You didn't all have the same best players. You can click right on each team to view their roster.One of 8 teams to score exactly 204.3 points, not sure whether to take that as a good or bad sign. I'm assuming chances are good that if we had that exact score, we had the same best players. Or not...n00b to this contest, damn fun though!
Team SizeData Wk 1 Wk 2 Total Over60018 Avg 165.77 180.32 347.23 2.34% St.Dev 21.72 22.24 32.50 19 Avg 166.52 180.89 348.42 2.46% St.Dev 21.00 22.52 32.13 20 Avg 167.74 182.87 351.38 3.23% St.Dev 20.95 21.83 32.22 21 Avg 168.44 184.45 353.69 4.26% St.Dev 20.28 22.70 32.96 22 Avg 168.31 183.86 352.75 4.00% St.Dev 19.36 22.80 33.05 23 Avg 168.20 184.03 353.09 3.40% St.Dev 19.59 22.12 31.49 24 Avg 169.81 184.20 355.27 3.98% St.Dev 20.16 22.14 31.25 25 Avg 169.99 183.74 354.79 3.73% St.Dev 19.17 21.98 31.06 26 Avg 170.50 183.13 354.25 2.66% St.Dev 17.83 20.78 28.99 27 Avg 170.22 186.02 357.98 4.17% St.Dev 18.93 21.39 29.73 28 Avg 169.86 180.49 351.24 2.15% St.Dev 17.56 21.42 29.51 29 Avg 171.67 182.55 355.39 3.42% St.Dev 17.51 21.16 29.99 30 Avg 171.52 181.65 354.49 2.62% St.Dev 17.68 20.18 28.75 Total Average 167.67 182.14 350.84 3.00%Total StdDev 20.54 22.16 32.02
What is "Over 600"? Do you mean over 400 (avg > 200 per week)?This is for only teams that are still alive
Code:Team SizeData Wk 1 Wk 2 Total Over60018 Avg 165.77 180.32 347.23 2.34% St.Dev 21.72 22.24 32.50 19 Avg 166.52 180.89 348.42 2.46% St.Dev 21.00 22.52 32.13 20 Avg 167.74 182.87 351.38 3.23% St.Dev 20.95 21.83 32.22 21 Avg 168.44 184.45 353.69 4.26% St.Dev 20.28 22.70 32.96 22 Avg 168.31 183.86 352.75 4.00% St.Dev 19.36 22.80 33.05 23 Avg 168.20 184.03 353.09 3.40% St.Dev 19.59 22.12 31.49 24 Avg 169.81 184.20 355.27 3.98% St.Dev 20.16 22.14 31.25 25 Avg 169.99 183.74 354.79 3.73% St.Dev 19.17 21.98 31.06 26 Avg 170.50 183.13 354.25 2.66% St.Dev 17.83 20.78 28.99 27 Avg 170.22 186.02 357.98 4.17% St.Dev 18.93 21.39 29.73 28 Avg 169.86 180.49 351.24 2.15% St.Dev 17.56 21.42 29.51 29 Avg 171.67 182.55 355.39 3.42% St.Dev 17.51 21.16 29.99 30 Avg 171.52 181.65 354.49 2.62% St.Dev 17.68 20.18 28.75 Total Average 167.67 182.14 350.84 3.00%Total StdDev 20.54 22.16 32.02
It'll creep a little higher until we hit the bye weeks, where it should drop sharply. My initial guess is that it'll be mid-140's this week, maybe low 150's.138.85 seems like a high cutoff.For those who have played before is this about the same cutoff we'll see until the bye weeks?
Sorry, "Over 600" is probability that a random team in that roster size will score over 600 in 3 weeks. It's based on the Total Avg and St. Dev. So basically is projects the 2 weeks avg/var into a 3 week avg/var and then calculated the chance of hitting 600+.What is "Over 600"? Do you mean over 400 (avg > 200 per week)?
You know, I was going to post that this was an unusually high cutoff for week 2, but it turns out it wasn't:138.85 seems like a high cutoff.For those who have played before is this about the same cutoff we'll see until the bye weeks?
Year Wk 2 Cut2007 128.302008 132.602009 130.042010 141.75
Wow! Just doing a linear regression on average score vs. roster size, # of players is able to explain 48.5% of the variation. One potential problem here is that this might reflect the impact of junk rosters. Would rosters of 18 be more likely to be junk than larger rosters? The effect isn't steadily increasing as it seems the jump in average score occurs at 24 players; so probably some diminishing returns above that point (at least so far).This is for only teams that are still alive
Code:Team SizeData Wk 1 Wk 2 Total Over60018 Avg 165.77 180.32 347.23 2.34% St.Dev 21.72 22.24 32.50 19 Avg 166.52 180.89 348.42 2.46% St.Dev 21.00 22.52 32.13 20 Avg 167.74 182.87 351.38 3.23% St.Dev 20.95 21.83 32.22 21 Avg 168.44 184.45 353.69 4.26% St.Dev 20.28 22.70 32.96 22 Avg 168.31 183.86 352.75 4.00% St.Dev 19.36 22.80 33.05 23 Avg 168.20 184.03 353.09 3.40% St.Dev 19.59 22.12 31.49 24 Avg 169.81 184.20 355.27 3.98% St.Dev 20.16 22.14 31.25 25 Avg 169.99 183.74 354.79 3.73% St.Dev 19.17 21.98 31.06 26 Avg 170.50 183.13 354.25 2.66% St.Dev 17.83 20.78 28.99 27 Avg 170.22 186.02 357.98 4.17% St.Dev 18.93 21.39 29.73 28 Avg 169.86 180.49 351.24 2.15% St.Dev 17.56 21.42 29.51 29 Avg 171.67 182.55 355.39 3.42% St.Dev 17.51 21.16 29.99 30 Avg 171.52 181.65 354.49 2.62% St.Dev 17.68 20.18 28.75 Total Average 167.67 182.14 350.84 3.00%Total StdDev 20.54 22.16 32.02
I think we all pretty much agreed that this was the case last year. The question is how long it takes to weed out all the "junk" entries. In my opinion, it takes until week 13 or so.Would rosters of 18 be more likely to be junk than larger rosters?
I think the sweet spot for roster size is probably in the mid- to high-20s, so this makes sense.The effect isn't steadily increasing as it seems the jump in average score occurs at 24 players; so probably some diminishing returns above that point (at least so far).
Any kickerguys left?
Entry # Kickers Alive?106532 20 Y104301 18 N110566 18 Y109520 15 Y102238 15 Y108288 15 N102670 14 N108699 13 N110096 13 Y101223 13 N108547 12 N101828 12 N109629 11 Y102083 11 N109402 10 Y101071 10 Y101154 10 N

I'd say it would be through the bye weeks, so after week 11.This guy will likely be eliminated that week.I think we all pretty much agreed that this was the case last year. The question is how long it takes to weed out all the "junk" entries. In my opinion, it takes until week 13 or so.Would rosters of 18 be more likely to be junk than larger rosters?
# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
Shouldn't even be a debate anymore. Any Brady plus one owner is going to be at a significant advantage versus any Brady plus two owner.I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
Iggy, any chance you can add average points scored (only the ones that counted) to this?I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
Unless of course Brady gets hurt, then the Brady + 2 owner has a significant advantage.Shouldn't even be a debate anymore. Any Brady plus one owner is going to be at a significant advantage versus any Brady plus two owner.I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
If Brady is a stud every single week, then sure. But he might not be, and at the very least he has a bye week you have to contend with. Also, I think the debate is less like, "I have Tom Brady, should I have one backup or two?" and more like, "Should I take Brady and one backup, or should I take three cheaper QBs?"FTR I fall squarely on the 2 QB side of the debate, but I think it's a debatable point.Shouldn't even be a debate anymore. Any Brady plus one owner is going to be at a significant advantage versus any Brady plus two owner.I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
It comes down to taking 2 QBs and taking that extra risk to get further in the contest. Taking 3 QBs as insurance in case of injury is like being on the 1 yard line and kicking the field goal on 4th and 1. Taking just 2 QBs is the equivalent of going for the QB Sneak.Unless of course Brady gets hurt, then the Brady + 2 owner has a significant advantage.Shouldn't even be a debate anymore. Any Brady plus one owner is going to be at a significant advantage versus any Brady plus two owner.I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
Iggy, any chance you can add average points scored (only the ones that counted) to this?
QBs Count AvQBScore AvTotScore1 223 29.94 167.452 6523 32.42 174.733 3455 33.17 171.674 465 33.99 166.135+ 109 35.22 151.48
Last year's first three week cuts:Week 1: 125.9Week 2: 141.75Week 3: 145.0138.85 seems like a high cutoff.For those who have played before is this about the same cutoff we'll see until the bye weeks?
Also forgot to add that Jordan Shipley is out for the year.Bad News: Roscoe Parrish was just placed on Bills IR due to ankle injury. :( So he joins Jamaal Charles and Nate Kaeding out for the year.However, no team had all three on their roster.
I took a chance on Parrish for $2 = didn't work out I guess I should have spent a few more bucks and went with NelsonBad News: Roscoe Parrish was just placed on Bills IR due to ankle injury. :( So he joins Jamaal Charles and Nate Kaeding out for the year.However, no team had all three on their roster.
I really like your team...as long as you can survive week 8 (only 2 RB's & 4 WR's not on bye that week)wow, good week for me. I have vjax, decker, and moore. Hopefully decker and moore continue to be good (if not great). I spent most of my money on rb, also looking good with forte and mcfadden. I also grabbed tate, that should help for another week or so, unless fosters hammy lingers, then it could be gold.
Fitz, Jackson, and McCluster have the same bye, so hopefully you'll have Amendola back by then and Bryant will be healthy.'eaglezzz said:Went with 11 WR's last year and learned that it was over kill. Well this year I went with 8 and now I am feeling I don't have enough.Fitzgerald $28V. Jackson $25D. Bryant $21 (Might have nagging injuries all year long)Amendola $8 (Nasty looking injury - could be back soon though)A. Brown $3D. Moore $3McCluster $2Parrish $2 (Out For the Year)I actually contemplated taking Nelson/Decker/Burleson instead of Bryant but went with the big gun instead.... time will tell I guess
126.95Definitely doomed226.8Probably doomed.
![]()

And taking 20 Kickers is like going empty backfield with your Kicker lined up behind Center and seeing what happens.It comes down to taking 2 QBs and taking that extra risk to get further in the contest. Taking 3 QBs as insurance in case of injury is like being on the 1 yard line and kicking the field goal on 4th and 1. Taking just 2 QBs is the equivalent of going for the QB Sneak.Unless of course Brady gets hurt, then the Brady + 2 owner has a significant advantage.Shouldn't even be a debate anymore. Any Brady plus one owner is going to be at a significant advantage versus any Brady plus two owner.I think we did this last year, but we can keep an eye on the 2 vs. 3 QB debate again this season:
Code:# QBs Count Alive Surv%1 223 200 89.7%2 6523 6175 94.7%3 3455 3170 91.8%4 465 402 86.5%5+ 109 76 69.7%
Your doing the Lords work here my good friend......Thank You....For those of you using the live scoring for this contest, I've made a few updates.- Added ownership percent to the team view page. - This is a number for teams still in the contest. This will update on Tuesday's after the final cut is announced.- Added a way to see if the team is still alive from the team page- Automated the current cut, this will run at 8:01PM, 12:01AM on Sunday and again after the game on Monday, then one last time when the scores are finalized at 2AM on Monday. I've also added Staff ID's to get an accurate cut line.

Thank You!!!For those of you using the live scoring for this contest, I've made a few updates.- Added ownership percent to the team view page. - This is a number for teams still in the contest. This will update on Tuesday's after the final cut is announced.- Added a way to see if the team is still alive from the team page- Automated the current cut, this will run at 8:01PM, 12:01AM on Sunday and again after the game on Monday, then one last time when the scores are finalized at 2AM on Monday. I've also added Staff ID's to get an accurate cut line.
Wow, no kidding. That looks like a pretty decent 19 player team on paper, but you still need pretty much every one of your picks to be good.The perfect case study on why you should never have a roster with less than 22 players.
Eh, I think this is more of a case study on how not to put together a roster with 22 or less players.The perfect case study on why you should never have a roster with less than 22 players.
Eh, I think this is more of a case study on how not to put together a roster with 22 or less players.The perfect case study on why you should never have a roster with less than 22 players.
1) If you're going to spend that much on QB, go Stud + 1.
2) 3 High priced Defenses isn't the greatest idea.
3) Niether is 2 high priced kickers.
This team is out not so much because they went with a 19-man roster, but because of how they decided to break up that 19 man roster (both roster spots and cost).
This team isn't out because it's a small roster, it's out because it's a poorly constructed small roster. IMO if you're going with 18 players, you pretty much have to go 2 QB, 4 RB, 6 WR, 2 TE, 2 K, 2 D. If you want to add a 19th player, you make it a RB/WR/TE, not a QB/K/D.Awesome!!!For those of you using the live scoring for this contest, I've made a few updates.- Added ownership percent to the team view page. - This is a number for teams still in the contest. This will update on Tuesday's after the final cut is announced.- Added a way to see if the team is still alive from the team page- Automated the current cut, this will run at 8:01PM, 12:01AM on Sunday and again after the game on Monday, then one last time when the scores are finalized at 2AM on Monday. I've also added Staff ID's to get an accurate cut line.
I'll be making a donation soon. Thank you so much.Unfortunately, I will join you in this club.I had Ben Tate on my roster for several iterations and decided to go with Marion Barber instead![]()
I'm still holding out hope for some goalline action later.