenverWeek 13 Ryan @ Hou / Rivers @ Jack-------Week 14 Ryan @ CAR / Rivers vs BuffWeek 15 Ryan vs Jack / Rivers vs BaltWeek 16 Ryan @ NO / Rivers @ DetriotHopefully I can make it that far though, but if I can I like this combo for the 6 pts per TD pass
Sure it can. You could have had a unique roster by excluding Foster last year. That would have hurt.'Velveeta22 said:Everyone likes points, but uniqueness never hurts.![]()
You guys have an interesting take on games that will produce big points. Generally I'm not a fan of having players (especially WRs and QBs) in games that are decided by halftime or against against teams that don't push them to score and extra TD or two.Which is another reason why I got Welker and Hernandez hoping for big production then.'Jayrod said:Have you guys seen Brady's playoff schedule? @WAS, @DEN, MIA looks nice as long as the weather is decent.'pocketducks said:Yeah I agree. It was one of the reasons I also went Ryan (over Bradford) and Rivers.'eaglezzz said:I really like my QB combo of Rivers/Ryan and especially their schedule down the stretch.Week 12 Ryan vs Minny / Rivers vs DenverWeek 13 Ryan @ Hou / Rivers @ Jack-------Week 14 Ryan @ CAR / Rivers vs BuffWeek 15 Ryan vs Jack / Rivers vs BaltWeek 16 Ryan @ NO / Rivers @ DetriotHopefully I can make it that far though, but if I can I like this combo for the 6 pts per TD pass![]()
Yeah, it's not like the Pats would ever run up the score in a game they have under control.You guys have an interesting take on games that will produce big points. Generally I'm not a fan of having players (especially WRs and QBs) in games that are decided by halftime or against against teams that don't push them to score and extra TD or two.Which is another reason why I got Welker and Hernandez hoping for big production then.'Jayrod said:Have you guys seen Brady's playoff schedule? @WAS, @DEN, MIA looks nice as long as the weather is decent.'pocketducks said:Yeah I agree. It was one of the reasons I also went Ryan (over Bradford) and Rivers.'eaglezzz said:I really like my QB combo of Rivers/Ryan and especially their schedule down the stretch.Week 12 Ryan vs Minny / Rivers vs DenverWeek 13 Ryan @ Hou / Rivers @ Jack-------Week 14 Ryan @ CAR / Rivers vs BuffWeek 15 Ryan vs Jack / Rivers vs BaltWeek 16 Ryan @ NO / Rivers @ DetriotHopefully I can make it that far though, but if I can I like this combo for the 6 pts per TD pass![]()
Then you would be giving up points and uniqueness. My statement was in regards to two players of the same caliber.Sure it can. You could have had a unique roster by excluding Foster last year. That would have hurt.'Velveeta22 said:Everyone likes points, but uniqueness never hurts.![]()
I was just looking for that tool myself. With so many commonly owned players, I am hoping that I have a few unique combos (River-Blount-SJax specifically).What was the page on the main site where you could plug in players, and see how many teams had certain combinations? That was VERY cool, you could see who had Rodgers, Foster, and a certain kicker, or defense, or whatever.by the way, once we have all these links, they should go in the OP. The fantasy star thing, all of Drinen's links, etc.
104 teams have that combinationI was just looking for that tool myself. With so many commonly owned players, I am hoping that I have a few unique combos (River-Blount-SJax specifically).What was the page on the main site where you could plug in players, and see how many teams had certain combinations? That was VERY cool, you could see who had Rodgers, Foster, and a certain kicker, or defense, or whatever.by the way, once we have all these links, they should go in the OP. The fantasy star thing, all of Drinen's links, etc.