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!
Subscriber Contest to be Unveiled by Wednesday Morning (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter David Dodds
- Start date
EHRMAHGERD
Footballguy
263 last 206 this week.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
If you go to the standings for this year you can just change the year in the URL from 2013 to 2012, 2011, etc. to see past years' results.
Not liking my team at all anymore with David Wilson. He is dragging down my only real team I have him on as well. I knew I should have said eff Kerley as a cheapie and upgraded to a better RB. With Blackmon and Kerley out, a bad week this week since Kaep, Romo, MAustin, Wilson, AJ Green and D Thomas all crapped out. I just need to make it this week and next week to get Blackmon and Gronk available hopefully every week. Glad Matt Prater looking solid since I didn't even realize Forbath was out (don't have him on any fantasy rosters).
Just looking at this year's rankings, and using ~15% as the cut line, it would have been 166ish and 153ish in weeks 1 and 2.
There will be some fluctuation when the "crap" teams are eliminated this week, and when the bye weeks start in week 4.
stubby
Footballguy
196 last week. 243 this week (#33 overall). However, Lacy hurt, Wilson still not getting the carries. Think Bernard will get more touches every week. Bullock is awful, Forbath hurt, Redskins Def/ST blows. This is why I always take 3/3 .
Dez,Julio, and my TE trio carrying my team so far. Still like my QBs as long as Vick is healthy.
(HULK)
(Smash)
It should be lower, shouldn't it? Or you think the flex offsets the reduction in passing TDs?
5-ish Finkle
Footballguy
There were never any "tactics" involved there. It was a ploy.
And it's still kind of humorous. Sort of.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
let's see - an average QB gets what, 1.5 touchdowns per game and maybe throws what .75 picks per game? Going on that premise the new scoring probably shaves around 2.25 points for the typical QB. I don't think kick and punt return TDs are frequent enough to move the lines much. I imagine that replacing a WR with a Flex should cause a slight uptick in scoring which probably washes out the drop in QB points. I think that the past-year cutline will be as decent a rough guide as any 
Meanwhile I was tied in 7967th place with a very pedestrian 172.80
Oh and my RB line-up of Richardson, Wilson, Lacy, Redman, and Powell looks really great
-QG
Meanwhile I was tied in 7967th place with a very pedestrian 172.80
Oh and my RB line-up of Richardson, Wilson, Lacy, Redman, and Powell looks really great
-QG
Update to previous post from last week. I think there are three separate issues to be considered: (1) what level of value is represented by TEs this year, (2) what is the level of production for TEs this year, and (3) how do the results affect strategy for roster development? I'll consider each issue compared to the WR position. Granted, we only have two weeks of experience so far this year.
Measuring overall production is easy. How many points have been produced by the top players at each position. Look at the top-5 WRs and TEs, respectively (according to the contest's scoring system)? Answer: 538.0 for WRs and 478.0 for TEs.
What about the next 5 highest scorers (#6-10)? Answer: 457.0 for WRs and 383.0 for TEs.
This is a little misleading because there were over twice as many WRs (compared to TEs) available to pick from the list of players in the contest this year (111 WRs compared to 50 TEs). Therefore, I think it's fairer to compare the top 10% of players at each position - in other words, let's compare the production (per player) of the top 5 TEs against the top 11 WRs. Answer: 98.0 for WRs and 95.6 for TEs (per player, for first two weeks combined). So, a very slight edge for WRs in overall production.
Now what about value at the two positions? A relevant measure of value is points produced per dollar of salary. Consider the top-5 WRs and TEs for the first two weeks. Answer (points produced per dollar of salary, for first two weeks): 4.60 for WRs and 6.64 for TEs.
Again, let's compare the top 10% at each position? Answer: 4.53 for WRs and 6.64 for TEs. Therefore, in terms of value per salary dollar, the TE position is clearly dominant over WRs.
Conclusion, with the change in rules this year from "3 WRs and 1 TE and 1 Flex" (last year) to "2 WRs and 1 TE and 2 Flex" (this year), the optimal roster strategy this year was to concentrate on the TE position. Considering production and value, a roster should have at least as many TEs as WRs on the roster, and probably more.
Organized Chaos
Footballguy
So, I've come up with an automated process this year that wont hose my server and allow for 15 minute current cut line stats. Starting with the games next week at 7PM on Sunday's, I have a process kick off every 15 minutes that will calculate the current cut line and post it to ffltools.com on the team pages. This calculation runs on a different server and takes about 6 or 7 minutes, then will post the results.
This will run throughout the games on Sunday and Monday nights.
The cut line wont be official of course, but it should be within a point or two variance.
This will run throughout the games on Sunday and Monday nights.
The cut line wont be official of course, but it should be within a point or two variance.
rabidsheep
Footballguy
The other factor to take into consideration is that your third wide receiver is the first one eligible to hit the flex since you score two WRs in the WR slot each week. Your second highest scoring TE can hit the flex.
This raises the importance of Wide Receivers since you know you'll have to score at least 2 of them each week, so you need a deeper bench at the position to handle the flux in week to week performance. That being said the flex change and scoring advantage given to tight ends still supports the idea that the TE position's relative value is much much higher this year than last.
I want to wait at least one more week and then look at the scoring consistency differential between WRs and TEs. My feeling is that good TEs are going to be used in more weeks over similarly priced/talented WRs.
rabidsheep
Footballguy
Players that lit it up for me week 1 that didn't get used in week 2:
Adrian Peterson
Reggie Bush
Anquan Boldin
Players that showed up big time in week 2 that were absent week 1:
Knowshon Moreno
Calvin Johnson
Dwayne Bowe
Over 200 points both weeks so far. Week 9 still looming large due to too many byes and of course I'm out week 12 with both QBs on bye. Until then it's not looking too bad. One injured stud (including or especially Vick) however and the season will end extra early. Roster is too shallow to survive any losses.
Adrian Peterson
Reggie Bush
Anquan Boldin
Players that showed up big time in week 2 that were absent week 1:
Knowshon Moreno
Calvin Johnson
Dwayne Bowe
Over 200 points both weeks so far. Week 9 still looming large due to too many byes and of course I'm out week 12 with both QBs on bye. Until then it's not looking too bad. One injured stud (including or especially Vick) however and the season will end extra early. Roster is too shallow to survive any losses.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
I am actually liking my team, which historically means I am due an early exit.
P. Manning
S. Bradford
Shady
MJD
Forte
J. Bell
B. Powell
Dez
Garcon
V. Brown
Wheaton
Hankerson
K. Thompkins
Graham
J. Cook
Ausberry
J. Thomas
Hauschka
Forbath
Josh Brown
Cincy
Panthers
It is a short roster and weak at WR but overall I would not change much going into week 3.
P. Manning
S. Bradford
Shady
MJD
Forte
J. Bell
B. Powell
Dez
Garcon
V. Brown
Wheaton
Hankerson
K. Thompkins
Graham
J. Cook
Ausberry
J. Thomas
Hauschka
Forbath
Josh Brown
Cincy
Panthers
It is a short roster and weak at WR but overall I would not change much going into week 3.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
kardplayer
Footballguy
I have to say a big thank you to OC on this. While I enjoyed running the cutlines manually and posting them in the thread over the last two years, it will be nice to have my Monday nights back! Thanks OC!!!QuizGuy66 said:It's like RoboTurkOrganized Chaos said:
-QG
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Will be interestin to see how Richardson's new bye week (8 instead of 10) ends up impacting the contest.
Orginally I probably would not have like this since one of my big receivers (Andre) is off that week. However given the b/c of Wilson, Lacy, and Redman all being awful, Bilal Powell seems to be my 2nd best RB right now so it's just as well that he now has a different bye week than T Rich.
-QG
Orginally I probably would not have like this since one of my big receivers (Andre) is off that week. However given the b/c of Wilson, Lacy, and Redman all being awful, Bilal Powell seems to be my 2nd best RB right now so it's just as well that he now has a different bye week than T Rich.
-QG
BaBastage
Footballguy
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
Week 8 was a frequent problem for me when adjusting my roster. I guess I just liked a lot of players on those teams. I don't have TRich, but I'm sure there will be people screwed by the change to his bye week.QuizGuy66 said:
chocula
Footballguy
Kuz
Footballguy
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Donnie Avery $4 woohoo!
Warrior
Footballguy
It would take me too long to point out all the flaws in this logic, so I won't. Nice effort though.
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Happy for averys score but the chiefs offense looks anemic.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Avant looks like a nice $2 player.
Organized Chaos
Footballguy
Yeah, Richardson Trade puts both he and Forte on by the same week, leaving me with Wilson, Joique Bell and Christine Michael... not looking forward to week 8. With Andre Johnson out as well.... oofRichardson trade now makes 2 studs out on Week 8 - Richardson & Marshall.
Of all the things to consider a deeper roster, an in-season trade was not one I planned.
Who am I kidding... I scored 240 week 1 and just broke 140 last week, at this rate, I'll be eliminated well before then
Rookie.Richardson trade now makes 2 studs out on Week 8 - Richardson & Marshall.
Of all the things to consider a deeper roster, an in-season trade was not one I planned.
Always have to factor in potential in-season trades involving a top-10 skill position players. You should have invested in OC's "in-season trade sim" program. Certainly helped me avoid Richardson this year.
Last edited by a moderator:
FUBAR
Footballguy
Even with the bye week issue, this trade helps a lot more than it hurts.Yeah, Richardson Trade puts both he and Forte on by the same week, leaving me with Wilson, Joique Bell and Christine Michael... not looking forward to week 8. With Andre Johnson out as well.... oofWho am I kidding... I scored 240 week 1 and just broke 140 last week, at this rate, I'll be eliminated well before thenRichardson trade now makes 2 studs out on Week 8 - Richardson & Marshall.
Of all the things to consider a deeper roster, an in-season trade was not one I planned.
Dammit! I wanted the program but $2.49 was just too much for me to pay. Had he made it 99 cents I would have gotten it. Plus, he probably would have sold 2000 more at that price.Rookie.Richardson trade now makes 2 studs out on Week 8 - Richardson & Marshall.
Of all the things to consider a deeper roster, an in-season trade was not one I planned.
Always have to factor in potential in-season trades involving a top-10 skill position players. You should have invested in OC's "in-season trade sim" program. Certainly helped me avoid Richardson this year.
rustycolts
Footballguy
chocula
Footballguy
Similar threads
