***Official*** 2012 FBG Subscriber Contest Thread (2 Viewers)

[Ahmad Rashad]

If White scores 160 points this year vs. 177.6 last year, that would be a decline of more than 10%, which is consistent with those studies and my statement.

Too bad you were wrong.

I didn't predict that would happen -- I was quoting you where you were saying he would score at least 160 points, and I was saying that was consistent with my statement that he was past his peak:[QUOTE='CalBear]This is the list of WRs who scored at least 160 fantasy points (White scored 177.6) at age 30, who had had at least 4 1000-yard seasons to that point (White has had 5 in a row).So, how does it look? Of the 14 (excluding Welker), 10 of them scored over 160 points at age 31
[/QUOTE][QUOTE='Ahmad Rashad]I never said, "All-pro WR's who scored at least 160 fantasy points at age 30, who had had at least 4 1000-yard seasons to that point, couldn't score 160 fantasy points at age 31." I said, "Roddy is 31, when most WR's start to decline," to which you replied, "Uh, no."
[/QUOTE]My statement that caused you to attack me was only that most WR's start to decline by age 31. I never predicted anything about 177.6 points, nor do I even know what that means or how many points he's scored under that system this year.Face it -- you came out and said "Uh, no" and "That's not what the odds say" to my statement that most WR's start to decline by 31, yet White's performance has clearly declined this year from his peak, proving my statement to be correct for Roddy as well as the others I cited.Also, you're the one who implied Julio wouldn't score 160 points, which is the closest thing to a wrong prediction we have in this debate:[QUOTE='CalBear]And maybe you should run some stats on how often second-year WRs score 160+ points.
[/QUOTE]I don't know if Julio's scored 160+ points in your system, but if Roddy's scored over 177.6 points, then Julio's definitely scored 160+...I made a statement, you came on and refuted it without anything to back it up, I backed up my statement with studies and numbers, and now it's been proven to also have applied to Roddy this year. Now please leave me alone and stop saying I predicted something that I didn't.

 

[plastik]

Minor comment on the large vs. small roster discussion.

I have one of the remaining 30 player teams and I feel like a major stabilizing factor has been that I was able to carry three kickers and three defenses. On average I've gotten 13.6 ppg and 14 ppg at the two positions. It would be interesting to see what the difference in defensive and kicker scoring is at a larger scale between 18 and 30 man rosters.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Julio's outproduced Roddy in the bigger cut weeks and helped his owners survive at double the rate, and will probably end up outproducing him overall by the end of the contest....He has during the higher cut weeks since their bye, and probably will continue to do so through the playoff weeks now that he has more NFL experience and is getting healthy again. That's another consideration for this contest where the cuts get more and more difficult and the scoring for a young, emerging WR increases as he gets experience and begins to replace the aging vet as the highest producer.

Did you miss this whole part?

Roddy outscored Julio in three of the last four weeks. And yet, in week 9, Roddy outscored Julio but Julio owners survived at a rate about 10% higher than Roddy owners; similarly in week 10, Roddy outscored Julio but Julio owners survived at a rate about 7% higher than Roddy owners. Clearly there's more going on than just "Julio is better than Roddy" because that's not actually the case.

I'm not sure how many ways to say the same thing - Julio owners having double the survival rate as Roddy owners is not because he's outscoring Roddy. Because he hasn't, at least not overall, nor on a consistent weekly basis. Sure, some weeks he has, but Roddy's outscored Julio more often than Julio's outscored Roddy - even in most of the higher cut weeks. And even when Roddy has outscored Julio in those higher cut weeks, Julio owners had a higher weekly survival rate than Roddy owners. That's very curious, considering they play the same position and cost the same exact price, so it really limits the realistic possible explanations.It's an interesting question, how to explain that apparent discrepancy. I know you hitched your wagon to the "Roddy's past his peak, Julio's up and coming" stuff, but that's not at all what this is about, that's something you and CalBear can hash out. Julio may outscore Roddy the rest of the way, it wouldn't surprise me at all and that's not anything I'm interested in. But their relative survival rates to this point don't seem to line up with their actual point production this season. That's the part you seem to keep dancing around.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Julio's outproduced Roddy in the bigger cut weeks and helped his owners survive at double the rate, and will probably end up outproducing him overall by the end of the contest....He has during the higher cut weeks since their bye, and probably will continue to do so through the playoff weeks now that he has more NFL experience and is getting healthy again. That's another consideration for this contest where the cuts get more and more difficult and the scoring for a young, emerging WR increases as he gets experience and begins to replace the aging vet as the highest producer.

Did you miss this whole part?

Roddy outscored Julio in three of the last four weeks. And yet, in week 9, Roddy outscored Julio but Julio owners survived at a rate about 10% higher than Roddy owners; similarly in week 10, Roddy outscored Julio but Julio owners survived at a rate about 7% higher than Roddy owners. Clearly there's more going on than just "Julio is better than Roddy" because that's not actually the case.

I'm not sure how many ways to say the same thing - Julio owners having double the survival rate as Roddy owners is not because he's outscoring Roddy. Because he hasn't, at least not overall, nor on a consistent weekly basis. Sure, some weeks he has, but Roddy's outscored Julio more often than Julio's outscored Roddy - even in most of the higher cut weeks. And even when Roddy has outscored Julio in those higher cut weeks, Julio owners had a higher weekly survival rate than Roddy owners. That's very curious, considering they play the same position and cost the same exact price, so it really limits the realistic possible explanations.It's an interesting question, how to explain that apparent discrepancy. I know you hitched your wagon to the "Roddy's past his peak, Julio's up and coming" stuff, but that's not at all what this is about, that's something you and CalBear can hash out. Julio may outscore Roddy the rest of the way, it wouldn't surprise me at all and that's not anything I'm interested in. But their relative survival rates to this point don't seem to line up with their actual point production this season. That's the part you seem to keep dancing around.

Yes, I did miss that part, which reflects Julio's injury limiting him those weeks, but week 9 Roddy outscoring Julio was 18.8 vs. 18.7, which may not have made a difference for anybody. Week 10's difference is strange, but it's not where the big difference is.The biggest difference is last week, when half the teams were cut (and again this week). Only 29.63% of Roddy owners survived, while 72.17% of Julio owners survived, which dwarfs any other week's differences. Julio outscored Roddy by 16 points in the biggest week for cuts %-wise by far. The % that are cut for the week is more important than how high the cut line is, though last week did have the highest cut line, too. Roddy only outscored Julio by that much in 2 weeks, in weeks 2 and 4, when over 82% of teams survived, so those 51.6 extra points early on weren't worth anywhere near as much for survival as Julio's 16 extra points last week, and were actually worthless above-the-line points for many teams. So it's not just how many points are scored overall, but when they're scored. Even though in those 3 weeks Roddy outscored Julio by 35.6 points, Julio's points were far more valuable for survival, and a far higher % of Julio owners survived those 3 weeks than Roddy owners.It is relevant that Julio's scoring has increased relative to Roddy's late in the season, as this week and last week half the teams are cut each week rather than only 17%, making these weeks almost 3 times more important in surviving to the finals than the early ones. The 16 extra points from Julio last week made all the difference for lots of teams. When 75% of teams are cut in 2 weeks, that's when you want your guy to outscore the other guy, which Julio has done handily over Roddy.If you can get a younger guy who takes over the lead role from an older guy as you get later in the season, that younger guy is much more valuable in this contest when he scores much more than the older guy in the 50% cut weeks (even when he scores around the same number of points overall, or slightly fewer), as Julio has.

 

[sooted72]

Do you guys think that anything useful can come out of looking at survival rates of individual players? Seems to me that much like RBIs in baseball while it does measure performance in some ways it's also pretty teammate dependent too.

 

[kardplayer]

Do you guys think that anything useful can come out of looking at survival rates of individual players? Seems to me that much like RBIs in baseball while it does measure performance in some ways it's also pretty teammate dependent too.

The really interesting analysis would be which players are difference makers in getting over the cutline each week. No idea how that would be done on a broad level, but would need to seea) how often teams with a particular player wouldn't have made the cutline if that player had gotten a zero (call this the SRIPI - Survival Rate If Player Injured)b) how often teams with a particular player would/wouldn't have made the cutline if a player that cost the same amount (or close) had been selected instead (VORPOSP - Value Over Replacement Player Of Same Price)

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Do you guys think that anything useful can come out of looking at survival rates of individual players? Seems to me that much like RBIs in baseball while it does measure performance in some ways it's also pretty teammate dependent too.

The really interesting analysis would be which players are difference makers in getting over the cutline each week. No idea how that would be done on a broad level, but would need to seea) how often teams with a particular player wouldn't have made the cutline if that player had gotten a zero (call this the SRIPI - Survival Rate If Player Injured)b) how often teams with a particular player would/wouldn't have made the cutline if a player that cost the same amount (or close) had been selected instead (VORPOSP - Value Over Replacement Player Of Same Price)

I've done (a) and halfheartedly attempted (b) in previous years I think. After week 13 is over I'll see if I can do it for this season.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Roddy outscoring Julio was 18.8 vs. 18.7, which may not have made a difference for anybody.

Right, it shouldn't have really made a difference to replace a $23 WR who scored 18.8 with a $23 WR who scored 18.7 points. But there was a significant difference in their survival rates that week, indicating that their relative survival rates are not entirely driven by their relative point production.

Week 10's difference is strange, but it's not where the big difference is.

Yes it is - that's the point I'm trying to get across that you seem to be missing or avoiding. Every other week, the player that scores more points also has a higher survival rate - exactly as we'd expect things to happen, right? But not in weeks 9 or 10. Roddy White owners had literally outsurvived Julio Jones owners all season long to that point. But then in week 9, even though Roddy White outscored Julio Jones once again*, Julio Jones owners - for the first time all year - took the lead in survival rate over Roddy White owners. Then in week 10, Roddy White outscored Julio Jones again, yet Julio Jones widened his survival lead over Roddy White even further.(* - Yes, I know he only outscored him by a tenth of a point in week 9. But it's still more points. It would be one thing to bring that up to argue that Roddy's survival rate shouldn't have been much greater than Julio's that week. But it's not relevant when discussing why Roddy's survival rate was markedly lower than Julio's that week. More points - even just 0.10 - shouldn't lead to lower survival.)

Of course Julio Jones owners did way better than Roddy White owners in week 12. That's because Julio Jones scored way more than Roddy White. Just like Roddy White owners did way better than Julio Jones owners in week 11, because Roddy White scored way more than Julio Jones. None of that addresses what I'm bringing up here. Besides, your notion that the late cut weeks are more important to the season-long numbers because there's a higher cut percentage is a bit misguided in this context. Yes, in week 12 the elimination rate was 50% - the highest one all year - but that's 50% of the people who were left. Going into week 12, 93-94% of Jones and White owners had already been eliminated. So saying it's the highest elimination week is somewhat of a misnomer in this context, because there were relatively few teams left with either of those players at that point anyway. It's like saying 50% off of a $10 item is saving more money than 20% off a $100 item.

There's an interesting phenomenon here where a player who scored more points, for two consecutive weeks, actually survived at a lower rate. We would probably never guess that would happen. If it did happen, most of the time we could come up with a bunch of different plausible explanations: "This WR cost more than the other WR, so his owners had less money to spend at other positions," "This guy's a RB, where his relative competition to contribute to the cutline was lower than it is at WR," etc. But we lucked into a perfect scenario where these two players play the same exact position, had the same exact bye week, and cost the same exact amount of money. We couldn't ask for a better setup to test the hypothesis "relative survival rates are directly tied to relative point production," and the results here show us that it's not necessarily true. For two consecutive weeks, Roddy White outscored Julio Jones and yet his owners survived at a lower rate in those weeks. None of the stuff you've offered in response so far - he didn't outscore him by that much, Julio's younger and getting relatively better as the season goes on, etc. - really addresses that point.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Roddy outscoring Julio was 18.8 vs. 18.7, which may not have made a difference for anybody.

Right, it shouldn't have really made a difference to replace a $23 WR who scored 18.8 with a $23 WR who scored 18.7 points. But there was a significant difference in their survival rates that week, indicating that their relative survival rates are not entirely driven by their relative point production.

Week 10's difference is strange, but it's not where the big difference is.

Yes it is - that's the point I'm trying to get across that you seem to be missing or avoiding. Every other week, the player that scores more points also has a higher survival rate - exactly as we'd expect things to happen, right? But not in weeks 9 or 10. Roddy White owners had literally outsurvived Julio Jones owners all season long to that point. But then in week 9, even though Roddy White outscored Julio Jones once again*, Julio Jones owners - for the first time all year - took the lead in survival rate over Roddy White owners. Then in week 10, Roddy White outscored Julio Jones again, yet Julio Jones widened his survival lead over Roddy White even further.(* - Yes, I know he only outscored him by a tenth of a point in week 9. But it's still more points. It would be one thing to bring that up to argue that Roddy's survival rate shouldn't have been much greater than Julio's that week. But it's not relevant when discussing why Roddy's survival rate was markedly lower than Julio's that week. More points - even just 0.10 - shouldn't lead to lower survival.)

Of course Julio Jones owners did way better than Roddy White owners in week 12. That's because Julio Jones scored way more than Roddy White. Just like Roddy White owners did way better than Julio Jones owners in week 11, because Roddy White scored way more than Julio Jones. None of that addresses what I'm bringing up here. Besides, your notion that the late cut weeks are more important to the season-long numbers because there's a higher cut percentage is a bit misguided in this context. Yes, in week 12 the elimination rate was 50% - the highest one all year - but that's 50% of the people who were left. Going into week 12, 93-94% of Jones and White owners had already been eliminated. So saying it's the highest elimination week is somewhat of a misnomer in this context, because there were relatively few teams left with either of those players at that point anyway. It's like saying 50% off of a $10 item is saving more money than 20% off a $100 item.

There's an interesting phenomenon here where a player who scored more points, for two consecutive weeks, actually survived at a lower rate. We would probably never guess that would happen. If it did happen, most of the time we could come up with a bunch of different plausible explanations: "This WR cost more than the other WR, so his owners had less money to spend at other positions," "This guy's a RB, where his relative competition to contribute to the cutline was lower than it is at WR," etc. But we lucked into a perfect scenario where these two players play the same exact position, had the same exact bye week, and cost the same exact amount of money. We couldn't ask for a better setup to test the hypothesis "relative survival rates are directly tied to relative point production," and the results here show us that it's not necessarily true. For two consecutive weeks, Roddy White outscored Julio Jones and yet his owners survived at a lower rate in those weeks. None of the stuff you've offered in response so far - he didn't outscore him by that much, Julio's younger and getting relatively better as the season goes on, etc. - really addresses that point.

I don't know the answer to why Julio owners survived weeks 9 and 10 more than Roddy owners, other than the fact that the rest of their rosters obviously did better those weeks. However, Roddy only outscored Julio by 3.5 points/week those 2 weeks, and Julio's teams only out-survived Roddy's by 74-67 and 69-64% those weeks, with both of them surviving less than average both weeks. I chalk it up to margin of error -- it's not a truism that every week that player A outscores player B at the same price and same position, player A's teams will always out-survive player B's. There will be some relatively small discrepancies like these when the point differences aren't huge.But as I said, that's not where the big difference in survival rates for Julio vs. Roddy is.

Besides, your notion that the late cut weeks are more important to the season-long numbers because there's a higher cut percentage is a bit misguided in this context. Yes, in week 12 the elimination rate was 50% - the highest one all year - but that's 50% of the people who were left. Going into week 12, 93-94% of Jones and White owners had already been eliminated. So saying it's the highest elimination week is somewhat of a misnomer in this context, because there were relatively few teams left with either of those players at that point anyway. It's like saying 50% off of a $10 item is saving more money than 20% off a $100 item.

Here's where I completely disagree. In order to survive to the finals, you have to make it through all 12 elimination weeks. Of course there will be fewer teams eliminated in the late cut weeks because most have already been eliminated, but the fact remains that to make it to the finals you have to make it through those weeks. If you want to make the finals, weeks 12 and 13, when Julio outscored Roddy, are far more important than weeks 2 and 4, where Roddy far outscored Julio. Obviously, the biggest difference by far in their survival rates to date is from week 12, when only 29.63% of Roddy owners survived, while 72.17% of Julio owners survived. Before that week, Roddy's teams had survived at a higher rate despite weeks 9 and 10 you keep harping on. Now, after week 12, Julio's teams have survived at more than double the rate of Roddy's teams because of the big elimination difference in week 12 It doesn't matter if a bigger number of Julio owners were eliminated in weeks 2 and 4 -- for the survival rate to date, it's more important to have survived all 12 weeks, which required surviving week 12. If you can't understand that, I give up.

It has nothing to do with buying a $10 item vs. a $100 item. Every finalist has to survive the big 50% cuts in weeks 12 and 13, and Julio's outscoring Roddy handily those weeks is far more important to making it to the finals than Roddy outscoring Julio in weeks 2 and 4. If your goal is to make it through week 4, than Roddy's more valuable, but the goal of this contest is to make the finals and then score highest there, and Julio's clearly been better for making the finals because of his outscoring Roddy in the last 2 weeks.

 

[CalBear]

There's an interesting phenomenon here where a player who scored more points, for two consecutive weeks, actually survived at a lower rate. We would probably never guess that would happen. If it did happen, most of the time we could come up with a bunch of different plausible explanations: "This WR cost more than the other WR, so his owners had less money to spend at other positions," "This guy's a RB, where his relative competition to contribute to the cutline was lower than it is at WR," etc. But we lucked into a perfect scenario where these two players play the same exact position, had the same exact bye week, and cost the same exact amount of money. We couldn't ask for a better setup to test the hypothesis "relative survival rates are directly tied to relative point production," and the results here show us that it's not necessarily true. For two consecutive weeks, Roddy White outscored Julio Jones and yet his owners survived at a lower rate in those weeks.

It's very likely just statistical noise; at this point our sample sizes are very small.

 

[Maelstrom]

It has nothing to do with buying a $10 item vs. a $100 item. Every finalist has to survive the big 50% cuts in weeks 12 and 13, and Julio's outscoring Roddy handily those weeks is far more important to making it to the finals than Roddy outscoring Julio in weeks 2 and 4. If your goal is to make it through week 4, than Roddy's more valuable, but the goal of this contest is to make the finals and then score highest there, and Julio's clearly been better for making the finals because of his outscoring Roddy in the last 2 weeks.

I'm no statistical genius, but I do know this. You cannot make an argument, after the fact, like you are making because of 1 week of scores. Maybe after the entire season is over, you can look at both players for the entire season, and figure out which would have been better on any given team. But the argument you are making, that there is some upside in weeks 12 and 13 that should have led you to pick Julio before week 1, and that the scoring for Week 12 proves this out...well, that is just nonsense and trying to bend statistics to suit your illogical argument. Besides, I'm more interested in how roster size affects chances to win or survive and that discussion than this one over two receivers neither of whom appear to have been the differences makers on their team.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

It has nothing to do with buying a $10 item vs. a $100 item. Every finalist has to survive the big 50% cuts in weeks 12 and 13, and Julio's outscoring Roddy handily those weeks is far more important to making it to the finals than Roddy outscoring Julio in weeks 2 and 4. If your goal is to make it through week 4, than Roddy's more valuable, but the goal of this contest is to make the finals and then score highest there, and Julio's clearly been better for making the finals because of his outscoring Roddy in the last 2 weeks.

I'm no statistical genius, but I do know this. You cannot make an argument, after the fact, like you are making because of 1 week of scores. Maybe after the entire season is over, you can look at both players for the entire season, and figure out which would have been better on any given team. But the argument you are making, that there is some upside in weeks 12 and 13 that should have led you to pick Julio before week 1, and that the scoring for Week 12 proves this out...well, that is just nonsense and trying to bend statistics to suit your illogical argument. Besides, I'm more interested in how roster size affects chances to win or survive and that discussion than this one over two receivers neither of whom appear to have been the differences makers on their team.

My argument against taking Roddy before the season started was that he was turning 31, and that's when most WR's start to decline in performance. I wasn't arguing that Julio would be better, but another poster was implying that he wouldn't score 160 points, whatever that means.Roddy actually just turned 31 on November 2, so he was still 30 in the earlier part of the season when he was outscoring Julio. Despite being limited by injury, Julio's outscored Roddy since he turned 31. It's not that the 31st birthday is magical or anything, but history shows that top WR's decline in fantasy production after 31.In this contest, it's much more important for surviving to the finals to score higher in the 50% cut weeks in weeks 12 and 13 than in the lower-cut early weeks, so in a situation where you have an aging vet turning 31 mid-season, as Roddy was, vs. an emerging 2nd-year star like Julio, who's taking over the lead role, it's better to take the young star, who's more likely to produce better later in the season vs. earlier in the season as he gets more experience and as the vet passes the 31-year mark.It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

 

[CalBear]

It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

So if Roddy White outscores Julio Jones next week, will you admit you were wrong?

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

So if Roddy White outscores Julio Jones next week, will you admit you were wrong?

Wrong about what? My statement was that Roddy's fantasy production was likely to decline after he turns 31, as it has. If Roddy has a personal best in fantasy production this year or any future year I'll admit I was wrong about him. Why would Roddy outscoring Julio next week change that?If Roddy ends up being better in this contest for owners than Julio, then I'll admit I was wrong to warn about Roddy, but the elimination weeks are over for them, and Julio's clearly been better for his owners surviving to the finals.If a Roddy owner ends up winning it all and wouldn't if he had Julio instead, I'll admit I was wrong to warn about Roddy.[QUOTE='CalBear]And maybe you should run some stats on how often second-year WRs score 160+ points.
[/QUOTE]You're the one that didn't think Julio would score 160 points in your system. Now that he has (or when he does), will you admit you were wrong?

 

[Maelstrom]

It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

So if Roddy White outscores Julio Jones next week, will you admit you were wrong?

Wrong about what? My statement was that Roddy's fantasy production was likely to decline after he turns 31, as it has. If Roddy has a personal best in fantasy production this year or any future year I'll admit I was wrong about him. Why would Roddy outscoring Julio next week change that?If Roddy ends up being better in this contest for owners than Julio, then I'll admit I was wrong to warn about Roddy, but the elimination weeks are over for them, and Julio's clearly been better for his owners surviving to the finals.

If a Roddy owner ends up winning it all and wouldn't if he had Julio instead, I'll admit I was wrong to warn about Roddy.

[QUOTE='CalBear]And maybe you should run some stats on how often second-year WRs score 160+ points.

You're the one that didn't think Julio would score 160 points in your system. Now that he has (or when he does), will you admit you were wrong?[/QUOTE]You cannot make that statement (see bolded) based on the evidence we have, and you can't JUST make that statement based on 1 week alone. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your argument - we all fully understand what you are trying to say. I just happen to disagree that you can draw ANY conclusion like the one you are drawing, and furthermore, feel that you are claiming it ONLY to be able to say you were right to warn about Roddy. Bad reason to make a strong stance. The argument doesn't hold water, at best it's been a wash which one has been better over the season, and you can't make the conclusion you are making off of 1 week.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Julio's clearly been better for his owners surviving to the finals.

You cannot make that statement (see bolded) based on the evidence we have, and you can't JUST make that statement based on 1 week alone. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat your argument - we all fully understand what you are trying to say. I just happen to disagree that you can draw ANY conclusion like the one you are drawing, and furthermore, feel that you are claiming it ONLY to be able to say you were right to warn about Roddy. Bad reason to make a strong stance. The argument doesn't hold water, at best it's been a wash which one has been better over the season, and you can't make the conclusion you are making off of 1 week.

Okay, the elimination weeks are over for Julio and Roddy, and before this week, Julio's owners have out-survived Roddy's owners by better than 2 to 1, and then this week, Julio outscored Roddy. How's that a wash at best which one's been better for surviving to the finals? If I can't make the statement that Julio's been better for his owners surviving to the finals yet, when can I? After the rest of each guy's teams have played this week? I guess there's some possibility that after the scores for all the other players are counted this week, Roddy's owners' survival rate will overcome that 2 to 1 deficit despite Roddy scoring only 3 points. But once the elimination weeks are over for everyone, and Julio's owner's have survived to the finals at a much higher rate than Roddy's owners, wouldn't it be fair to say that Julio's clearly been better for his owners surviving to the finals? I must be missing something...

It's not a conclusion made off of 1 week, it's off of the first 13 weeks, with 2 of those weeks counting far more than the early weeks. The way the contest works, these 2 weeks are far more important than the early weeks for surviving to the finals, as 75% of the remaining teams are eliminated over these 2 weeks. A higher % of survivors get eliminated in these 2 weeks than the first 7 weeks combined, so to survive to the finals you really need guys who produce in these weeks.

Teams with Roddy, before this week with his 3 points, have survived at just over half the rate of the rest of the teams. That's far worse than any roster size difference, so a warning about selecting him for this contest seems to have been warranted.

 

[sooted72]

I'm not exactly sure how the statement [paraphrasing] "Roddy White is likely to decline this season as he's turning 31" has generated so much controversy. Call me crazy, but it seems like a pretty reasonable preseason prediction.

 

[Maelstrom]

I'm not exactly sure how the statement [paraphrasing] "Roddy White is likely to decline this season as he's turning 31" has generated so much controversy. Call me crazy, but it seems like a pretty reasonable preseason prediction.

I don't think anyone is worried about that statement. Saying that that has been THE significant difference in survivability is the controversial issue. In the end, it may well be that Roddy was the worse choice. But I think it is silly (based on the evidence given) to claim that the choice between those 2 WRs is a significant difference in survivability without considering the rest of the rosters in question.

 

[kardplayer]

Do you guys think that anything useful can come out of looking at survival rates of individual players? Seems to me that much like RBIs in baseball while it does measure performance in some ways it's also pretty teammate dependent too.

The really interesting analysis would be which players are difference makers in getting over the cutline each week. No idea how that would be done on a broad level, but would need to seea) how often teams with a particular player wouldn't have made the cutline if that player had gotten a zero (call this the SRIPI - Survival Rate If Player Injured)b) how often teams with a particular player would/wouldn't have made the cutline if a player that cost the same amount (or close) had been selected instead (VORPOSP - Value Over Replacement Player Of Same Price)

I've done (a) and halfheartedly attempted (b) in previous years I think. After week 13 is over I'll see if I can do it for this season.

Knew I could count on you

 

[CalBear]

It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

So if Roddy White outscores Julio Jones next week, will you admit you were wrong?

Wrong about what? My statement was that Roddy's fantasy production was likely to decline after he turns 31, as it has.

Yeah, uh, except for the fact that he's on pace to score just about as many points as he did last year. In what world is that declining?

If Roddy has a personal best in fantasy production this year or any future year I'll admit I was wrong about him. Why would Roddy outscoring Julio next week change that?

What if he has a personal best in yardage production but not TDs? Would you say that's a decline?

You're the one that didn't think Julio would score 160 points in your system. Now that he has (or when he does), will you admit you were wrong?

I didn't say Julio wouldn't score 160 points. I said there was no particular reason to believe that he would outscore Roddy White, which he hasn't. And I pointed out that your conclusion that Jones was a better bet did not follow from your "analysis," because if you analyze the entirety of second-year WRs, they do a lot worse than 31-year-old WRs who are starters on their teams.You made a guess and then tried to justify it after the fact. You're still doing it.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

It's not just 1 week of scores. Julio's outscored Roddy over these 2 critical high-cut weeks, 12 and 13, and will likely do so during the playoffs, too, and he's outscored him during the second half of the season since Roddy turned 31. The trend of the younger WR overtaking the older WR in the latter part of the season is what was predictable and can help in roster selection.

So if Roddy White outscores Julio Jones next week, will you admit you were wrong?

Wrong about what? My statement was that Roddy's fantasy production was likely to decline after he turns 31, as it has.

Yeah, uh, except for the fact that he's on pace to score just about as many points as he did last year. In what world is that declining?

Roddy's peak was 2 years ago, at the age of 29. He already started declining in production last year, and is continuing that decline, especially after he turned 31 midseason.

If Roddy has a personal best in fantasy production this year or any future year I'll admit I was wrong about him. Why would Roddy outscoring Julio next week change that?

What if he has a personal best in yardage production but not TDs? Would you say that's a decline?

Yes, if it's a decline in fantasy production, which is what's relevant for this contest.

You're the one that didn't think Julio would score 160 points in your system. Now that he has (or when he does), will you admit you were wrong?

I didn't say Julio wouldn't score 160 points. I said there was no particular reason to believe that he would outscore Roddy White, which he hasn't. And I pointed out that your conclusion that Jones was a better bet did not follow from your "analysis," because if you analyze the entirety of second-year WRs, they do a lot worse than 31-year-old WRs who are starters on their teams.You made a guess and then tried to justify it after the fact. You're still doing it.

I made a statement that you refuted, and I backed it up with studies and numbers before the fact back in early September, and now it's proving to be true for Roddy as well as the others I cited.

 

[CalBear]

Roddy's peak was 2 years ago, at the age of 29. He already started declining in production last year, and is continuing that decline, especially after he turned 31 midseason.

If he scores the same number of points (or more) as last year, how is he declining?

What if he has a personal best in yardage production but not TDs? Would you say that's a decline?

Yes, if it's a decline in fantasy production, which is what's relevant for this contest.

So if he scores more, than he's not declining, right?

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Roddy's peak was 2 years ago, at the age of 29. He already started declining in production last year, and is continuing that decline, especially after he turned 31 midseason.

If he scores the same number of points (or more) as last year, how is he declining?

He's still on the decline from his peak year, and his production has declined this season after he turned 31.

What if he has a personal best in yardage production but not TDs? Would you say that's a decline?

Yes, if it's a decline in fantasy production, which is what's relevant for this contest.

So if he scores more, than he's not declining, right?

Yes, if he scores more fantasy points than his personal best, then he's not declining, and I'll admit I was wrong about Roddy.

 

[CalBear]

Yes, if he scores more fantasy points than his personal best, then he's not declining, and I'll admit I was wrong about Roddy.

So you think it's only worth taking a player if he scores better than his personal best?

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Yes, if he scores more fantasy points than his personal best, then he's not declining, and I'll admit I was wrong about Roddy.

So you think it's only worth taking a player if he scores better than his personal best?

If his upside is limited to below his peak, and he's priced for his peak production, or close to it, then I won't want to take that player in a contest like this. For that price, I'd rather take players with more upside, with the potential to far outproduce expectations if everything goes well, especially as they get more NFL experience later in the season. That's partially why I chose guys like Julio, Doug Martin, and Brandon Marshall. They may not produce their personal best (besides rookie Martin), but they aren't limited by it, so have the potential to explode and help me get to the finals and do well there. Doug Martin's explosion in recent weeks has definitely helped me to survive -- as a rookie RB, his upside was unknown, and his $21 price was attractive for a potential top RB.

 

[CalBear]

Yes, if he scores more fantasy points than his personal best, then he's not declining, and I'll admit I was wrong about Roddy.

So you think it's only worth taking a player if he scores better than his personal best?

If his upside is limited to below his peak, and he's priced for his peak production, or close to it, then I won't want to take that player in a contest like this.

But White wasn't priced for his peak production. He was priced for the same production as Julio Jones, a second-year WR who hadn't proven anything. And that's what he's produced.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Yes, if he scores more fantasy points than his personal best, then he's not declining, and I'll admit I was wrong about Roddy.

So you think it's only worth taking a player if he scores better than his personal best?

If his upside is limited to below his peak, and he's priced for his peak production, or close to it, then I won't want to take that player in a contest like this.

But White wasn't priced for his peak production. He was priced for the same production as Julio Jones, a second-year WR who hadn't proven anything. And that's what he's produced.

Julio was the #3 WR by preseason rankings here, and White was priced the same. Julio has thus far underproduced vs. expectations, partially because of his injury the last few weeks, but the season's not over yet. Julio definitely proved his value last week, helping his owners survive the 50% cut at a 72.17% rate. However, although he scored more than triple White's score this week, it was a subpar performance by Julio, too, and that could eliminate a lot of his owners, myself included.

 

[rustycolts]

Any guesstimates on what we will need to score today to make the final 250?Last year it was 164.55 think it could be that low again?

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Any guesstimates on what we will need to score today to make the final 250?Last year it was 164.55 think it could be that low again?

With the relatively low fantasy production from the commonly owned players in the Atl-NO game on Thursday, I think it definitely could be that low again, or even lower if the commonly owned players today and tomorrow also have low fantasy production. The most-owned QB and the most-owned TE both had subpar performances, which by itself may lower the cut line quite a bit from where it would have been if they had huge games. After my players on Thursday under-produced, I'm hoping for a relatively low cut line.

 

[Alberta Clipper]

good luck to everyone today in the final push for top 250

fingers crossed

 

[rustycolts]

My most important players today are going to be Rodgers,Chris Johnson,Boldin,and Shorts.If those four can have outstanding games then I might have a fighting chance.

 

[sooted72]

Can somebody quickly list a few of the most owned players at each position still left? Is there an easy place to access this information?

 

[rustycolts]

Can somebody quickly list a few of the most owned players at each position still left? Is there an easy place to access this information?

quierer post #1.Ryan was owned by 197 teams.

 

[HALtheCOW]

No Andre Roberts and no Amendola. Ryan didn't help me on Thursday. I would need a huge day out of Stafford to even have a chance. But I have loved this contest. Thanks to FBG for putting it on and so many of you have have provide such great analysis and great info that has allowed us all to enjoy this contest even more.

Now you can return to the Jones/White discussion. I am sorry that I interrupted.

 

[sooted72]

Can somebody quickly list a few of the most owned players at each position still left? Is there an easy place to access this information?

quierer post #1.Ryan was owned by 197 teams.

I've seen the querier, but I'm not sure how it would allow me to come up with a quick list of most owned players at each position.

 

[rustycolts]

Can somebody quickly list a few of the most owned players at each position still left? Is there an easy place to access this information?

quierer post #1.Ryan was owned by 197 teams.

I've seen the querier, but I'm not sure how it would allow me to come up with a quick list of most owned players at each position.

I guess its not quick but I just select one player and see how many teams are still alive that own him.Of course I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed so I'm sure there is another way to do it.

 

[pizzatyme]

The Roddy/Julio talk has killed this thread for me. Can we please get back on track?

 

[rustycolts]

The Roddy/Julio talk has killed this thread for me. Can we please get back on track?

I don't know I kind of enjoy reading those types of discussions you use to be able to read them in some threads in the Shark Pool not so much anymore.

 

[pizzatyme]

The Roddy/Julio talk has killed this thread for me. Can we please get back on track?

I don't know I kind of enjoy reading those types of discussions you use to be able to read them in some threads in the Shark Pool not so much anymore.

It is pointless. We're discussing a difference of 5 points YTD. And then a he said/he said.

 

[sooted72]

LESTAR JEAN!!!

 

[chocula]

Any chance 120 points will make the top 250 today? This is my last week for sure... My team is falling flat today.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Any chance 120 points will make the top 250 today? This is my last week for sure... My team is falling flat today.

I think a lot of teams are falling flat today, but I doubt 120 points makes it. I wouldn't be surprised if the cut line is lower than last week and last years' week 13, but I still think it will be over 150 anyway. My completely wild guess would be somewhere in the 160 area.

 

[chocula]

It looks like FFTools is not picking up the Thursday night game...

 

[sooted72]

Sick 1st 15 minutes for me today with olsen, jean, james jones making me think I might coast to the final 250. Then they do nothing the rest of the game. Fail.

 

[Chainz]

Need some big games out of RG3, A.J. Green, one of my tight ends (Gates or Bennett) and the Ravens D# to have a fair chance.

Currently sitting at 112.1 (without the guys from the Thursday game, so maybe 120-125 at the moment)

 

[Qtip Callahan]

At 192.. Luck, Marshall, AP - good trio..

 

[Maelstrom]

At 192.. Luck, Marshall, AP - good trio..

And CJohnson? Nice quad.

 

[rustycolts]

At 165.70 with Boldin (-8.7)and Barth and Prater (-12.00) to go.I may be able to get a couple more out of Boldin.Man I hope cutline is real low got a feeling this is going to be really close.

 

[Qtip Callahan]

At 192.. Luck, Marshall, AP - good trio..

And CJohnson? Nice quad.

I wish! Have Foster for my quad, but he wasn't too hot today..

 

[Maelstrom]

At 192.. Luck, Marshall, AP - good trio..

And CJohnson? Nice quad.

I wish! Have Foster for my quad, but he wasn't too hot today..

Ah...too bad - I found a squad with 192 (when you posted that) and figured that was you.