Up by 21 going into Monday night (1 Viewer)

[thatguy]

Threads that are asking for advice on how you [or your leaguemates] should draft or manage your team belong in The Assistant Coach forum.

Do you really think that's what this is?

Who should he start and why?

Wow, people. It's actually an interesting question, and could very easily have been posed as a simple hypothetical. It just so happens it is based on an actual game. Lighten up. This is in no way a WDIS question. It is a question of general strategy.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Silly question anyway because the answer is always start the guy who will score you more points.

trying to keep this generic, this isn't always true. You don't need to score the most points, you need to beat your opponent. Any time you only have 2 relatively equal WRs remaining, he only has one of your WR's QB left, you are up by 3 TDs, can change your lineup, and the moon sets before the game starts, you hedge your bets and play the guy linked to his QB. This question has mass application!

LOL, that was priceless by_the_sea. "Silly question anyway because..." and then you went on to provide the WRONG answer.

 

[Jersey35]

FWIW, I'm really shocked at the negative response this has received.

You shouldn't be. I'm not sure why people don't get this, but the best way to avoid being confused with a misplaced WDIS topic is to leave the names out.

Because this is an actual, real situation where the theory of hedging your bets in fantasy football might come into play. Leaving the names out makes it just another thread on theory - which never go anywhere around here. My intent was to demonstrate that these situations DO occur, and that there IS value in discussing it as a viable strategy.Why don't some of you board police cadets just politely walk away? If the mods think this is an actual WDIS, they'll move it. In fact, I officially request that a mod chime in and remove this thread if they think it is inappropriate.

And is this thread going where you expected it to go? You could have attracted more intelligent discussion if you left out the specific names. However, if you think the Shark Pool isn't intelligent enough to discuss theory, then you certainly shouldn't be 'shocked' that most here would mistake your post for one of the many WDIS posts that pollute the pool daily.

I don't purport to be board police and I am not saying the topic merits no discussion (in fact it has been discussed many times over in the SP). I am simply surprised at your incredulity that your topic would be received in the manner it was.

So here I am again, defending my decision to post this. If you've read any of the theoretical debate threads on this topic, you know that one of the most frequent arguments by those against (besides "start your best player") is that it never happens or that they can't even conceive of a time when you might NOT choose to start the guy you think might score the moat points. This was an attempt to demonstrate that this situation DOES in fact happen using a real life example.And yes, I am surprised that this is such a problem. I've been around for 7 years and followed Joe and David eevn before that. I think highly of this place, and I guess I didn't realize how bad it has gotten around here.

 

[thatguy]

To answer the questions:

Ahead by 21 in this situation, definitely start Ward with the hope that he will offset at least part of Big Ben's production.

Down by 21, start Ocho Cinco. If Ward has a big day, it's almost a certainty that Big Ben does as well. That is to say, even if Ward scores 21 points, there is almost no way you win, unless Big Ben gets injured early (of course, there is one other scenario where you can win: perhaps Big Ben throws for 250 yards, 210 to Ward, but has 5 or more turnovers--a very, very unlikely scenario). So, your only real chance is to start Ocho, hope he has a monster game and hope Big Ben has an awful game.

 

[thatguy]

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

 

[DoubleG]

Start Ward, of course, given a choice.Off subject a little...is it just me, or does anyone else find it strange that a league allows changing/choosing from players participating in Monday Night Football. In every league I've participated, everyone is required to submit their complete line-up prior to Sunday 1:00 PM (barring a Thursday game).

Any CBS league, by default, will allow you change starters up to 5 minutes before their respective games. So, if you have two guys slotted to go on Monday night at the same position, you can swap them up until 5 minutes before kickoff. It's a nice feature, especially if you have a guy thats in doubt playing later on Sunday, but have a viable alternative also playing a later game (or even Sunday night or Monday) - it gives you options. In-game injuries, or guys who suddenly don't play when they were expected to, is my one pet peeve about FF. In real NFL football, if Romo or Cutler goes down, their coaches don't say "Oh well, we'll just play without a QB" (regardless as to what you think of their respective backups) - in FF, owners are forced to do just that. Back to your regularly scheduled thread, which is about strategy, btw.

 

[Jersey35]

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

Thanks. I have no other reason to really care about this game, so I'll be watching to see how the numbers fall between Ben, Ward, and Ochocinco. I am a bit disappointed though, when I glanced at their scoring totals for the year, I assumed that Ochocinco would be the favored start here if not taking into account the cancel theory.So maybe not as great an example as I thought it might be, but c'est la vie.

 

[DoubleG]

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

Honestly, this was one of the more interesting threads today. All the people suggesting it belongs in the AC are either being tools or just dense.The reason it's interesting, is simply because it doesn't fit into the classic "start whoever you think will get the most points" or "always start your studs...unless they're up against Revis" line of thinking.It would be a slightly more interesting discussion if it was TO (i.e. someone who will more than likely outscore Ward)... but I don't want to hijack.

 

[fred_1_15301]

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

Thanks. I have no other reason to really care about this game, so I'll be watching to see how the numbers fall between Ben, Ward, and Ochocinco. I am a bit disappointed though, when I glanced at their scoring totals for the year, I assumed that Ochocinco would be the favored start here if not taking into account the cancel theory.So maybe not as great an example as I thought it might be, but c'est la vie.

Agree for you to ignore the idiots. My question for you is why you think it isn't an obvious answer to start Ward in this situation? We're not comparing Roddy White to Ward here. We're comparing the # 2 wr for the Bengals to Ward. Ward has 365 yds and 3 tds and Ochocinco has 458 yds and 2 tds. Factor in that Ward played his first 4 games without Ben, this isn't much of a difference. Certainly not enough of a difference to offset the other advantage of playing Ward. I like the idea for the thread but I think this is a pretty easy decision.

 

[Jersey35]

O

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

Thanks. I have no other reason to really care about this game, so I'll be watching to see how the numbers fall between Ben, Ward, and Ochocinco. I am a bit disappointed though, when I glanced at their scoring totals for the year, I assumed that Ochocinco would be the favored start here if not taking into account the cancel theory.So maybe not as great an example as I thought it might be, but c'est la vie.

Agree for you to ignore the idiots. My question for you is why you think it isn't an obvious answer to start Ward in this situation? We're not comparing Roddy White to Ward here. We're comparing the # 2 wr for the Bengals to Ward. Ward has 365 yds and 3 tds and Ochocinco has 458 yds and 2 tds. Factor in that Ward played his first 4 games without Ben, this isn't much of a difference. Certainly not enough of a difference to offset the other advantage of playing Ward. I like the idea for the thread but I think this is a pretty easy decision.

Well, as you can tell from my comment above, I agree. As I said earlier, in my league, Ochocinco leads Ward by about a point per game. I figured it was close enough for it to at least be debatable - obviously I was wrong.

 

[footballnerd]

Threads that are asking for advice on how you [or your leaguemates] should draft or manage your team belong in The Assistant Coach forum.

Do you really think that's what this is? :whoosh:

Who should he start and why?

Wow, people. It's actually an interesting question, and could very easily have been posed as a simple hypothetical. It just so happens it is based on an actual game. Lighten up. This is in no way a WDIS question. It is a question of general strategy.

Tell you the truth I was going to give his thread a shot even if it was so vaguely written what he wanted from the discussion, but then the OP decides to take shots at responders INSTEAD of expanding on his discussion and saving the thread.

 

[Jersey35]

Tell you the truth I was going to give his thread a shot even if it was so vaguely written what he wanted from the discussion, but then the OP decides to take shots at responders INSTEAD of expanding on his discussion and saving the thread.

Pretty sure I've been more polite than most would be. I also took the time to explain things when I got actually questions instead of toolish responses like yours. Give respect and you'll get it in return.

 

[davearm]

So here I am again, defending my decision to post this. If you've read any of the theoretical debate threads on this topic, you know that one of the most frequent arguments by those against (besides "start your best player") is that it never happens or that they can't even conceive of a time when you might NOT choose to start the guy you think might score the moat points. This was an attempt to demonstrate that this situation DOES in fact happen using a real life example.And yes, I am surprised that this is such a problem. I've been around for 7 years and followed Joe and David eevn before that. I think highly of this place, and I guess I didn't realize how bad it has gotten around here.

The fact is, this discussion cannot exist in a theoretical context, because the answer hinges on the actual facts -- the specific players involved and the exact point differential. The "start your best guy" folks will be right in some circumstances, and the "start your hedge guy" will be right in other circumstances.Your reaction here is doing you no favors, btw. It's not the fault of the SP at large that your topic was inherently flawed and much more a WDIS than some intriguing and enlightening philosophical exercise.

 

[Gopher State]

Start Ward because Ochocinco sucks.

This is the correct answer

 

[Doug Drinen]

Obviously a perfectly reasonable thread and not a WDIS. Just as obviously a no-brainer start for Ward.

I think the more interesting question is: given this scenario, which WRs (if any) would you NOT start Ward over in this situation?

 

[davearm]

Obviously a perfectly reasonable thread and not a WDIS. Just as obviously a no-brainer start for Ward.

I think the more interesting question is: given this scenario, which WRs (if any) would you NOT start Ward over in this situation.

But therein lies the problem. This discussion is not generalizable in any useful way: change the players and/or point differential, and the answer changes.

 

[videoguy505]

Sam, I respect your opinion, however, if I came in here asking, "if you have two similar WRs, and your opponent is starting the QB for one of them, should you try to cancel the opponent's points?", I can assure you that the conversation would go nowhere fast.

Because that conversation has been had many times. You start the player that you expect will score the most points. It is that simple.

You should take part in some of those conversations. Your answer is exactly wrong.

 

[videoguy505]

Start the player that has a higher points per game average.

did I miss the smilie in your post?

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Every time I swear I've given up trying to explain this strategy to people I get pulled back in.

The people who don't get it never will.

They look at the projections as gospel, so if Ward is projected to have 5.5 points, and Ocho is projected to have 6.5 points, then you obviously start Ocho, who will score more.

They act is if they know the future and they will never get it.

That said, here I go banging my head against the wall again.

Let's try to break it down like this...

Q: Which scenario is more likely?

1) Big Ben outscores Ocho by 21 points

2) Big Ben outscores Ward by 21 points

If Big Ben has a really good day, it's more likely he had a good day with Hines Ward also having a good day, than he had a good game but Ward didn't.

The other problem people who don't get it is that this is situational. It's not a strategy you use all the time.

The scenario in the first post (I can't believe how many people thought it was actually a WDIS...I mean talk about :woosh is a perfect example.

Anyone who says you start Ocho because he will score more, will NEVER get it.

Hmm...I'm going to start a new exercise and put everyone who doesn't get this on ignore. I've got five from just this thread.

Should help cut down on the nonsense I read when I visit the SP...

I came into this thread hoping for this sort of debate, and after scrolling through a bunch of pissing and moaning, finally get some.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

To the OP, ignore the haters man. I think it is an interesting question and entirely worthy of being discussed. It's a shame you have been blasted for it, but I can't say it's surprising--some people really are clueless.

Thanks. I have no other reason to really care about this game, so I'll be watching to see how the numbers fall between Ben, Ward, and Ochocinco. I am a bit disappointed though, when I glanced at their scoring totals for the year, I assumed that Ochocinco would be the favored start here if not taking into account the cancel theory.So maybe not as great an example as I thought it might be, but c'est la vie.

Agree for you to ignore the idiots. My question for you is why you think it isn't an obvious answer to start Ward in this situation? We're not comparing Roddy White to Ward here. We're comparing the # 2 wr for the Bengals to Ward. Ward has 365 yds and 3 tds and Ochocinco has 458 yds and 2 tds. Factor in that Ward played his first 4 games without Ben, this isn't much of a difference. Certainly not enough of a difference to offset the other advantage of playing Ward. I like the idea for the thread but I think this is a pretty easy decision.

A lot of people have got it wrong, though - stating you should start who you project for a higher score.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Obviously a perfectly reasonable thread and not a WDIS. Just as obviously a no-brainer start for Ward.

I think the more interesting question is: given this scenario, which WRs (if any) would you NOT start Ward over in this situation.

But therein lies the problem. This discussion is not generalizable in any useful way: change the players and/or point differential, and the answer changes.

Not sure I understand your criticism. Isn't your last sentence true of any strategy discussion? Should you handcuff? Should you wait on QBs? Should you trade front-line studliness for depth?

Isn't the answer to any interesting strategical question "it depends"? And isn't the fun part of the discussion trying to pin down what range of situations and/or players would lead you to choose one over the other?

 

[Twilight]

Obviously a perfectly reasonable thread and not a WDIS. Just as obviously a no-brainer start for Ward.

I think the more interesting question is: given this scenario, which WRs (if any) would you NOT start Ward over in this situation.

But therein lies the problem. This discussion is not generalizable in any useful way: change the players and/or point differential, and the answer changes.

Sure it is. Would Roddy White be a better start than Ward, assuming Atlanta replaces Cinci in the game? Chad & Ward are the same tier of WR. Roddy is a clear improvement, WR wise, and much more likely to score huge points, so he would probably be better than the Ward hedge. But at what point down the WR rankings is the Ward hedge a better bet than the straight points of another WR, especially with many of the answers in this thread being that they'd go pretty low (Chad).

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

 

[rick6668]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger. The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Roddy is a clear improvement, WR wise, and much more likely to score huge points, so he would probably be better than the Ward hedge.

You don't need huge points. You're already winning. Your only goal is to make sure Roethlisberger doesn't outscore your WR by a ton of points. If I had Ward and Roddy White in this situation, I'd start Ward every single time. No-brainer.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Hopefully he went with Ward............

 

[Jersey35]

Hopefully he went with Ward............

LOL yea, he's had Ward in from the start, no idea if he ever considered Ochocinco. Funny thing is, after the game started I posted the scenario on our league message board. Everyone who responded said he should have started Ochocinco for the most points.... guess I'm not in a Shark League after all.

 

[Jersey35]

I'm gonna go so far as to say that with a lead that large, I'd take a reasonable hedge (like Ward) over pretty much any WR in the game. I'm trying to think of a #1 WR type I wouldn't use as a hedge in this case. Mike X Williams? I can't really fathom a huge game by his qb without him being involved either... I can't think of any offhand.

 

[mcdons3]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

The only acceptable answer in this scenario is Mike Wallace.It's very surprising how many "sharks" are on the wrong side of this pretty basic scenario. Sadly, though, it's unsurprising how many people whined and complained about this thread without actually reading and comprehending the question being posed to them.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

The only acceptable answer in this scenario is Mike Wallace.It's very surprising how many "sharks" are on the wrong side of this pretty basic scenario. Sadly, though, it's unsurprising how many people whined and complained about this thread without actually reading and comprehending the question being posed to them.

 

[Jersey35]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

The only acceptable answer in this scenario is Mike Wallace.It's very surprising how many "sharks" are on the wrong side of this pretty basic scenario. Sadly, though, it's unsurprising how many people whined and complained about this thread without actually reading and comprehending the question being posed to them.

You're right!

 

[fred_1_15301]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

The only acceptable answer in this scenario is Mike Wallace.It's very surprising how many "sharks" are on the wrong side of this pretty basic scenario. Sadly, though, it's unsurprising how many people whined and complained about this thread without actually reading and comprehending the question being posed to them.

You're right!

Of course it still isn't a black and white scenario. A lot of this depends on your league scoring format and playoff system. For example, my league is setup in a way that rewards teams for being the week's point leader. Additionally, the wildcard team is the non-division winner with the highest point total. Thus, if you're willing to accept the unlikely risk of losing a 21 point lead, there is benefit in starting the stud.

 

[Billy Costigan Jr]

Start Ward, of course, given a choice.Off subject a little...is it just me, or does anyone else find it strange that a league allows changing/choosing from players participating in Monday Night Football. In every league I've participated, everyone is required to submit their complete line-up prior to Sunday 1:00 PM (barring a Thursday game).

Allows you to make adjustments for game time decisions.Say you had Ben as a GTD, and his backup, as well as a QB option starting at 1 PM. If you had to choose at 1 PM with no later adjustments, then you were screwed if you gambled on Ben and he didn't suit up.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I don't think there's any WR I would start over Hines Ward if I was up by 21 and my opponent was starting Roethlisberger.

The probability of Roethlisberger outscoring Ward by 21+ points < the probability of Roethlisberger outscoring ________ by 21+ points.

Fill in that blank with any other WR in the league and I still think it's true.

The only acceptable answer in this scenario is Mike Wallace.It's very surprising how many "sharks" are on the wrong side of this pretty basic scenario. Sadly, though, it's unsurprising how many people whined and complained about this thread without actually reading and comprehending the question being posed to them.

You're right!

Of course it still isn't a black and white scenario. A lot of this depends on your league scoring format and playoff system. For example, my league is setup in a way that rewards teams for being the week's point leader. Additionally, the wildcard team is the non-division winner with the highest point total. Thus, if you're willing to accept the unlikely risk of losing a 21 point lead, there is benefit in starting the stud.

This is also a great point. If you have a two game lead in your division and at this point, you're all but guaranteed making the playoffs and every team starts the playoffs with a score equal to their weekly average? Then you start getting into scenarios where it's acceptable risk to go ahead and start the better WR anyway.

 

[PIK95]

I am a believer in the theory and would start Ward without hesitation even if Ocho is averaging 1 point more per game than Ward (and not taking into account that this is partly due to Ward being without Ben for the first few weeks). I'd start Ward even if I felt that this week Ocho is likely to score around a point more than Ward against the defenses each are facing.The ultimate goal here is not to score as much as you can, but to not let Ben outscore you by 21. The goal is to win, not to score high. Usually those are the same, but not always. If Ben goes off, most likely Ward at least has a good game as well. If Ben does poorly, Ward most likely will have a down week as well. You would be fine with them both having down weeks. You would also be good with them both having good weeks. At least in basic or basic PPR scoring systems, if you are starting Ward, the only way you can lose is the possible, but very unlikely, scenario where Ben has a great game and Ward doesn't benefit from it, but instead puts up a near zero.If you start Ocho, however, if he and Ben both do well or both do poorly, or if Ocho does well and Ben doesn't, you also win. But with no idea of how Palmer will do, there is a much bigger chance that Ben will do well and Ocho poorly than there is that Ward will do badly if Ben does great - and these are the only scenarios you have to worry about. Winning is avoiding those outcomes.I haven't checked, but I would bet that although Ocho may have outscored Ward over the last few years, there are a lot fewer weeks where Ben has outscored Ward by 21 than there are weeks where Ben has outscored Ocho by 21. That's because Ward tends to score a lot when Ben does, and not when he doesn't. Ocho and Ben's scoring have no similar correlation. And that's why your odds of avoiding the only losing scenario - that Ben outscores your WR by 21 - improve dramatically if you start Ward. Does anyone seriously start the guy who will give you less likelihood of winning just because he has the slightly better chance to score more points?(Edit to correct names.)