Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Starting 3 players from the same team? Does it work? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Darko M
- Start date
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
It can work fine a lot of the time, just be prepared to cry when Brady gets knocked out in week 1, or when a snowstorm ruins you in the playoffs.
I would imagine Brees/Colston/Thomas would be a pretty attractive trio.
I would imagine Brees/Colston/Thomas would be a pretty attractive trio.
FUBAR
Footballguy
I'm in favor if they're not my top 3 players. Risky still, but at least if they aren't your top 3 you should have others to fill in when they stink. In fact, I'd want to avoid having my 1st round pick as part of the trio
Trios I like in deep leagues
Rodgers, Grant, Jennings/Driver
Jacobs, Eli, Hixon/Smith
Warner, Hightower, Boldin
Penny, Brown, Ginn/Bess (16-20 team leagues)
Orton, Moreno, Royal (2QB league special)
Trios I like in deep leagues
Rodgers, Grant, Jennings/Driver
Jacobs, Eli, Hixon/Smith
Warner, Hightower, Boldin
Penny, Brown, Ginn/Bess (16-20 team leagues)
Orton, Moreno, Royal (2QB league special)
Last edited by a moderator:
The only Fubar part I like is Green Bay. If he took the real starter for Arizona most of the year in Beanie than I would like them. Hightower. NOT
I like
Rivers-LT-Gates
Manning-Wayne-Clark
Farve_Peterson and guessing the right receiver for Minny could be nice also
I dont like this team but most would love Ryan-Turner and either White or Gonzo as their big 3 and it does look good on paper.
Edwards-Lynch and Owens could be interesting but Lynch early suspension and TO's toe stop me on this one.
Dont mind
Big Ben-Parker-Holmes over the Denver and Miami combos above and put it with the Giants on Fubars list
I like
Rivers-LT-Gates
Manning-Wayne-Clark
Farve_Peterson and guessing the right receiver for Minny could be nice also
I dont like this team but most would love Ryan-Turner and either White or Gonzo as their big 3 and it does look good on paper.
Edwards-Lynch and Owens could be interesting but Lynch early suspension and TO's toe stop me on this one.
Dont mind
Big Ben-Parker-Holmes over the Denver and Miami combos above and put it with the Giants on Fubars list
Fantasy Man
Footballguy
McNabb/Westbrook/Jackson another decent fantasy trio
Wadsworth
Footballguy
This approach is more appealing to me in leagues that award points for weekly high score. Beyond that, I've never planned to have such a trio but if they were the best guys available when I drafted it wouldn't worry me.
Cutler/Forte/Olsen
Schaub/Slaton/Daniels
Palmer/Ocho/Henry
These aren't even close to the top level trios and they don't look half bad to me.
Cutler/Forte/Olsen
Schaub/Slaton/Daniels
Palmer/Ocho/Henry
These aren't even close to the top level trios and they don't look half bad to me.
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
I remember a guy drafting Favre, Freeman, and Levens back in the day.
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
I'd possibly be starting 6 if some ##### hadn't sniped Moss one pick in front of me.
Favre 2 Jennings
Footballguy
I have Rodgers, Grant and Jennings on my team and so far it has worked out fine for me. 
On a game-by-game basis...
Owning a QB/WR combo from the same team will increase your variance (i.e. more likely to boom, more likely to bust) compared to a comparably ranked QB/WR pair from different teams.
Owning a QB/RB or WR/RB combo from the same team will decrease your variance (i.e. less likely to boom, less likely to bust) compared to a comparably ranked QB/RB or WR/RB pair from different teams.
It then stands to reason that a QB/WR/WR combo would be even *MORE* volatile (huge boom chance, huge bust risk), while a QB/RB/WR or RB/WR/WR trio from the same team would be pretty comparable to a similarly ranked trio from different teams.On a season-by-season basis...
I haven't seen any studies on the subject, but I suspect that grabbing any combination of players from the same team, regardless of position, would increase your chances of *ALL* players outperforming projections, as well as your chances of *ALL* players underperforming their projections.
I suppose it's also possible that, if you grabbed a QB/RB combo, if the QB underperformed the RB would be more likely to outperform... but personally, I don't think so. It seems to me that improvements in the passing game more often than not correspond to improvements in the running game, and vice versa.Given this information, we can draw the following conclusions:
Starting a QB/WR pair from the same team increases your chances of finishing the week with the best score, and also increases your chances of finishing the week with the worst score (compared to starting a comparably ranked QB and comparably ranked WR from different teams). As such, this strategy favors leagues that offer some sort of reward for finishing with the best weekly score (whether cash or a tiebreaker), and is a hindrance in leagues that penalize having the worst weekly score (such as survivor leagues).
Starting a QB/RB or RB/WR pair decreases your chances of finishing the week with the worst score, but it also decreases your chances of finishing the week with the best score. As such, this strategy favors leagues that penalize bad performances (such as survivor leagues), but is less valuable in leagues that reward good performances (such as those with cash payouts to the top team).
Variance always favors the underdog, so a QB/WR combo from the same team is more advantageous if you have the worse team, while a QB/RB or RB/WR combo is more advantageous if you have the better team. This applies both to head-to-head as well as to all-play (if your team is in the top half of the league, look to minimize variance).
Over the course of an entire season, starting a QB/RB/WR trio or a QB/WR/WR trio or a RB/WR/WR trio (or even a QB/RB/WR/WR/TE quintet) will increase your variance, which increases your chances of finishing the season with the best team in the league, as well as your chances of finishing with the worst team. Since there's often no advantage to finishing 6th instead of 12th, but there's ALWAYS an advantage to finishing 1st instead of 6th, I would think that loading up on players from a single team would be a winning fantasy football strategy.Of course, it's very important to mention that variance is a very minor consideration, and only comes into play when looking at comparably ranked pairs of players. For instance, you should always start Tom Brady (QB1) and Randy Moss (QB1) over any other possible combination with no regard to variance, because they're higher ranked than anything else you could throw out there. It's only when making a comparison such as Peyton Manning (QB3) and Reggie Wayne (WR6) vs. Drew Brees (QB2) and Steve Smith (WR7) that this analysis comes into play. In that case, because both pairs are comparably ranked, they can be considered roughly equivalent when discussing whether you'd rather minimize variance or maximize variance.
Owning a QB/WR combo from the same team will increase your variance (i.e. more likely to boom, more likely to bust) compared to a comparably ranked QB/WR pair from different teams.
Owning a QB/RB or WR/RB combo from the same team will decrease your variance (i.e. less likely to boom, less likely to bust) compared to a comparably ranked QB/RB or WR/RB pair from different teams.
It then stands to reason that a QB/WR/WR combo would be even *MORE* volatile (huge boom chance, huge bust risk), while a QB/RB/WR or RB/WR/WR trio from the same team would be pretty comparable to a similarly ranked trio from different teams.On a season-by-season basis...
I haven't seen any studies on the subject, but I suspect that grabbing any combination of players from the same team, regardless of position, would increase your chances of *ALL* players outperforming projections, as well as your chances of *ALL* players underperforming their projections.
I suppose it's also possible that, if you grabbed a QB/RB combo, if the QB underperformed the RB would be more likely to outperform... but personally, I don't think so. It seems to me that improvements in the passing game more often than not correspond to improvements in the running game, and vice versa.Given this information, we can draw the following conclusions:
Starting a QB/WR pair from the same team increases your chances of finishing the week with the best score, and also increases your chances of finishing the week with the worst score (compared to starting a comparably ranked QB and comparably ranked WR from different teams). As such, this strategy favors leagues that offer some sort of reward for finishing with the best weekly score (whether cash or a tiebreaker), and is a hindrance in leagues that penalize having the worst weekly score (such as survivor leagues).
Starting a QB/RB or RB/WR pair decreases your chances of finishing the week with the worst score, but it also decreases your chances of finishing the week with the best score. As such, this strategy favors leagues that penalize bad performances (such as survivor leagues), but is less valuable in leagues that reward good performances (such as those with cash payouts to the top team).
Variance always favors the underdog, so a QB/WR combo from the same team is more advantageous if you have the worse team, while a QB/RB or RB/WR combo is more advantageous if you have the better team. This applies both to head-to-head as well as to all-play (if your team is in the top half of the league, look to minimize variance).
Over the course of an entire season, starting a QB/RB/WR trio or a QB/WR/WR trio or a RB/WR/WR trio (or even a QB/RB/WR/WR/TE quintet) will increase your variance, which increases your chances of finishing the season with the best team in the league, as well as your chances of finishing with the worst team. Since there's often no advantage to finishing 6th instead of 12th, but there's ALWAYS an advantage to finishing 1st instead of 6th, I would think that loading up on players from a single team would be a winning fantasy football strategy.Of course, it's very important to mention that variance is a very minor consideration, and only comes into play when looking at comparably ranked pairs of players. For instance, you should always start Tom Brady (QB1) and Randy Moss (QB1) over any other possible combination with no regard to variance, because they're higher ranked than anything else you could throw out there. It's only when making a comparison such as Peyton Manning (QB3) and Reggie Wayne (WR6) vs. Drew Brees (QB2) and Steve Smith (WR7) that this analysis comes into play. In that case, because both pairs are comparably ranked, they can be considered roughly equivalent when discussing whether you'd rather minimize variance or maximize variance.
mjr
Footballguy
My trio is QB/WR/K: Rodgers, Jennings & Crosby. I also have Jones and Nelson on the bench.
The K as the third player in the trio I think is a little more productive; helps hedge bets a little, especially in my league which awards 5 points for FGs from 40+ yards and 10 points for FGs over 50 yards. I also get 9 points for TDs from 10 yards out and 12 for TDs from outside the red zone, plus yardage in any case.
So, if Rodgers hits Jennings for a score inside the 10 and Crosby kicks the extra, I get at least 13 points.
The same hook up from outside the 10 gets me 20 points.
The same from 20+ gets me at least 27 points, possibly more depending on yardage.
If Rogers hooks up with someone else in the EZ and Crosby kicks the extra, I get anywhere from 7-15+ points.
If GB doesn't make it into the EZ, I can then get 3, 5 or 10 points from Crosby on a FG.
Basically, with this trio the only time I don't get points for each GB drive is either when the ball is ran in for a score or GB doesn't make it into FG range (or if Crosby misses when they do).
A QB/RB/K trio might raise your odds of putting up points on every drive, but the reward in points would be lower unless you've got a good receiving RB always good for a few rec TDs, something like a McNabb/Westbrook/Akers trio.
But a lot of this also depends on your scoring system and the team you're pulling your trio from. I can only see it working with maybe a half dozen NFL teams with higher octane offenses like Indy, NE, GB, NO, etc. Even then it can be shady with a cloudy backfield like NE has if you want to go QB/RB/K. And if you don't get extra points for long FGs or long scores, the incentive for me to do this really starts to drop off.
I wouldn't go QB/WR/WR with any team. QB/WR/RB is a little better but not considerably, IMO. I wouldn't even bother with a duo no less a trio in TD only leagues.
The K as the third player in the trio I think is a little more productive; helps hedge bets a little, especially in my league which awards 5 points for FGs from 40+ yards and 10 points for FGs over 50 yards. I also get 9 points for TDs from 10 yards out and 12 for TDs from outside the red zone, plus yardage in any case.
So, if Rodgers hits Jennings for a score inside the 10 and Crosby kicks the extra, I get at least 13 points.
The same hook up from outside the 10 gets me 20 points.
The same from 20+ gets me at least 27 points, possibly more depending on yardage.
If Rogers hooks up with someone else in the EZ and Crosby kicks the extra, I get anywhere from 7-15+ points.
If GB doesn't make it into the EZ, I can then get 3, 5 or 10 points from Crosby on a FG.
Basically, with this trio the only time I don't get points for each GB drive is either when the ball is ran in for a score or GB doesn't make it into FG range (or if Crosby misses when they do).
A QB/RB/K trio might raise your odds of putting up points on every drive, but the reward in points would be lower unless you've got a good receiving RB always good for a few rec TDs, something like a McNabb/Westbrook/Akers trio.
But a lot of this also depends on your scoring system and the team you're pulling your trio from. I can only see it working with maybe a half dozen NFL teams with higher octane offenses like Indy, NE, GB, NO, etc. Even then it can be shady with a cloudy backfield like NE has if you want to go QB/RB/K. And if you don't get extra points for long FGs or long scores, the incentive for me to do this really starts to drop off.
I wouldn't go QB/WR/WR with any team. QB/WR/RB is a little better but not considerably, IMO. I wouldn't even bother with a duo no less a trio in TD only leagues.
theplayer11
Footballguy
from the "rate my team" section with Romo, Wittem, Roy, Barber all on same team:
A quick note about the same-team hookups (Romo/Jason Witten and Romo/Roy Williams) you've got here: while we think the effect of the quarterback/receiver hookup has largely been exaggerated in fantasy football circles, it does have a tendency to make your team somewhat more inconsistent than comparable scoring duos from different NFL teams. But if you like the players at both ends of the connection, we do not see any need to make a change because of it.
With the Romo/Marion Barber pair, the story is different. Though the effect is probably negligible, this kind of pairing is likely to make your team more consistent if anything. See this article (which was written before the 2008 season) for more discussion.
A quick note about the same-team hookups (Romo/Jason Witten and Romo/Roy Williams) you've got here: while we think the effect of the quarterback/receiver hookup has largely been exaggerated in fantasy football circles, it does have a tendency to make your team somewhat more inconsistent than comparable scoring duos from different NFL teams. But if you like the players at both ends of the connection, we do not see any need to make a change because of it.
With the Romo/Marion Barber pair, the story is different. Though the effect is probably negligible, this kind of pairing is likely to make your team more consistent if anything. See this article (which was written before the 2008 season) for more discussion.
theplayer11
Footballguy
from the article:
In general, there is no reason to conclude that a same-team WR/RB pair is more variable --- more boom-or-bust --- than a similar-scoring different-team pair.
And it turns out the same is true of QB/RB pairs and WR/WR pairs
Bottom line: the historical data strongly suggests that you not skip over a player on your cheatsheet just because you already have another player from the same NFL team. As always, though, the particular situation you're considering is not a composite of historical situations. It's got its own pecularities, and you might have good reasons to believe that it's different. As usual, I view this study merely as a burden-of-proof shifter. That is, it should only define your default mode of thinking, your starting point. Instead of assuming that a same-team pair has more variability than a different-team pair and asking, "should I do it anyway?", you should instead start by asking, "In general, the same-team pairing is NOT more variable, so is there any particular reason why, in this case, it would be?"
http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/0...en-sameteam.php
In general, there is no reason to conclude that a same-team WR/RB pair is more variable --- more boom-or-bust --- than a similar-scoring different-team pair.
And it turns out the same is true of QB/RB pairs and WR/WR pairs
Bottom line: the historical data strongly suggests that you not skip over a player on your cheatsheet just because you already have another player from the same NFL team. As always, though, the particular situation you're considering is not a composite of historical situations. It's got its own pecularities, and you might have good reasons to believe that it's different. As usual, I view this study merely as a burden-of-proof shifter. That is, it should only define your default mode of thinking, your starting point. Instead of assuming that a same-team pair has more variability than a different-team pair and asking, "should I do it anyway?", you should instead start by asking, "In general, the same-team pairing is NOT more variable, so is there any particular reason why, in this case, it would be?"
http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/0...en-sameteam.php
Last edited by a moderator:
DAMAC3
Footballguy
I like drafting the TE from the same team as one my my stud running backs if they are decent. I have Slaton/Daniels in one league, Peterson/Shiancoe in another. I don't reach, but if the TE is there at the appropriate spot I like the strategy. I like this much better than QB/WR combos because that pair is so dependent on each other. Why add the risk unless a player falls to a great value where you are picking?
