Starting the WR to offset the QB theory.... (1 Viewer)

[jbz]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

 

[rick6668]

If you are a favorite overall, then you may want to start Garcon. If you are the underdog, you may want to start Allen.

 

[Soulfly3]

does. not. matter

 

[jbz]

does. not. matter

That's what I was thinking most would say. I don't want this to turn into a AC thread. Was curious if people had examples of when it worked/didn't work.

 

[EastonBlues22]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

The downside is that your wide receiver is very unlikely to have a big game unless his QB does as well, but his QB can certainly have a big game even if your WR doesn't.

If you consider yourself an underdog, that's a problem.

 

[Spaces Lines and Laces]

There's no hard rule one way or the other.

Allen could just as easily go for 100 and 2 TDs, then who cares if you covered your bases with Garcon pacing Cousins?

 

[jbz]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

The downside is that your wide receiver is very unlikely to have a big game unless his QB does as well, but his QB can certainly have a big game even if your WR doesn't.

If you consider yourself an underdog, that's a problem.

That's a good point. So this is more of a "favorite" option rather than an underdog one.

 

[donkshow]

Put out the lineup you feel gives you the best chance to win. Don't let their team dictate your team.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

If you are a favorite overall, then you may want to start Garcon. If you are the underdog, you may want to start Allen.

This.

It's often difficult, of course, to determine if you're the favorite or the underdog (especially so in a championship game where presumably the two best teams are facing off). So this strategy has limited usefulness before all the games start. It's most useful when you're going into Sunday/Monday night games with this kind of decision to make, since at that point you know how many points you're up or down by.

 

[Sarnoff]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week.

We rehashed it last week. And the week before.

And five times during the regular season.

And twice before the season started.

And 18 times last season.

At least make it a more blatant WDIS and add more CAPS and a Speling Eror to your title if you want to challenge for the crown.

 

[meatwad1]

You should drop a few more players and try to get all Redskins on your team. That would be the ultimate hedge!!!!

I am sure Morgan, Helu and Fred Davis are available on the ww. That would blow your opponent's mind!!! You would totally cancel him out!!!

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

nah

 

[Mikey16x]

I used this strategy during the semifinals. I have Alshon Jeffrey and my opponent was starting Brandon Marshall, my choice was betweeen Cutler and Brady. Started Cutler with Brady being Gronkless. My main reason for starting Cutler was in order for him to have a big day, it would have to include either one of those wide receivers. I wound up winning thanks to Jamaal Charles and a 45 yard bomb to Jeffrey.. but I'd probably do it again.

 

[maxwjom0]

If you are a favorite overall, then you may want to start Garcon. If you are the underdog, you may want to start Allen.

+1

This is the play for shizzle.

 

[Zaphod]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

 

[Warrior]

does. not. matter

That's what I was thinking most would say. I don't want this to turn into a AC thread. Was curious if people had examples of when it worked/didn't work.

With or without examples, nothing changes. Over the long run, you make the correct choice by ignoring this QB/WR nonsense.

Start the player who you expect to score more points. Period.

The only way this could be effective would be if you're a big underdog or big favorite, as has already been mentioned. Big favorite? Then hedge your bets and lean slightly towards the WR associated with the opponent's QB. Big underdog? Do the opposite and lean slightly away from the QB/WR combo. That way the two players don't have a direct correlation in their performance.

99% of the time, you should ignore it.

 

[Gawain]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will help you win.

Example:

Average score in league X is 100 points. WR Y has a 51% chance to score 50 points and a 49% chance to score 0. WR Z has a 100% chance to score 25 points. I'll start Z every time, even with the lower expected point total.

 

[jbz]

lol, the variety of answers to be expected. thanks for the input. i feel I am the favorite so

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week.

We rehashed it last week. And the week before.

And five times during the regular season.

And twice before the season started.

And 18 times last season.

At least make it a more blatant WDIS and add more CAPS and a Speling Eror to your title if you want to challenge for the crown.

thanks for taking the time to type out a great response. this is the reason I come to the shark pool

 

[jbz]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

That's why I'm trying to do. I normally don't like to ask for any type of advice in this place as the non-helpful remarks usually outweigh the useful ones. Was going to post an AC thread, but figured the discussion might be useful in an one and done scenario that people are facing.

I honestly think Allen and Garcon are a wash in terms of who will score the most points. Trying to find something to break the "tie" in my mind and this was one idea I thought of to use as a tiebreaker.

 

[jbz]

You should drop a few more players and try to get all Redskins on your team. That would be the ultimate hedge!!!!

I am sure Morgan, Helu and Fred Davis are available on the ww. That would blow your opponent's mind!!! You would totally cancel him out!!!

Genius. As a Redskins fan myself, I don't think I could stomach the pure awesomeness that would be an all Redskins fantasy final team...although at one point a team with RG3, Alf, Garcon and Jordan Reed would have looked decent.

This place is endless amounts of knowledge! haha.

 

[Short Corner]

Like some have posted, it depends on whether you consider yourself the favorite or not. Playing the WR against the QB will reduce variance which is advantagous for the favorite.

 

[Zaphod]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will help you win.

Example:

Average score in league X is 100 points. WR Y has a 51% chance to score 50 points and a 49% chance to score 0. WR Z has a 100% chance to score 25 points. I'll start Z every time, even with the lower expected point total.

Ahh, stats are fun. Unfortunately in the real world you can't cherry pick made up figures to win fantasy games.

The players that I think will help me win are the ones I feel will score me the most points each week after I have looked at all the available data.

 

[Zaphod]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

That's why I'm trying to do. I normally don't like to ask for any type of advice in this place as the non-helpful remarks usually outweigh the useful ones. Was going to post an AC thread, but figured the discussion might be useful in an one and done scenario that people are facing.

I honestly think Allen and Garcon are a wash in terms of who will score the most points. Trying to find something to break the "tie" in my mind and this was one idea I thought of to use as a tiebreaker.

That approach seems reasonable to me.

 

[Sweet Love]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

The downside is that your wide receiver is very unlikely to have a big game unless his QB does as well, but his QB can certainly have a big game even if your WR doesn't.

If you consider yourself an underdog, that's a problem.

It depends...in my son's PPR league, he had Calvin going against Stafford on Monday. I think we would all agree that Calvin had a pedestrian game (for Calvin), but he blew away Stafford. In a PPR, the WR gets one point more for a catch than the QB (unless you give completion points) and usually gains yardage points at 1 point for 10 yards versus 1 point for 25 yards for the QB. If you have a possession or "active" WR, they typically keep pace or outpace the QB. If a QB goes off, then it gets dicey, but more times than not, countering with guys like Garcon or Allen will work for you.

 

[whhwalker]

When I have been in this situation I also look at positional matchups to determine if I can afford a "push" by neutralizing my opponents QB or WR. If I am favorite at RB and TE, I might start the QB/WR offset to hedge.

I think there is a scenario that has not yet been factored into these threads that I believe will be an issue this week for many and that is deciding between:

Double bubble: you have QB and WR1 on same team

versus

Offset: You have QB/WR1 opposite your opponent starter.

Having reviewed championship roster thread in theShark Pool I was surprised to see how many teams had either/both of:

Romo/Bryant

Smith/Charles

Dalton/Green

Assuming it is an even match, would Sharks be more likely to start a double bubble or offset? Genuinely curious.

 

[rick6668]

To relate to an example, let's consider this scenario:

It's Monday night, you are up 20 points in a standard PPR

You have only your QB left to play and you have Kaepernick and Ryan.

Your opponent has only Roddy White left to play.

Who should you start?

In this scenario, it is probably better to start Matt Ryan than Kaepernick even though Kaepernick is rated WAY higher this week and will probably score more points.

This is because it is very unlikely that White has a monster game without Ryan getting some of that share.

The more points you are ahead going into Monday night, the more likely it is you should play Ryan. If you are ahead by 35 points, you would be crazy to not start Ryan.

 

[VikingFrog]

I almost did this in week 14. My opponent had Luck and I had TY Hilton. I thought there was no way Luck could have a big game without going through Hilton.

Luck threw for 300+ yards and 4 Tds and Hilton had 7 yards reviving.

Fortunately I didn't play him, I played the guy I thought would score more points.

Unfortunately, I still lost.

 

[TheAssassin]

I think this is truly a wash decision statistically. Allen has had 4 good weeks in a row, Garcon 1/4, personally I would feel worse losing if I started Garcon but at its most lopsided analysis it is still a 60/40 chance. Go with your gut (this is coming from a stats geek).

 

[Sarnoff]

I'll never understand this. Don't over think it. Pick your starters based on who you think will score more points.

I'll never understand how you still don't get that this is incorrect, after it's been discussed on here in about three hundred threads.

 

[jbz]

I almost did this in week 14. My opponent had Luck and I had TY Hilton. I thought there was no way Luck could have a big game without going through Hilton.

Luck threw for 300+ yards and 4 Tds and Hilton had 7 yards reviving.

Fortunately I didn't play him, I played the guy I thought would score more points.

Unfortunately, I still lost.

That's a good example of it not working for sure. Forgot about that game. Maybe it's the part of me that is a Redskins fan that knows Garcon is by far the target leader for the Skins. Interesting to note though.

 

[jbz]

I know this has probably been discussed a lot, but trying to rehash this for championship week. When presented with tough lineup decisions, I know sometimes people look at starting the main WR from their opponents starting QB's team to try to offset some of the potential scoring. I'd assume for stud WRs, this doesn't really apply, but when deciding between some similarly ranked WRs for the WR3 or flex spots this might be useful. Does this theory work? I find myself in possibly a scenario that I could apply it and was curious.

So in my case, I am deciding between Keenan Allen and Pierre Garcon. My opponent is starting Kirk Cousins. My thinking is that if Cousins has a good day, there's is practically no chance it happens without involving Garcon as he dominates the targets so much for the Skins. Allen has been the more productive WR of late, but has more competition for targets and has seen his usage/targets go up and down for various reasons (game plan, injury, etc). I am leaning Garcon, but wondering what is the downside to this theory.

The downside is that your wide receiver is very unlikely to have a big game unless his QB does as well, but his QB can certainly have a big game even if your WR doesn't.

If you consider yourself an underdog, that's a problem.

It depends...in my son's PPR league, he had Calvin going against Stafford on Monday. I think we would all agree that Calvin had a pedestrian game (for Calvin), but he blew away Stafford. In a PPR, the WR gets one point more for a catch than the QB (unless you give completion points) and usually gains yardage points at 1 point for 10 yards versus 1 point for 25 yards for the QB. If you have a possession or "active" WR, they typically keep pace or outpace the QB. If a QB goes off, then it gets dicey, but more times than not, countering with guys like Garcon or Allen will work for you.

I guess it then becomes a matter of factoring in who the WRs are and their role in the passing game. For example if this was a decision with the Bronco WRs, I think the decision would be more difficult since we've seen Thomas, Decker, Welker and J. Thomas all have monster games while one (or more) of the others get left out. In the case of Garcon, I think he's led the Skins in receiving targets every game but 2 and in those 2 it was Jordan Reed who got the most, but he's done for the season most likely. There were a few games that Garcon didn't do well and RG3 outscored him easily too. Not as cut and dry decision as I thought, even for a team that has such a dominant target leader.

Good feedback, thank you.

 

[Steeler]

I skipped this thread until now because I'm typically of the mindset that you don't consider your opponents roster when trying to set your own. However, I find myself considering starting Garcon this week too because my opponent it starting Cousins. As I said, typically I never consider my opponent's roster but I agree with a lot of what has been said regarding Garcon and his role in the passing game (dominating the targets most weeks, clear #1, etc).

Borderline WDIS portion of my post

Spoiler

I'm loaded at WR and only picked up Garcon last week because my league has short rosters and the guy who cut Garcon is also loaded at WR and was decimated by injuries at RB.

Right now I'm starting C.Johnson, B.Marshall and D.Jackson... I drafted all these guys and haven't even had another WR on my roster until last week... all 4 of these guys have good matchups... I guess it's a good problem to have