Official Subscriber Contest (2 Viewers)

[Bankerguy]

I survived a crappy QB score to post 151+ Celek tonight.

 

[apalmer]

My theoretical cold-hard-numbers driven would still be alive, even getting just 2.45 from S Hill at the QB spot. My real entry once again proved that I really wish there had been less than 12,000 entries. Thus concludes QG's post of the week.Good luck to the lucky 4000!-QG

Still in the club with 170+ this week.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I might have the worst team still alive.

This will be the first time all season I have been in the top 4000

 

[gianmarco]

Squeaked by with 143. I'll take it.

 

[Go Pack]

Sitting at 121.8 with Westbrook/ McCoy left and 3.6 & 3.7 at thost 2 spots currently. Could be a nail biter. Would be a good night for Westbrook to show up for me. Finley getting hurt early on Carlson's bye week was unfortunate. Other than that my lineup was just thin due to byes/injuries.

 

[Phil Elliott]

At 162 with no one tonight. Done with bye weeks except for a couple of minor players. Leon Washington was my third RB so his 5-10 points a week might force me out a week or two early.

 

[jon_mx]

I might have the worst team still alive.This will be the first time all season I have been in the top 4000

In this contest, being alive is the most important part. I am liking my team. My studs are all performing solidly, and a few of my flyers are starting to look good. The only thing is my backup QB is probably going to be benched, but Rivers should put up good points every week.139.00 160.70 153.75 165.90 113.30 252.80 172.60

 

[CalBear]

Looks like I'm out, 126 and done. I'd have had a chance if E.Manning had driven for a score instead of throwing a pick on the last drive. But fundamentally, I was done in by poor production from my RB corps led by Tomlinson, Lynch, and L.Johnson.

 

[Volleydog]

179.5 with Celek and DeSean (-4.7 to Flex) left.

Suddenly feeling less good overall though, as Leon joins Laurent Robinson & James Davis on the scrap heap while Tashard Choice registers 1 touch.

 

[thehornet]

Is the "average score" on Drinen's Sim your current score for the week?

 

[tomarken]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

 

[ctriopelle]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

On an individual team, TFS scoring can be significantly off (well, up to a couple of points) depending on the cause, although I have seen this more before I proactively hunted out DEF scoring issues (often have conflicts with how fumbles/sacks score between the services). This usually does not impact our estimated cut a lot since so few teams near the cut end up being effected. If a player has a significant stat change (like wrong player getting credit for a catch when we pull the stats which has happened a couple of times), this can also effect an individual team quite a bit. I'd guess that there is a player on one or both of these teams that has a change like this, and possibly one team has a player losing a catch and the other team having the player that picked it up.

 

[drm1125]

I survived the week with 152.10, nobody left to play on Monday. My most surprising week so far since the sim had me at only 38% of advancing. I wonder how many other teams were suppossed to be out this week but survived?

 

[Colts Win]

99.65 with Portis left. not liking my chances.

 

[proninja]

Looks like I'm still alive, but I'm going to need a minor miracle to survive next week. I've got a ton of players on bye next week, and I planned it that way originally - I got the guys I liked, and thought I'd roll the dice with week 8 - but what I didn't realize is that in week 8 I'm going against better teams than I am in week 1, and I also didn't take injuries into account. I've lost Washington, Robinson, and Davis so far. My byes next week:

Brady

Moss

Ocho

Henry

Winslow

Leaving me

Flacco

Rice

Felix Jones

Bradshaw

Edge

Chris Brown

Colston

Schilens

Bess

Cribbs

Finley

Hauschka

Feeley

NO

GB

AZ

I remember looking at Baltimore's week 8 game in the preseason thinking "great, they've got Denver, they're going against a crappy defense."

I'm looking forward to the week 8 SIM to see what it says based on projections.

 

[Barry Jive and The Uptown Five]

Is the "average score" on Drinen's Sim your current score for the week?

Without knowing for sure, the average is the average of 1000 Simulator runs, adding results from Monday night.The Minimum column is likely your "current", pre-MNF score. That assumes all your active players scored zero in at least one iteration of the MNF simulations.

 

[Fennis]

Pre-MNF sim

21.6% survival chance? Last week going into MNF I was at 3.9% and made it. 21.6% should be cake.

 

[PatsChowder]

I'm with ya... without Brady, FWP, Cooley, and Suisham (also duds S. Morris and Engram) I'm sitting with this roster:

QB

Mark Sanchez

RB

Thomas Jones

Ryan Grant

Ahmad Bradshaw

WR

Roddy White

Greg Jennings

Derrick Mason

Nate Burleson

Patrick Crayton

Davone Bess

Kenny Britt

TE

Owen Daniels

K

Steve Hauschka

DEF

Green Bay

Arizona

If Sanchez can get my 15 points, and I can get one game big game from my cheap-o wide receivers I think I can squeak by.

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm at 120 with Westbrook and McCoy (-0.6 and/or 3.7) to go. Lost a second RB yesterday (Washington, along with James Davis earlier) and am down to Westbrook, McCoy, FWP, Bradshaw, and Glen Coffee. Pretty sure I'm toast very soon even if I make it through this week.

 

[ctriopelle]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

On an individual team, TFS scoring can be significantly off (well, up to a couple of points) depending on the cause, although I have seen this more before I proactively hunted out DEF scoring issues (often have conflicts with how fumbles/sacks score between the services). This usually does not impact our estimated cut a lot since so few teams near the cut end up being effected. If a player has a significant stat change (like wrong player getting credit for a catch when we pull the stats which has happened a couple of times), this can also effect an individual team quite a bit. I'd guess that there is a player on one or both of these teams that has a change like this, and possibly one team has a player losing a catch and the other team having the player that picked it up.

Found the issue after doing some digging. Our stats had Camarillo at 13.3, but he really should be at 10.5 (-2.8). Probably miscredit of a reception but it doesn't look like there's an offset stat to anyone else in the contest. This brought down team 108443 by 2.8 points, making their exact total (134.65) somewhat less than 102162's 135.45. At least that's one stat fix that I will have in place prior to game time.

 

[tomarken]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

On an individual team, TFS scoring can be significantly off (well, up to a couple of points) depending on the cause, although I have seen this more before I proactively hunted out DEF scoring issues (often have conflicts with how fumbles/sacks score between the services). This usually does not impact our estimated cut a lot since so few teams near the cut end up being effected. If a player has a significant stat change (like wrong player getting credit for a catch when we pull the stats which has happened a couple of times), this can also effect an individual team quite a bit. I'd guess that there is a player on one or both of these teams that has a change like this, and possibly one team has a player losing a catch and the other team having the player that picked it up.

Found the issue after doing some digging. Our stats had Camarillo at 13.3, but he really should be at 10.5 (-2.8). Probably miscredit of a reception but it doesn't look like there's an offset stat to anyone else in the contest. This brought down team 108443 by 2.8 points, making their exact total (134.65) somewhat less than 102162's 135.45. At least that's one stat fix that I will have in place prior to game time.

I think I speak for everyone when I say thanks for all the work you and OC put into this.

 

[Deuceman]

Just when I thought this week would be my last because of the boneheaded move of picking Ray Rice and K Smith on the same bye, Beanie and Shonn Greene come thru.

BTW, here's my team.

QB - Matt Ryan - 19

QB - Joe Flacco - 14

RB - Kevin Smith - 30

RB - Ray Rice - 21

RB - Chris Wells - 15

RB - Bernard Scott - 2

RB - Shonn Greene - 2

RB - James Davis - 2

WR - Roddy White - 33

WR - Chad Ochocinco - 27

WR - Vincent Jackson - 21

WR - Earl Bennett - 11

WR - Derrick Mason - 9

WR - Percy Harvin - 5

TE - Greg Olsen - 15

TE - Dustin Keller - 12

PK - Mason Crosby - 4

PK - Jay Feely - 1

TD - Chicago Bears - 5

TD - Houston Texans - 2

 

[jon_mx]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

That works out because there were probably 9 runs out of 1000 that the cutoff line got pushed above 137.35 points. In those runs the defense did not score many points (less than 6), so he was stuck at 137.35. But also in those 9 runs your offensive player scored points pushing your score above 137.35. For you to lose, there would have to be some ridiculously high scoring game and your player got hurt or somehow put up zero points. According to distributions and assumptions of the model, you have less than a 0.1% chance of being eliminated. I would be sleeping pretty easy if I were you. The first time your WR catches a ball for a gain, even the wackiest of outcomes is covered.

 

[tomarken]

thanks. glad to see i'm at 100 percent, but i feel a lot less comfortable then 100 percent.

If the simulation says 100 percent, you are through.

Are we sure about this? For example, team 102162 has 135.45 points per TFS scoring with no one left to play and a 100% on the sim.

Team 108443 has 137.35 points and Washington defense (-6) left to go, and they're at 99.1%. Does not compute.

Now this is likely because of problems with the TFS scoring - Drinen has the latter team with a minimum score of 135 (rounded), could TFS really be off by 2+ points? - but my point is if you're within a point or two of the cutoff and the sim has you at 100%, I wouldn't be 100% comfortable. It is, after all, just a simulation and if you're currently at 3500 in the standings with no one left to play, and there are more than 500 teams below you with players going tonight, you never know.

That works out because there were probably 9 runs out of 1000 that the cutoff line got pushed above 137.35 points. In those runs the defense did not score many points (less than 6), so he was stuck at 137.35. But also in those 9 runs your offensive player scored points pushing your score above 137.35. For you to lose, there would have to be some ridiculously high scoring game and your player got hurt or somehow put up zero points. According to distributions and assumptions of the model, you have less than a 0.1% chance of being eliminated. I would be sleeping pretty easy if I were you. The first time your WR catches a ball for a gain, even the wackiest of outcomes is covered.

It's not my team, I was just pointing out that 100% survival in the sim doesn't mean that you're guaranteed to make it to next week. There's still a nonzero chance that you could be eliminated, although I agree that it's very small.For example, team 102162 is done at around 135 points, which puts him in ~3,340th place. There are 1,134 teams below him that still have players left to go, so even though the sim says 100% it's possible he could be knocked out tonight. Obviously it's not likely, but it's not impossible.

ETA Might even be 1,213 teams below him with players left, although I'm doing the numbers quickly at work so I could be off. And it looks like almost 800 of them have 115+ points, so it's not completely out of the question. I realize a lot of those players are probably buried behind insurmountable scores, but on the flip side, a lot of them are probably the same player, so if that one player blows up a lot of teams will move up the standings.

 

[ctriopelle]

Here's a list of guys that could be in the discussion for being at or near zero for the rest of the season. Really there's only a handful that are on IR or FA or in jail. If you feel guys like Bernard Scott will be a factor in this competition, feel free to remove them. I'm not going to argue.QBClemens, Kellen NYJ 0.00 Leftwich, Byron TB 0.00 McCown, Luke TB 0.00 Pennington, Chad MIA 0.00 Quinn, Brady CLE 0.00 Rosenfels, Sage MIN 0.00 Smith, Alex SF 0.00 Stafford, Matthew DET 0.00 RBDavis, James CLE 0.00 Duckett, T.J. SEA 0.00 Greene, Shonn NYJ 0.00 Jones, Greg JAC 0.00 Jones, Kevin CHI 0.00 Jordan, LaMont DEN 0.00 Leonard, Brian CIN 0.00 McFadden, Darren OAK 0.00 Scott, Bernard CIN 0.00 Taylor, Fred NE 0.00 Washington, Chauncey JAC 0.00 Watson, Kenny CIN 0.00 WRBurress, Plaxico NYG 0.00 Butler, Deon SEA 0.00 Curry, Ronald STL 0.00 Curtis, Kevin PHI 0.00 Darling, Devard KC 0.00 Davis, Andre HOU 0.00 Davis, Craig SD 0.00 Davis, Rashied CHI 0.00 Dillard, Jarett JAC 0.00 Douglas, Harry ATL 0.00 Engram, Bobby KC 0.00 Galloway, Joey NE 0.00 Hawkins, Lavelle TEN 0.00 Hill, Jason SF 0.00 Iglesias, Juaquin CHI 0.00 Jackson, Dexter TB 0.00 Jarrett, Dwayne CAR 0.00 Johnson, Steve BUF 0.00 Jones, Matt JAC 0.00 Lewis, Greg NE 0.00 Lloyd, Brandon DEN 0.00 Nelson, Jordy GB 0.00 Parrish, Roscoe BUF 0.00 Robinson, Laurent STL 0.00 Schilens, Chaz OAK 0.00 Smith, Brad NYJ 0.00 Stuckey, Chansi NYJ 0.00 Sweed, Limas PIT 0.00 Turner, Patrick MIA 0.00 Walker, Javon OAK 0.00 TECoffman, Chase CIN 0.00 Cottam, Brad KC 0.00 Graham, Daniel DEN 0.00 Heiden, Steve CLE 0.00 Martin, David MIA 0.00 Miller, Billy NO 0.00 Schouman, Derek BUF 0.00 Smith, L.J. BAL 0.00 Utecht, Ben CIN 0.00 Walker, Delanie SF 0.00

really just want to include guys out for the season guaranteed, not just guys we don't expect to score often. I'm trying to replace scoring profiles with an injury flag to see what true rosters look like going forward. I pulled the ones I recognized as on the IR for the season off this list, but I'm not planning on checking them all out. Anyone in here care to confirm some of these guys as done for the year (not benched, truly incapable of playing)FYI, just adding the handful of guys I am certain of, we have 91 (live) rosters with only 18 active players and only 552 rosters still at 24 strong. Once I get a better list it will be interesting to see how things change.

 

[GloryDaze]

QB

Pennington, Chad MIA 0.00

RB

Davis, James CLE 0.00

Jones, Kevin CHI 0.00

Washington, Leon

WR

Burress, Plaxico NYG 0.00

Robinson, Laurent STL 0.00

 

[jdoggydogg]

114.90 with McNabb and Celek still to play.

 

[ctriopelle]

that was fast...had everyone but Pennington in, but I hadn't dumped Leon in yet since he scored this week. Here's how the existing 5000 teams going this week break down as far as live player count goes (for next week):

1 28 189 619 1169 828 979 817 371

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Obviously this will change when we drop to 4000, but it's interesting to see how it works out. I'll try to do a breakdown of live rosters with byes included for next week, should be a fun exercise if I can find the time...

 

[jon_mx]

Here's a list of guys that could be in the discussion for being at or near zero for the rest of the season. Really there's only a handful that are on IR or FA or in jail. If you feel guys like Bernard Scott will be a factor in this competition, feel free to remove them. I'm not going to argue.QBClemens, Kellen NYJ 0.00 Leftwich, Byron TB 0.00 McCown, Luke TB 0.00 Pennington, Chad MIA 0.00 Quinn, Brady CLE 0.00 Rosenfels, Sage MIN 0.00 Smith, Alex SF 0.00 Stafford, Matthew DET 0.00

Alex Smith threw 3 TD's this week....Stafford will be back this year and will be starting.....most the other guys are backups and are one hard sack away from playing again.

 

[tomarken]

that was fast...had everyone but Pennington in, but I hadn't dumped Leon in yet since he scored this week. Here's how the existing 5000 teams going this week break down as far as live player count goes (for next week):1 28 189 619 1169 828 979 817 37116 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Obviously this will change when we drop to 4000, but it's interesting to see how it works out. I'll try to do a breakdown of live rosters with byes included for next week, should be a fun exercise if I can find the time...

So there are more 20-player teams left than 24-player teams. I guess this ends the debate.

 

[jon_mx]

that was fast...had everyone but Pennington in, but I hadn't dumped Leon in yet since he scored this week. Here's how the existing 5000 teams going this week break down as far as live player count goes (for next week):1 28 189 619 1169 828 979 817 37116 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Obviously this will change when we drop to 4000, but it's interesting to see how it works out. I'll try to do a breakdown of live rosters with byes included for next week, should be a fun exercise if I can find the time...

So there are more 20-player teams left than 24-player teams. I guess this ends the debate.

no, these are active players. Some players like James Davis are out for the year. So the "20 Player" teams could have started with 22 and have two players out for the year. I started with 23 players, but now am a 22 player team.

 

[TheFanatic]

At 162 with no one tonight. Done with bye weeks except for a couple of minor players. Leon Washington was my third RB so his 5-10 points a week might force me out a week or two early.

I'm in a similar situation. 157 with no one left tonight. I do have a bye week still coming up for Schaub. And Leon was my 4th RB. After DeAngelo, Addai and Grant I've got nobody really now - Leon, James Davis and Edge. But I'm OK if this is the biggest injury I have to deal with this year...

 

[jon_mx]

I'm in a similar situation. 157 with no one left tonight. I do have a bye week still coming up for Schaub. And Leon was my 4th RB. After DeAngelo, Addai and Grant I've got nobody really now - Leon, James Davis and Edge. But I'm OK if this is the biggest injury I have to deal with this year...

Considering you only have to have two, DeAngelo, Grant, and Addai produce consistent enough results, Leon is not needed. Edge saved my butt on DeAngelo's bye week, by scoring 6 points. I made the cut by three points. So Edge was somebody to me.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Here's a list of guys that could be in the discussion for being at or near zero for the rest of the season. Really there's only a handful that are on IR or FA or in jail. If you feel guys like Bernard Scott will be a factor in this competition, feel free to remove them. I'm not going to argue.Lewis, Greg NE 0.00

really just want to include guys out for the season guaranteed, not just guys we don't expect to score often. I'm trying to replace scoring profiles with an injury flag to see what true rosters look like going forward. I pulled the ones I recognized as on the IR for the season off this list, but I'm not planning on checking them all out. Anyone in here care to confirm some of these guys as done for the year (not benched, truly incapable of playing)FYI, just adding the handful of guys I am certain of, we have 91 (live) rosters with only 18 active players and only 552 rosters still at 24 strong. Once I get a better list it will be interesting to see how things change.

Greg Lewis is in Minnesota now and saw several plays this weekend. Berrian is injured and may miss some time so Lewis' playing time may increase even more.

 

[ctriopelle]

I'm in a similar situation. 157 with no one left tonight. I do have a bye week still coming up for Schaub. And Leon was my 4th RB. After DeAngelo, Addai and Grant I've got nobody really now - Leon, James Davis and Edge. But I'm OK if this is the biggest injury I have to deal with this year...

Considering you only have to have two, DeAngelo, Grant, and Addai produce consistent enough results, Leon is not needed. Edge saved my butt on DeAngelo's bye week, by scoring 6 points. I made the cut by three points. So Edge was somebody to me.

I have Grant and DeAngelo myself, but Leon was my 3rd option. While I like my RB1 and RB2, having only Edge now as a non-IR bench does not bode well for my long term prospects. Hard enough counting on just 2 backs for weekly production, but needing both of them to go off for the final 3 weeks is asking a lot, especially if continued good production drives their % alive numbers up. Fortunately, I like the depth of my WR's, so I should be able to still count on good flex numbers.

 

[tomarken]

that was fast...had everyone but Pennington in, but I hadn't dumped Leon in yet since he scored this week. Here's how the existing 5000 teams going this week break down as far as live player count goes (for next week):1 28 189 619 1169 828 979 817 37116 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Obviously this will change when we drop to 4000, but it's interesting to see how it works out. I'll try to do a breakdown of live rosters with byes included for next week, should be a fun exercise if I can find the time...

So there are more 20-player teams left than 24-player teams. I guess this ends the debate.

no, these are active players. Some players like James Davis are out for the year. So the "20 Player" teams could have started with 22 and have two players out for the year. I started with 23 players, but now am a 22 player team.

 

[Defending Champs]

Dangit, I'm still out.

 

[kevzilla]

^^^^LMAO. I'm gonna be right there with you unless Chris Cooley goes off.

 

[Volleydog]

I have Grant and DeAngelo myself, but Leon was my 3rd option. While I like my RB1 and RB2, having only Edge now as a non-IR bench does not bode well for my long term prospects. Hard enough counting on just 2 backs for weekly production, but needing both of them to go off for the final 3 weeks is asking a lot, especially if continued good production drives their % alive numbers up. Fortunately, I like the depth of my WR's, so I should be able to still count on good flex numbers.

Also have DeAngelo & Grant at RB1/2 with Leon formerly at RB3. Tashard could still come back to save me if one of the other porcelain dolls in Big D goes out again, but otherwise I'm scrambling between Charles, Edge, and Betts. Is it too much to ask for KC to bench LJ or Portis to just sit down with his myriad of injuries?Not that he played a huge role, but this should definitely make me lean on the Jumbo set more often (Celek/Daniels). Also, you can remove Luke McCown from consideration for future points if you haven't already.

 

[LHUCKS]

I hope a lot of hasselbeck and Carlson teams are eliminated!

 

[Doug Drinen]

^^^^LMAO. I'm gonna be right there with you unless Chris Cooley goes off.

Me three. The Turk's simulation says that there is a 90% chance that the Turk will be asking for the Turk's playbook tomorrow morning.

 

[jdoggydogg]

If I make it past this week, (114.9 with McNabb and Celek), I think I am not long for the contest. My WR and TE are outstanding, but my RBs are going to be the death of me. Slaton, Parker, Washington, Michael Bush, Sammie Morris are not getting me far in this contest.

 

[Project Mayhem]

I thought I was screwed this week, made the mistake of taking three kickers, all with the same bye week. I know, I know. Also had Carlson on bye so Marty B's 7 points were a pleasant surprise. I have nobody tonight but 136 and 100% chance in the pre-MNF run.

 

[datonn]

61.4% chance of survival with 122.15 going into tonight with Celek -4.5. If weeks 1-3 Celek shows up, I'm alive! If weeks 5-6 Celek shows up, I'm out. Don't know if I can bear to watch...

 

[Bamboo Bill]

DeSean>

 

[ctriopelle]

^^^^LMAO. I'm gonna be right there with you unless Chris Cooley goes off.

Me three. The Turk's simulation says that there is a 90% chance that the Turk will be asking for the Turk's playbook tomorrow morning.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Turk, but you caught yourself before halftime...Cut slightly before all 1st half stats have compiled is 128.7

 

[Bernman2]

DeSean>

I feel foolish that I don't know what your post means. Bye Desean? Desean is single-handedly getting me back. I started the day at 102, needing 30 more points, with only Desean (-4.3), Moss (-7.9) and Betts (-3.6) to go.Moss has a way to go,, but now I'm sitting at 127 and every point both Desean and Cooley get will count for me. I'm feeling better now. Let's put me out of my misery early in the third, please? Good luck to everyone else!

 

[H8fulHuck]

that was fast...had everyone but Pennington in, but I hadn't dumped Leon in yet since he scored this week. Here's how the existing 5000 teams going this week break down as far as live player count goes (for next week):1 28 189 619 1169 828 979 817 37116 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Obviously this will change when we drop to 4000, but it's interesting to see how it works out. I'll try to do a breakdown of live rosters with byes included for next week, should be a fun exercise if I can find the time...

So there are more 20-player teams left than 24-player teams. I guess this ends the debate.

Nope. My team has 24 active players and will win the contest. Well...it is 24 active players if you count Edgerrin James an active player.

 

[ctriopelle]

DeSean>

I feel foolish that I don't know what your post means. Bye Desean? Desean is single-handedly getting me back. I started the day at 102, needing 30 more points, with only Desean (-4.3), Moss (-7.9) and Betts (-3.6) to go.Moss has a way to go,, but now I'm sitting at 127 and every point both Desean and Cooley get will count for me. I'm feeling better now. Let's put me out of my misery early in the third, please? Good luck to everyone else!

That could be a problem, since Jackson went to the locker room early before the half, and I think Cooley had an issue in the 1st half as well. Didn't notice if Cooley was in on the last series, but it looks like Jackson in back on the field now...

 

[Das Boot]

Here's a list of guys that could be in the discussion for being at or near zero for the rest of the season. Really there's only a handful that are on IR or FA or in jail. If you feel guys like Bernard Scott will be a factor in this competition, feel free to remove them. I'm not going to argue.QBClemens, Kellen NYJ 0.00 Leftwich, Byron TB 0.00 McCown, Luke TB 0.00 Pennington, Chad MIA 0.00 Quinn, Brady CLE 0.00 Rosenfels, Sage MIN 0.00 Smith, Alex SF 0.00 Stafford, Matthew DET 0.00 RBDavis, James CLE 0.00 Duckett, T.J. SEA 0.00 Greene, Shonn NYJ 0.00 Jones, Greg JAC 0.00 Jones, Kevin CHI 0.00 Jordan, LaMont DEN 0.00 Leonard, Brian CIN 0.00 McFadden, Darren OAK 0.00 Scott, Bernard CIN 0.00 Taylor, Fred NE 0.00 Washington, Chauncey JAC 0.00 Watson, Kenny CIN 0.00 WRBurress, Plaxico NYG 0.00 Butler, Deon SEA 0.00 Curry, Ronald STL 0.00 Curtis, Kevin PHI 0.00 Darling, Devard KC 0.00 Davis, Andre HOU 0.00 Davis, Craig SD 0.00 Davis, Rashied CHI 0.00 Dillard, Jarett JAC 0.00 Douglas, Harry ATL 0.00 Engram, Bobby KC 0.00 Galloway, Joey NE 0.00 Hawkins, Lavelle TEN 0.00 Hill, Jason SF 0.00 Iglesias, Juaquin CHI 0.00 Jackson, Dexter TB 0.00 Jarrett, Dwayne CAR 0.00 Johnson, Steve BUF 0.00 Jones, Matt JAC 0.00 Lewis, Greg NE 0.00 Lloyd, Brandon DEN 0.00 Nelson, Jordy GB 0.00 Parrish, Roscoe BUF 0.00 Robinson, Laurent STL 0.00 Schilens, Chaz OAK 0.00 Smith, Brad NYJ 0.00 Stuckey, Chansi NYJ 0.00 Sweed, Limas PIT 0.00 Turner, Patrick MIA 0.00 Walker, Javon OAK 0.00 TECoffman, Chase CIN 0.00 Cottam, Brad KC 0.00 Graham, Daniel DEN 0.00 Heiden, Steve CLE 0.00 Martin, David MIA 0.00 Miller, Billy NO 0.00 Schouman, Derek BUF 0.00 Smith, L.J. BAL 0.00 Utecht, Ben CIN 0.00 Walker, Delanie SF 0.00

really just want to include guys out for the season guaranteed, not just guys we don't expect to score often. I'm trying to replace scoring profiles with an injury flag to see what true rosters look like going forward. I pulled the ones I recognized as on the IR for the season off this list, but I'm not planning on checking them all out. Anyone in here care to confirm some of these guys as done for the year (not benched, truly incapable of playing)FYI, just adding the handful of guys I am certain of, we have 91 (live) rosters with only 18 active players and only 552 rosters still at 24 strong. Once I get a better list it will be interesting to see how things change.

I think for some players you could mark them out on a week by week basis, even if they aren't yet guaranteed to be out for the season.That way the weekly "dead wood" numbers would be accurate.