Subscriber Contest (2 Viewers)

[Ahmad Rashad]

Foster would not be a stud under our definitions we were bouncing around in this thread. He was the cheapest starting RB out there, so a must have like mentioned above. He just is out performing his price so far, along with other players like LT.

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

Foster's ranking shot way up to where some considered him an RB1, and the experts on this site on average ranked him RB18: Foster RB18 by experts

The 18th most expensive RB in this contest was $26, twice what Foster cost. The "stud" definitions on this thread considered any player at $26 to be a stud.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Pre-MNF sim. The cut will almost certainly be in the low 130s.

Simulator question for the Turk. I noticed this odd-ball projection:7100. Team 112845 | 66.5 | 133 | 170 133 133 133 133 133

Looking at the roster, it looks like the only player they have left is the Dolphins (-2.0)

The distribution of 133 in all cases then jumping sharply to 170 as a top score is a bit odd. It's further strange since I would think that the odds of the Dolphins defense getting more than 2 points would be pretty high.

Just figured I'd point it out in case there's a bug in the Turkometer.

-QG

You're looking at week 3 scores. SF scored 13 this week.

-QG

 

[CalBear]

Foster would not be a stud under our definitions we were bouncing around in this thread. He was the cheapest starting RB out there, so a must have like mentioned above. He just is out performing his price so far, along with other players like LT.

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

Foster's ranking shot way up to where some considered him an RB1, and the experts on this site on average ranked him RB18: Foster RB18 by experts

The 18th most expensive RB in this contest was $26, twice what Foster cost. The "stud" definitions on this thread considered any player at $26 to be a stud.

When you're finished beating that straw man, please let us know.

 

[rzrback77]

Foster would not be a stud under our definitions we were bouncing around in this thread. He was the cheapest starting RB out there, so a must have like mentioned above. He just is out performing his price so far, along with other players like LT.

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

Foster's ranking shot way up to where some considered him an RB1, and the experts on this site on average ranked him RB18: Foster RB18 by experts

The 18th most expensive RB in this contest was $26, twice what Foster cost. The "stud" definitions on this thread considered any player at $26 to be a stud.

No way that the RB18 in a start two RB league would be considered stud. Foster was definitely a value as his $13 cost was set four weeks or so before the season AND before the rookie was injured. Te average ranking of RB 18 would indicate a middle of the pack RB2 and that was value at $13 cost. Value does not equal stud. He is producing as a stud because he is at the top of the RB rankings.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I cant believe you guys are wasting time debating the semantics of the definition of the word stud when you could be posting praising my team, which is a lock to win this thing.

But I digress...

A stud is a player who has a demonstrated track record of league leading performance (see Manning, Gore, Gates, etc.) and is valued as such.

A stud is NOT someone who is performing above their value (see Bradshaw, Foster, Tolbert, etc.).

A stud is NOT someone who all the cool kids think is going to be great this year (see Finley).

Now that that's settled, do you think Gronkowski will catch 2 or 3 TDs tonight?

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Foster would not be a stud under our definitions we were bouncing around in this thread. He was the cheapest starting RB out there, so a must have like mentioned above. He just is out performing his price so far, along with other players like LT.

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

Foster's ranking shot way up to where some considered him an RB1, and the experts on this site on average ranked him RB18: Foster RB18 by experts

The 18th most expensive RB in this contest was $26, twice what Foster cost. The "stud" definitions on this thread considered any player at $26 to be a stud.

No way that the RB18 in a start two RB league would be considered stud. Foster was definitely a value as his $13 cost was set four weeks or so before the season AND before the rookie was injured. Te average ranking of RB 18 would indicate a middle of the pack RB2 and that was value at $13 cost. Value does not equal stud. He is producing as a stud because he is at the top of the RB rankings.

Then you disagree with the definition of "stud" that was discussed on this thread. As I said, "It's all in the definition of "stud."

 

[Saint]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Brady $24 30.90 22.40 31.20 bye

Matthew Stafford $16 4.15 0.00 0.00 out? out? out? bye

Derek Anderson $6 21.75 6.05 17.10 bye

Survived week 4.... BUT... Week 5 should be interesting... I mean who needs a QB that week anyway!!!!

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I think you guys are all arguing the wrong point. "Stud" in this context is just shorthand for "expensive player." Foster was not a "stud" because he was not prohibitively expensive - rosters of all sizes could (and obviously did) find room for him because of his low price. Whether or not he's actually a stud, performance-wise, won't really be determined until the end of the season. But that's irrelevant. When we're talking about things like "stud-led teams," for example, we mean teams with expensive players at the top of their rosters.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:Foster ownership: 75.1%LT ownership: 16.2%

I think you're looking at survival rate or something.Out of all 13,061 entries:Foster owned by 63%Tomlinson by 15.7%Anyway. I don't see how the semantics matter one way or another.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:

Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

I think you're looking at survival rate or something.Out of all 13,061 entries:

Foster owned by 63%

Tomlinson by 15.7%

Anyway. I don't see how the semantics matter one way or another.

No, I got it from the contest stats:
Player price %OWN %LIVE ----------------------------------------Arian Foster $13 75.1 77.3LaDainian Tomlinson $12 16.2 67.2Maybe that's ownership of the entries that are still alive.Agree, the semantics argument is silly. I viewed Foster as a stud because of his unique situation where he should have been priced like other studs, and while I know many don't agree, nobody's going to convince me he wasn't under my definition, which differs from others. IMO, he's the one cheap "stud" (based on preseason value, which in most cases is $ cost, but Foster was mispriced) most entrants got.

 

[The Ref]

I think my but is going to get bailed out by Foster/49ers/Hanson.

 

[Saint]

Question for Drinnen....Do you ever run frequency stats each week to see how the teams are progressing? For example, the summary stats have the following:

This is the percentage of all rosters that contain the given number of players at the given position. For example, 64% of all entries contain exactly two TEs. A blank slot means no entries fall into that category, while a zero means that more than zero but fewer than 0.5% of the entries fell into that category. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12=======================================================qb 3 56 34 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 This table shows the min and max, and the 20th, 40th, 60th, and 80th percentile expenditures for each position. For example, 20% of all entries spent $33 or less at QB, 40% spent $38 or less, 60% spent $42 or less, and 80% spent $47 or less. MIN 20 40 60 80 MAX=================================qb 6 33 38 42 47 194

I am curious about how these progress throughout the weeks (for all positions). Do we have any snapshot of where the percentages are now and costs of those living rosters?

 

[Bad_Mo]

Easy week for me...However, next week with Derek Anderson and Jake Delhighankle. Not looking good at QB.

 

[Utter Chaos]

New England's defense might have just saved me. Their 28 points puts me at 138.8. If the cut is the low 130's then I should be OK.

My wide receivers will be my downfall eventually. I picked nine 2nd and 3rd tier guys hoping that 3 of them will put up good numbers each week. I was doing well until now. I picked 4 (Dez B, Tampa Mike, McCluster, and Camarillo) with a week 4 bye to get it out of the way. My other 5 guys (Garcon, L.Robinson, L.Murphy, Branch, and Crayton) combined for 2 catches for 15 yards! That's a total of 3.5 points for my 3 receivers. I won't last too much longer at that rate.

If I had to do it over again I'd definitely would pick one stud but other than Reggie Wayne and Roddy White there's not many stud WR putting up good, consistant numbers.

 

[levinakl]

179 for me, should be good for another week!

QB - Flacco 17.9

RB - Foster 32.2

Tolbert 17.3

Gore (flex) 17.2

WR - Moore 14.7

Henderson - 11.9

Gaffney - 10.1

TE - Z. Miller - 34.7

K - Bironas - 13

D - Detroit - 10

Thank god for Zach Miller's huge game (and Foster of course), in helping me overcome AJ's injury

 

[The Man With No Name]

189.85 with 6 byes, 2 rb's active and only 28 points from my wr's. I'll take it and like it.

 

[pinda]

In at 155 with 2 players putting up a 0......hoping this enough to move on.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I think you guys are all arguing the wrong point. "Stud" in this context is just shorthand for "expensive player." Foster was not a "stud" because he was not prohibitively expensive - rosters of all sizes could (and obviously did) find room for him because of his low price. Whether or not he's actually a stud, performance-wise, won't really be determined until the end of the season. But that's irrelevant. When we're talking about things like "stud-led teams," for example, we mean teams with expensive players at the top of their rosters.

I would argue that a true stud-led team is one that has at least 4+ and probably really 5+ such players. Even moreso I think that in terms of the argument at hand, we're looking at the teams that went with more expensive mid-tier/back-up guys as well.I have Peterson and Calvin as my two most expensive players (with Rivers as a marginal-stud perhaps - $19 is kinda borderline at best). But I have a 26-player roster where largely value prevailed. But if you tied up over half your budget, say, on your top 5 players this is definitely as example of that.Just my opinion anyhow.Foster is an example of a bargain player, regardless of how much faith folks had in him prior to the season.-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

Foster was an anomaly, obviously mis-priced because the prices were set weeks before the contest closed:

Foster ownership: 75.1%

LT ownership: 16.2%

I think you're looking at survival rate or something.Out of all 13,061 entries:

Foster owned by 63%

Tomlinson by 15.7%

Anyway. I don't see how the semantics matter one way or another.

No, I got it from the contest stats:
Player price %OWN %LIVE ----------------------------------------Arian Foster $13 75.1 77.3LaDainian Tomlinson $12 16.2 67.2Maybe that's ownership of the entries that are still alive.Agree, the semantics argument is silly. I viewed Foster as a stud because of his unique situation where he should have been priced like other studs, and while I know many don't agree, nobody's going to convince me he wasn't under my definition, which differs from others. IMO, he's the one cheap "stud" (based on preseason value, which in most cases is $ cost, but Foster was mispriced) most entrants got.

Pretty sure that OWN% is % of the entries that are left that have that player.Pretty sure that LIVE% is the % of the original entries with that player that are still alive.

So out of the remaining 8521 entries left, 6401 (75.1%) of them have Foster

Out of the 8276 entries that had Foster at the start, 6401 (77.3%) are still alive.

Foster was owned by 63.4% of the original entries: Linky

-QG

 

[rzrback77]

I viewed Foster as a stud because of his unique situation where he should have been priced like other studs, and while I know many don't agree, nobody's going to convince me he wasn't under my definition, which differs from others. IMO, he's the one cheap "stud" (based on preseason value, which in most cases is $ cost, but Foster was mispriced) most entrants got.

This part I understand

 

[QuizGuy66]

My unofficial tally of key players tonight. Some numbers for a couple key guys could prove costly for some strong-looking entries:

Brady 14.25

S Morris 0.3

Welker 15.0

Brandon Tate 7.9

Gronkowski 1.9

R Moss 0.0

New England Def: 28.0

Gostkowski 12.0

Henne 24.1

Bess 24.3

Fasano 14.2

Marshall 10.0

R Williams 18.1

R Brown 7.6

Hartline 5.1

Miami Defense: 3.0

Carpenter 2.0

Pretty crazy how the Miami players, by and large, were so much better for the contest than they proved to be in the game.

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

My unofficial tally of key players tonight. Some numbers for a couple key guys could prove costly for some strong-looking entries:The percentages listed are from the START of the contest.Brady 14.25 -- 10.0% ownedS Morris 0.3 -- 3.3%Welker 15.0 -- 17.8%Brandon Tate 7.9 -- 1.2%Gronkowski 1.9 -- 14.2%R Moss 0.0 -- 8.8%New England Def: 28.0 -- 6.2%Gostkowski 12.0 -- 2.9%Henne 24.1 -- 5.9%Bess 24.3 -- 4.3%Fasano 14.2 -- 5.4%Marshall 10.0 -- 7.9%R Williams 18.1 -- 1.7%R Brown 7.6 -- 7.7%Hartline 5.1 -- 2.4%Miami Defense: 3.0 -- 3.2%Carpenter 2.0 -- 7.1%Pretty crazy how the Miami players, by and large, were so much better for the contest than they proved to be in the game.-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

Done at 161.05 btw.

-QG

 

[THE UNDERCOVER BROTHA]

No AJ, Austin, M.Williams, Schaincoe means this 19 man roster is toast.LOL, cant even find a flex guy right now.BradyFosterBradshawR.MossNicksM.ClaytonFinleySpiller/Gronkowski (flex?) thats all i have to choose from.HansonSaints.I think im around 110 right now....this heavy wr core team looks like i wont make it, But all along i knew if one of the big time wr's got hurt my ### was in trouble anyways.A.Johnson, R.Moss, M.Austin and H.Nicks was alot to spend on wr's. Clayton and M.Williams have been nice additions however. Anyway, i hope Brady/Moss does well enough for me to survive.

Thx MOSS and BRADY....you sonava#####ez might have just eliminated me.And i was at 100% survival....

 

[QuizGuy66]

Well getting through the first deep sweat week, I figure I'll take a look at my team and consider how I'm doing.

Week 5 the bye situation is much less dire as I have Leon Washington, Branch, and Fasano missing (probably no Stafford still too)

QBs

Rivers $19 Week 10 bye

Stafford $16 Week 7 bye (hurt)

Anderson $6 Week 6 bye (possibly benched)

Glad I went with 3, though Rivers is pretty much the whole show right now for me. Hope that Stafford gets back sooner than later but certainly by the ever-so-critical week 10 . Things look pretty bad with Anderson, but it wouldn't shock me if he doesn't end up playing again at some point - still gotta figure anything out of him is strictly gravy. In hindsight, shoulda grabbed Bradford I guess. Some regret not taking Ryan over Stafford, but if he gets back I'm okay with that, that's just bad luck. No regrets so far passing on Schaub and going with Rivers.

RBs

ADP $38 Week 4 bye

Spiller $17 Week 6 bye

Foster $13 Week 7 bye

L Washington $8 Week 5 bye

T Jones $7 Week 4 bye

B Scott $6 Week 6 bye

Glad I took ADP here. I feel he's blue chip and slightly out of favor for this kind of contest and I like that. Spiller's been a bust so far, but if they trade Lynch away and as the season gets more and more bleak I think they are much more likely to see what the kid can do. I still have hope. Foster has been as advertised and more - a guy you knew was Frank Gore 2.0 in this contest and that everyone would have but he's brought it. Eventually may be on 100% of surviving entries rendering one starting spot moot Washington looks like pretty much a swing and a miss who will provide little dribbles of points, but one year a one catch 2-yard peformance from Sinorice Moss kept me alive in this contest so even the occasional 7-performance is better than nothing. Still, I expected more. Thomas Jones has proven to be value so far and the fact that they are winning probably keeps his role intact. Figure he'll be good for a decent number of flexes this year. Scott will continue to provide little (though he did get a touch in the red-zone against the Browns) - pretty much a gamble that will give big numbers if he has to step in for Benson. All-in-all I think I did pretty good.

WRs

Calvin $27 Week 7 bye

Gaffney $16 Week 9 bye

M Williams $8 Week 4 bye

Berrian $7 Week 4 bye

L Robinson $7 Week 9 bye

H Dougals $5 Week 8 bye

L Murphy $4 Week 10 bye

Branch $3 Week 5 bye

I've believed in Calvin the whole way and still do - I thought he was a must-have and this week showed why IMO. Gaffney has been great so far, though I think he'll be boom or bust from week to week. Mike Williams has been solid and I think he'll stay so. Berrian is pretty much a total disaster who I have a hard time seeing getting back on track. I though Laurent Robinson was before the year started and another must have but Clayton basically took his #1 spot and his untimely injury might leave him just table scraps ala Berrian. Harry Douglas will have the odd good week like this one and will have the random flex now and again but I'm not counting on much. I'm hoping that Murphy's week this week was more an exception due to some injury issues than a hint of things to come - my gut says he'll be fine. Branch is the kind of guy who'll pop the odd 10-pointer but usually not do much but at $3 I think he's fine. On balance, I still like the group, but I'm a little nervous - I think the throwing a bunch of stuff on the wall and see what sticks approach has gone well.

TEs

Winslow $14 Week 4 bye

Fasano $7 Week 5 bye

Gresham $6 Week 6 bye

The position that had me pondering my team at this point in the first place. I went against the grain somewhat purposefully here and took Winslow over Shiancoe - probably wouldn't do that again, but I also think the Winslow pick is gonna prove sneaky good. I went away from Finley as well, figuring the whole world would take him and that this committee approach might serve better. It was a deliberate zag, particularly figuring in Finley's week 10 bye and the fact that I already have Rivers on bye there and that a lot of folks will have Packers and Saints and thus have some bye issues that week.

I don't think this strategy will hurt me too much in the end.

So far Winslow/Fasano/Gresham have given me 17.50, 14.30, 11.90, and 14.20 at the TE position (with one flex 11.00 for good measure). Finley's totals have been 10.70, 16.30, 25.00, 15.60. Now I fully realize that this means Finley's gotten 8.7 more points over the 4 weeks, but that's not as massive as most would think. Now I will say that adding Gresham to Finley (thus give $27 at TE just like I have) would pop another 6.8 onto the difference but still not so bad.

PKs

Bironas $3, week 9 bye

Janikowski $2, week 10 bye

Bryant $2, week 8 bye

I'm a big believer in the power of 3 kickers as a diversification hedge. So far this group has gotten me 53 points over 4 weeks. The gold standard for kicker excellence of course is 21-kicker guy. He has 67 points over the same period so I think my troika holds up well.

DEFs

Chicago $4, week 8 bye

Tampa Bay $3, week 4 bye

Detroit $2, week 7 bye

Again diversification in action here. 42 points in four week (3 10's and a 12). Now here the gold standard would be of course 17-defense guy. He had 82 points. Looking a little more at my situation, in the first 3 weeks there were between 6 and 8 teams that put up double-digit totals. Nearly half of the teams in the league in this time put up 5 points or less. I'm glad I went with 3.

So there you go

Hopefully my guys will keep on fighting

-QG

 

[Jayrod]

I'm moving on with 164.2

Schaub - 21.7

Foster - 32.2

Hightower - 2.4

White - 17.4

Welker - 15.0

Murphy - 1.5

Finley - 15.6

Hernandez - 10.4

Hanson - 20.0

New England - 28.0

 

[Doug Drinen]

129.75

 

[belljr]

GOD BLESS THE NEW ENGLAND DEF/ST

129.90.

My team is awful and I threw it together in about 5 minutes, hence one TE but it's fun to still be alive

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

The AJ/Chris Johnson/Rice/Murphy/Williams owners should be trimmed back this week.

This group lost its first three members, dropping from 10 to 7. Welker and my other studs saved me this week.The Rodgers/Chris Johnson/Foster/AJ/Finley group lost its first 11 members, dropping from 76 to 65, with a slightly lower than average elimination rate this week despite AJ's late scratch and Chris Johnson's dud. 85.53% still alive, vs. 55.66% overall in the contest.

 

[comfortably numb]

Where is that search query?

Just wanted to see how many people had my RB's.

I think that is where I can separate myself some.

Going in, no one had my 4 RB's

of

Gore

Foster

Forte

Felix

and I think only 50something had those top 3, just wanted to see how many are left.

Thanks

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Brady

Anderson

Zero points for QB coming Week 5. and Moss on bye.

Hopefully Wayne, Gore, Bradshaw, Foster, Tolbert, Ocho Cinco, Driver and Gates can cover the slack.

- your 2010 lock entry

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

Where is that search query?Just wanted to see how many people had my RB's.I think that is where I can separate myself some.Going in, no one had my 4 RB's of GoreFosterForteFelixand I think only 50something had those top 3, just wanted to see how many are left.Thanks

68 had the top 3. 59 are left.go to weekly content to find a link to the query form.

 

[Dodge]

I've been doing well so far. I'm averaging about 190 pts every week.

 

[LittlePhatty]

Where is that search query?

Querierer...erAJ + Moss combo = only 41% survival and they haven't even hit byes yet.

 

[texan]

ADP, Witten, Succop (my only kicker) and Miles on bye. This 19 man roster squeaked by with a 140 on a tough bye week. Now if Anderson can just keep his job until Schaub's bye...unlikely.

 

[Marauder]

Brady

Anderson

Zero points for QB coming Week 5. and Moss on bye.

Hopefully Wayne, Gore, Bradshaw, Foster, Tolbert, Ocho Cinco, Driver and Gates can cover the slack.

- your 2010 lock entry

I'm in the same boat with Brady, Stafford and Anderson as my three QB's. What gives me a little hope is I would have survived week 4 even if I had taken a zero at the QB position, and that was with 9 other players on my roster also with a big zero either because of byes or injuries. Hopefully I can get something out of my WR position this week.

 

[firstseason1988]

Johnny Knox 3.60 Malcom Floyd 6.50 Louis Murphy 1.50

Got 168.75 and these were my 3 counting WRs. Got LT2 and Foster, and Tolbert. Used Pettigrew but didn't use Finley.I didn't realize how lucky I was.I guess I might have a hard time with these WRs, hopefully just a bad week.

Johnny Knox $18 8.20 12.60 13.60 3.60 bye Malcom Floyd $17 7.80 18.50 21.70 6.50 bye Mike Williams $8 14.00 13.40 10.50 0.00 Bernard Berrian $7 1.30 4.40 3.10 0.00 Laurent Robinson $7 10.80 1.40 0.00 0.00 out? bye Julian Edelman $5 0.00 1.60 3.90 0.00 bye Jordy Nelson $4 1.70 4.60 5.00 0.00 bye Louis Murphy $4 6.80 21.10 16.90 1.50 bye Greg Camarillo $3 3.90 1.30 3.60 0.00 Patrick Crayton $3 0.00 2.50 8.70 0.00 bye ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[TheFanatic]

I had the NE D. That's about all I needed... Then again playing against the same D in my main league pretty much sucked...

 

[wollac]

18) 79.31 () 46.36

19) 84.15 () 54.33

20) 85.44 () 57.47

21) 88.03 () 60.46

22) 90.05 () 62.33

23) 91.76 () 66.99

24) 93.21 () 69.86

25) 94.14 () 71.89

26) 92.92 () 72.4

27) 93.12 () 75.54

28) 93.85 () 67.78

29) 95.54 () 75.35

30) 94.01 () 75.28

I can't get the spacing right, but the first column is roster size, the second column is Week 4 survival rate (which is the first indication of how bye week affects roster size), and the last column is overall survival rate, through four weeks. I think the data is becoming pretty clear.

 

[CrossEyed]

Averaging about 182 and looking good so far. I get Ben added to my roster in a couple of weeks and I've gotten pretty balanced scoring from Ryan, Foster, LT, McCoy, Calvin, Gaffney, and Finley. Week 7 with LT, Foster and Calvin all on byes will probably be a big challenge. Fortunately those are my only byes that week, so hopefully I get some unexpected contributions elsewhere.

 

[Bruce Leroy]

18)	79.31 ()	46.3619)	84.15 ()	54.3320)	85.44 ()	57.4721)	88.03 ()	60.4622)	90.05 ()	62.3323)	91.76 ()	66.9924)	93.21 ()	69.8625)	94.14 ()	71.8926)	92.92 ()	72.427)	93.12 ()	75.5428)	93.85 ()	67.7829)	95.54 ()	75.3530)	94.01 ()	75.28

I can't get the spacing right, but the first column is roster size, the second column is Week 4 survival rate (which is the first indication of how bye week affects roster size), and the last column is overall survival rate, through four weeks. I think the data is becoming pretty clear.

How's that?

 

[MIMN]

I can't believe that I survived that Min/Dallas bye week. I've got a slight chance to hold on a week or two more but week 8 bye should eliminate me (didn't even look at bye weeks when selecting).

Oh well.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Here's probably the most amazing statistic I've seen. Somtimes it really is good to run with the heard.

Foster owners: 5878 out of 8276 are still alive (71.02% vs 55.66% overall)

Non-Foster owners: 1392 out of 4785 are still alive (29.09% vs 55.66% overall)

That is just crazy!

Out of the 7270 survivors (including staff), 80.85% of the entries have Foster on their roster.

-QG

 

[firstseason1988]

Here's probably the most amazing statistic I've seen. Somtimes it really is good to run with the heard.Foster owners: 5878 out of 8276 are still alive (71.02% vs 55.66% overall)Non-Foster owners: 1392 out of 4785 are still alive (29.09% vs 55.66% overall) That is just crazy!Out of the 7270 survivors (including staff), 80.85% of the entries have Foster on their roster.-QG

This is only the 2nd year I have been a subscriber, so I didn't do it 2 years ago, but 2 years ago, didn't almost everyone in the final 250 have Kurt Warner? It seems like you have to find a gem like that to do well. Last year I don't remember anyone gem-like like that except maybe Finley. but Foster could be that guy this year. so far,he is. Cool thing is, it very well could be someone totally off the radar right now.

 

[Bruce Leroy]

This is only the 2nd year I have been a subscriber, so I didn't do it 2 years ago, but 2 years ago, didn't almost everyone in the final 250 have Kurt Warner? It seems like you have to find a gem like that to do well. Last year I don't remember anyone gem-like like that except maybe Finley. but Foster could be that guy this year. so far,he is. Cool thing is, it very well could be someone totally off the radar right now.

Last year.Jermichael Finley $3Sidney Rice was $4 (Super Stud)Mendenhall $10Maroney $4 (Yes he was decent last year from week #6 on)Rodgers $27

 

[eaglezzz]

197.55 points this week.

I love having WR's combos

I have

Bess/Marshall (This combo is money I think These two can take me far) Both guys have counted in 3 weeks a peice.

I also have the TB combo that might be alright down the road

Williams/Stroughter (Williams has been money - Stroughter I still think has some value down the line).

I went with 11 WR's because of the PPR 1 pt - and that has been the best decision. I wish I would have combo Garcon/Collie as well but I just took Garcon for the upside and nothing but downside so far.

I like my team but not sure how unique it really is.

Rivers - Liked the schedule and the price of $19 wasn't bad.

Roethlisberger - Top ten QB when he gets back

Bradshaw - He has turned into a stud RB - Questionable this week

Spiller - Not a great pick but still is healthy and might get involved in the Offense later in the season

Foster - Stud RB for sure - Everybody has him

Washington - Dud pick but if Forsett goes down he will get some work

Jones - I think Jones numbers go down soon once KC starts losing

Scott - I just have a feeling Bensen will get hurt at some point

Choice - Not a great pick but if Dallas wants to win they will have to run

Tolbert - $1 well spent. He has talent and even with Matthews back he will get some touches

C. Johnson - Week 4 was an example of what he can do

Marshall - PPR King

Garcon - Natta

Willims - Great WR3 for my team

Stroughter - ? not sure how involved in the offense he becomes but nice that him and Williams byes are over

Bess - PPR assistant King

Murphy - Needs to stay healthy

Branch - Seattle WR's are a mess - any week one can step up

Camarillo - Still think he has some value.

Sanders - Injuried but when he comes back later I think he will be a nice WR for the Steelers

Finneran - $1 for another player that will see the field.

Finley - Huge talent that most people have rostered

Scheffler - If he stays healthy should continue to put up decent numbers

Gronkowski - Red Zone TD guy - Hernandez is clearly the better TE for PPR

Bironas - Just went with kickers that had different byes and could kick long FG's. Also that played in warmer weather.

Succop

Janikowski

49ers - I took all 3 of the highest owned Defenses.

Saints

Lions

I don't really think Byes will be an issue for me team going forward I spread them all out pretty good. I think my biggest problem will be that my team is not very unique. The only think unique I would say is that I did take 30 players which might pay off when it gets harder to make the cut later in the year. I kind of wish I took another TE as well in place of my 3rd kicker.

 

[Go DC Yourself]

I like my team but not sure how unique it really is.Roethlisberger - Top ten QB when he gets backBradshaw - He has turned into a stud RB - Questionable this week Washington - Dud pick but if Forsett goes down he will get some workMarshall - PPR KingGarcon - NattaBess - PPR assistant KingMurphy - Needs to stay healthyBranch - Seattle WR's are a mess - any week one can step upGronkowski - Red Zone TD guy - Hernandez is clearly the better TE for PPRI don't really think Byes will be an issue for me team going forward I spread them all out pretty good. I think my biggest problem will be that my team is not very unique. The only think unique I would say is that I did take 30 players which might pay off when it gets harder to make the cut later in the year. I kind of wish I took another TE as well in place of my 3rd kicker.

Its's not the byes that get you, its the guys who get nicked for a game or two, and those games fall when you have your most byes. This week might be key for you if Bradshaw, Garcon, and Murphy all are hobbled.

 

[kface]

somehow made it through with this performance from the wrs

Johnny Knox $18 8.20 12.60 13.60 3.60 bye

Jabar Gaffney $16 12.40 3.50 26.00 10.10 bye

Mike Williams $8 14.00 13.40 10.50 0.00

Legedu Naanee $7 22.00 2.40 9.10 1.40 bye

Julian Edelman $5 0.00 1.60 3.90 0.00 bye

Louis Murphy $4 6.80 21.10 16.90 1.50 bye

Greg Camarillo $3 3.90 1.30 3.60 0.00

Jordan Shipley $3 13.20 9.20 6.70 4.90

 

[tigerz]

Yay, Grant owner still alive another week. LT, Foster, and Bradshaw are saving me. I thought Floyd and Santana's no shows would kill me for sure but getting ~180 each week.

 

[dudaman]

Here's probably the most amazing statistic I've seen. Somtimes it really is good to run with the heard.Foster owners: 5878 out of 8276 are still alive (71.02% vs 55.66% overall)Non-Foster owners: 1392 out of 4785 are still alive (29.09% vs 55.66% overall) That is just crazy!Out of the 7270 survivors (including staff), 80.85% of the entries have Foster on their roster.-QG

712 out of 919 (77.5%) Dustin Keller owners are still alive.566 out of 621 (91.1%) of owners that have both are still alive.I hope these two can keep the mojo alive.