Veteran in Lineup vs Prospect on Bench (1 Viewer)

[eighsse2]

In a dynasty league. Assume "generic game" as for the significance of winning or losing the game. (That is to say, if the game is for the title, the answer is pretty obvious. If the game is to secure the 1.01 in the draft, the answer is probably obvious the other direction. So assume that this is a game of unknown significance. Or a week 1 game with an average team.) The "prospect on your bench" is a deeper dart-throw kind of guy. Not like, generational 1.01 type of guy.

ETA: Don't want to get overly specific, but maybe I shouldn't say "deeper dart-throw". But more of a middling prospect who hasn't yet gotten to shine.

 

[Gally]

The point is to win the game. I want the 50 in my lineup.

 

[eighsse2]

The point is to win the game. I want the 50 in my lineup.

I get it. I figured my opinion (yeah, the other option) would be pretty unpopular.

If that 50-point game on your bench turns out to be the first sign of superstardom, that could contribute significantly to many, many wins. Now, of course it doesn't necessarily mean anything. But a moderate prospect could turn out to have an entirely inconsequential career, or be a 22-ppg guy for the next 9 years, or anywhere in between. A 50-point game is substantial enough evidence -- I think, anyway -- to move the needle quite a bit.

On the other side, a goose-egg is horrible, but it doesn't even guarantee a loss. And even if it is a loss, there's a small chance it could be a blowout where 50 points wouldn't even turn a loss to a win. And even if it does create an actual loss, there's a relatively low chance that one game will make the difference between playoffs and no playoffs. (Of course, my wording could possibly be taken to allow for the game to be a playoff game, in which case it would make all the difference in the world, but I didn't really intend a playoff game to be in consideration here.)

 

[-OZ-]

Unless I’m building and not competing this year it’s got to be the guy in my lineup.

Eta - I’ve been quite happy starting Myles Garrett every week who’s been giving 48+ point weeks.

 

[TheWinz]

It makes for an interesting study. Do dart throws begin their rise to stardom with a monster performance out of the blue, or do they slowly push their way into more snaps with their talent? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.

 

[eighsse2]

It makes for an interesting study. Do dart throws begin their rise to stardom with a monster performance out of the blue, or do they slowly push their way into more snaps with their talent? I'm willing to bet it's the latter.

Fair point, and that may be the more common path. But ultimately if you look at two very similar prospects A and B, and A has scored 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 points in his first 7 games, where B has scored 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 28 points, are you going to say, well, they've both scored 28 total, but A is taking a more natural path, so ...

(Edited because my numbers were way off)

I don't know if that's exactly a fair example or not, but the point is mainly, a huge game is a huge indicator. It could be a false blip (Jonas Gray). It could be the start of something (Puka Nacua).

 

[JohnnyU]

Balance

 

[eighsse2]

Also the initial observation that kind of developed into this poll is a more general thing. I always hear people upset that they "left so-and-so on the bench and he blew up" for however many points. But I have never, ever, ever, ever been upset about that, because every point scored today contributes to trade value and future expectations. Granted, I'm dynasty-only. In redraft I could understand. And in an elimination game, yeah, I can get that. But even so, it's still a good sign for your future.

 

[Gally]

Also the initial observation that kind of developed into this poll is a more general thing. I always hear people upset that they "left so-and-so on the bench and he blew up" for however many points. But I have never, ever, ever, ever been upset about that, because every point scored today contributes to trade value and future expectations. Granted, I'm dynasty-only. In redraft I could understand. And in an elimination game, yeah, I can get that. But even so, it's still a good sign for your future.

I would not necessarily agree that it's a good sign for your future. I mean it's better than a zero but a one off game by itself doesn't really indicate much. If a guy goes, 2, 2, 2, 50, 2, 2, 2 what does that 50 pt game really do for value. It's an anomaly.

It could be a good sign but that single data point doesn't really mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Grahamburn]

Using a real life example from this weekend any team that has invested in, believed in, and hung onto Sean Tucker would have been happy to see that game even if he were on their bench.

In terms of the question if you’re choosing between the two there’s only one reasonable answer if it meant the difference between W/L.

 

[eighsse2]

any team that has invested in, believed in, and hung onto Sean Tucker

Nailed it. I lost my game, but I am ecstatic about Tucker (I know, I know, he isn't going to get anything once Irving is back ... but I really really hope having two huge games when he's gotten the chance gets him somewhere.) Egbuka was the only one in my lineup who, if replaced with Tucker would have gotten me the win. Now, Egbuka doesn't work too well, because he's a prospect too. But, suppose it were AJ Brown who scored 9 points in my lineup? If you offer me the power to alter reality and make AJ score 34 and Tucker score 9 instead, such that I win? I don't think I do it. Granted, I have clinched a playoff berth. But I was playing the guy who is 2 games ahead of me, and only #1 gets a bye in the first round. So I was definitely playing for something. But not playing for enough to give up the Tucker performance.

 

[TheWinz]

We all want our young bench players to break out, but let's face it - the odds are not in their favor, and that's why we all churn the bottom of our rosters. The secret is, if they ever do break out, do you quickly sell high, or hold and hope they are the real deal? Guessing correctly here can make or break your team. Let's go over a recent example:

RB Jacory Croskey-Merritt - sell high after his week 5 monster game, or hold? This should've been an easy decision, but many held onto hope, and now have a RB who has been outscored in fantasy by 2 of his own RB teammates over the last 6 weeks. Were the warning signs there?
- Selected as the last of 25 RB's in the NFL draft -
- 24 year old rookie -
- Spent 4 years at a crappy college -
- Averaged 3.5 yards per carry -
- Stupid nickname -
- Unbelievable hype -

 

[Lansdowne]

Seeing a prospect flourish is nice even if it’s on the bench, but it’s a major peeve of mine to see points wasted on the bench, especially if it could’ve saved my matchup. Give me the points in the lineup with the savvy veteran. I’m happy with flashes of potential from the prospect on the bench, but not entire outbursts.

 

[eighsse2]

Would be interesting to do a poll over thousands of dynasty players using two random numbers instead of the extreme 0 and 50. Then graph it out and see what number pairs people would prefer the prospect outscoring the vet.

 

[Gally]

Would be interesting to do a poll over thousands of dynasty players using two random numbers instead of the extreme 0 and 50. Then graph it out and see what number pairs people would prefer the prospect outscoring the vet.

I actually think it will lean more to philosophy for dynasty builds. The owners that are always playing for "next year" will for sure always take the shiny new bench toy scoring points because of the "future benefits". The guys that are always "win now" will want the points in the lineup.

I think most dynasty players fall in those two categories. You will get guys to say they are in the middle and play based on how their team is doing but deep down people will always lean one way or the other. I believe I am a middle guy but I know deep down I am a win now guy. I will always look to improve for both the future and now but my goal is always to win so punting on a season for next year is very rare. I think in my 20 yrs of playing dynasty I have only done that one time and it was when I had my core guys all get season ending injuries early. I didn't want to trade them away for the now because they were still young and the injuries weren't catastrophic just season ending (or most of season lost). So I shifted and tried to acquire other injured good players for the following year and it worked as I won the title the following year and have been in contention most years. I am most definitely a win now guy.

 

[Grahamburn]

any team that has invested in, believed in, and hung onto Sean Tucker

Nailed it. I lost my game, but I am ecstatic about Tucker (I know, I know, he isn't going to get anything once Irving is back ... but I really really hope having two huge games when he's gotten the chance gets him somewhere.) Egbuka was the only one in my lineup who, if replaced with Tucker would have gotten me the win. Now, Egbuka doesn't work too well, because he's a prospect too. But, suppose it were AJ Brown who scored 9 points in my lineup? If you offer me the power to alter reality and make AJ score 34 and Tucker score 9 instead, such that I win? I don't think I do it. Granted, I have clinched a playoff berth. But I was playing the guy who is 2 games ahead of me, and only #1 gets a bye in the first round. So I was definitely playing for something. But not playing for enough to give up the Tucker performance.

I follow.

I felt like the Bucs could have used Tucker more last year and should have. Bucky was just so red hot that I understood why they didn't. Rachaad White is a FA and Tucker is an RFA. It will likely be the Buck and Tuck show next year.