Who do you consider a better fantasy player>? (1 Viewer)

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Who would you consider a better fantasy player if you were to look at results from the last 4 years and this is how the 2 fantasy players have faired in their respective redraft league. Let's say it is a 12 team league.

Player A)

4 years ago finished 7th

3 years ago finised 8th in the league

2 years ago finised 11th

1 year ago finished 1st

Player B)

4 years ago finised 5th

3 years ago finised 2th

2 years ago finised 4th

1 year ago finised 5th

My take: Consistency in fantasy is what seperates the good fantasy players from the get lucky and win a championship fantasy player. I would say that player b is the stronger fantasy player. Would you rather be player A or Player B?

 

[Sopranos]

This may sound harsh. But i would want to be player A. He wasnt a loser every year. 5th,8th whats the difference...Player b was a loser every season..

 

[H.K.]

Who would you consider a better fantasy player if you were to look at results from the last 4 years and this is how the 2 fantasy players have faired in their respective redraft league. Let's say it is a 12 team league.

Player A)

4 years ago finished 7th

3 years ago finised 8th in the league

2 years ago finised 11th

1 year ago finished 1st

Player B)

4 years ago finised 5th

3 years ago finised 2th

2 years ago finised 4th

1 year ago finised 5th

My take: Consistency in fantasy is what seperates the good fantasy players from the get lucky and win a championship fantasy player. I would say that player b is the stronger fantasy player. Would you rather be player A or Player B?

Player A: Avg finish 6.75 with a titlePlayer B: Avg finish 4th, but no ring

Is B the better player? Probably, that team was better three years out of four, but was a perennial also ran.... I'd rather have a Championship

 

[jurb26]

This should be a poll...

 

[Mario Kart]

Its all about the Championships.

This holds true more in redraft than in dynasty though.

 

[schu]

I'd rather be player A. Swinging for the fences can get you 11th at times but winning a 12 team league once in four years is outstanding.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

The player who doesn't use the terms "shark" or "guppy".

hth

 

[The Jerk]

Given the data, Player B, but it's not just as simple as the place a person finishes...

 

[ScottNorwood]

Trick question. With all the variance of injuries and under/over performers in fantasy football, this isn't a big enough sample size to say who is better.

 

[Colin Dowling]

THe Guy with the Ring....sports (professional and fantasy) are littered with teams that are consistent and win lots of Games. However, no one really cares. It's about winning the last game of the playoffs. Period.

 

[diesel7982]

How much does each position pay?

And why would you ever consider one player to be "better" than another in a draft league? Flip a coin.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

How much does each position pay?And why would you ever consider one player to be "better" than another in a draft league? Flip a coin.

I called heads. It was heads. Send me the $100 entry fee. TIA. See you next season.

 

[dickey moe]

Without looking it up, who lost the NFC championship game three years ago?

BTW, it was Philly.

 

[Kevin Ashcraft]

If I was concerned with my image and what others thought I would say A...but if I was confident in myself and didnt need one title to validate me, then I would want to be B.

I go against the grain as when I played ball, I would much rather have been in the playoffs every season than had one title and sucked the other three seasons.

I like to win more than I lose...just how my ego works.

 

[Kleck]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year.

Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

 

[jurb26]

So let me gat this straight, team A makes the playoffs only once in 4 years and gets "lucky" enough to win it all. Team B makes the playoffs 4 of 4 years, just don't win it all. I say team B is the better player, hands down.

 

[revsonny]

I was Player B in my homeboy league for five years. Then in 2004, I discovered sites like this one. Last year, I won my homeboy league. I expect to at least make the playoffs from here on out, and probably win (since those guys still don't know what hit them).

If Player A won because he did what I did, then he is now the better player.

 

[radballs]

If I was concerned with my image and what others thought I would say A...but if I was confident in myself and didnt need one title to validate me, then I would want to be B.I go against the grain as when I played ball, I would much rather have been in the playoffs every season than had one title and sucked the other three seasons. I like to win more than I lose...just how my ego works.

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

So let me gat this straight, team A makes the playoffs only once in 4 years and gets "lucky" enough to win it all. Team B makes the playoffs 4 of 4 years, just don't win it all. I say team B is the better player, hands down.

s

 

[coolnerd]

I will talk out of both sides of mouth here. With the information given the better manager is team B, but I would rather be team A.

Mixing my sports: Team A is essentially the Florida Marlins, not very good overall, but has brought home the bacon. If I am team A, anyone who is trying to smack my method gets because I have a title.

Team B is the Houston Astros probably have had one season in the last 10 that they have not been competitive, but only seriously challenged for the title once. Team B eventually becomes a yearly

 

[trader jake]

easy choice: B is the better GM

titles seem more luck of the draw...consistently putting your team in the playoffs is not

 

[Colin Dowling]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Tell that to the Atlanta Braves...One gut-shot straight on the river now and then may not make you a good player, but it can make you a bigger winner then being a solid player who rarely drags the large pot. Wasn't it my GB RFW that said the goal in NLHE is to double-up when the opportunity presents itself, not to win frequent small plots? Regardless, I subscribe to that theory...

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

This is way more split then I had anticipated it to be.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Tell that to the Atlanta Braves...One gut-shot straight on the river now and then may not make you a good player, but it can make you a bigger winner then being a solid player who rarely drags the large pot. Wasn't it my GB RFW that said the goal in NLHE is to double-up when the opportunity presents itself, not to win frequent small plots? Regardless, I subscribe to that theory...

Who's the better team...the Braves or the Marlins.A team making a one time "fluke" run does not mean they are the better team in the last 5 years.But I would say that you can not compare this to real life sports, because you are starting from scratch every year in fantasy football. In real life soprts, not only can you actually control your own offense/defense, but you have a core group of guys staying from year to year. Fantasy sports has SOOOO much more luck involved in winning a champioship than real life sports, so these "real-life" comparisons do not really fly with me.

 

[jurb26]

But I would say that you can not compare this to real life sports, because you are starting from scratch every year in fantasy football. In real life soprts, not only can you actually contorl your own play, but you have a core group of guys staying from year to year.

Lots of people are missing the boat here.

 

[revsonny]

It's really tough to answer this question without knowing what each owner has been doing to get better each year. We don't know if Player A's ring is the result of increased knowledge or dumb luck.

 

[coolnerd]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Tell that to the Atlanta Braves...One gut-shot straight on the river now and then may not make you a good player, but it can make you a bigger winner then being a solid player who rarely drags the large pot. Wasn't it my GB RFW that said the goal in NLHE is to double-up when the opportunity presents itself, not to win frequent small plots? Regardless, I subscribe to that theory...

Who's the better team...the Braves or the Marlins.A team making a one time "fluke" run does not mean they are the better team in the last 5 years.But I would say that you can not compare this to real life sports, because you are starting from scratch every year in fantasy football. In real life soprts, not only can you actually control your own offense/defense, but you have a core group of guys staying from year to year. Fantasy sports has SOOOO much more luck involved in winning a champioship than real life sports, so these "real-life" comparisons do not really fly with me.

OT: But this is the start of a great why I play dynasty post.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Awesome post, actually. Consistency gets you in the playoffs. And, once you are in the play-offs anything can happen in FF.I've never finished below .500, and missed the playoffs in FF, and that's primarily due to having a good balance of consistent, underrated vets on my team. In recent years that has included, Garrison Hearst, Tiki (Not the past year), Westbrook, DDavis, Curtis Martin (Not last year), Rod Smith, Toomer (Not the past year or two), Kennison, McCardell, Trent Green, among MANY others. You have to have several of these safe picks on your team, or the long-shot hits will cancel out the long-shot busts, and you'll have a mediocre team.

 

[videoguy505]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

I think FF is like SNGs if we're going with a poker analogy. I'd rather money 1st once and play free for the next 10 seasons, than bubble for no cash every time. A's strategy could very well be try to double up early at the table--take some FF risks with his picks trying to hit the homerun or go bust early.

 

[The Jerk]

I will talk out of both sides of mouth here. With the information given the better manager is team B, but I would rather be team A. Mixing my sports: Team A is essentially the Florida Marlins, not very good overall, but has brought home the bacon. If I am team A, anyone who is trying to smack my method gets because I have a title. Team B is the Houston Astros probably have had one season in the last 10 that they have not been competitive, but only seriously challenged for the title once. Team B eventually becomes a yearly

You're not talking out of both sides of your mouth. I think you get the concept precisely. The question isn't which player you would rather be or which player will be remembered a few years from now. The question is who do you consider a better fantasy player.To me, it is very clearly Team B. Team B had a chance to win each season, while Team A had only one team even above average. I will say that if I was Owner B I would look at why I keep falling short and potentially adjust my strategy to be better come playoff time. However, Owner A may simply have stumbled into a couple of fortunate late-round picks that blew up huge and got him his championship.

 

[The Jerk]

I think a more extreme example brings this debate into sharper focus.

Team A: finishes 12th for 9 out of 10 years, 1st in the other year

Team B: finishes 2nd each year for 10 straight years

or if you prefer a little more plausibility:

Team A: finishes between 8th and 12th 9 out of 10 years; other year is a championship

Team B: finishes in the playoffs, 2nd, 3rd or 4th all ten years; no championships

 

[bjabrad]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Awesome post, actually. Consistency gets you in the playoffs. And, once you are in the play-offs anything can happen in FF.I've never finished below .500, and missed the playoffs in FF, and that's primarily due to having a good balance of consistent, underrated vets on my team. In recent years that has included, Garrison Hearst, Tiki (Not the past year), Westbrook, DDavis, Curtis Martin (Not last year), Rod Smith, Toomer (Not the past year or two), Kennison, McCardell, Trent Green, among MANY others. You have to have several of these safe picks on your team, or the long-shot hits will cancel out the long-shot busts, and you'll have a mediocre team.

You guys are both on target and in the money. Consistency is king and while A sucks and got lucky, B is better but still sucks. They are both losers in my book but I'd rather be B. B will have more fantasy fun throughout the season because he'll still be in the running for the entire season. Championships are important but you can't tell me it's about the money because there are plenty of ways to make money that are far more profitable than fantasy football.

 

[TheLastDispatch]

with the consistency bunch.

 

[chris1969]

Way too much info missing here. What happened to their offensive lines last year? Hold old are they. What's their injury history. Back in the day, way too many of the people swinging for the fences drafted Fred Taylor too early. If Curtis Martin would have played, he would have been drafted too early this year. It ain't all about the numbers no matter what anybody tells you.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I'd rather know how they finished in total points, because that will give me an idea who consistently starts the better players.

I don't know which team I'd rather be...but I'd rather face team B, who probably plays it pretty vanilla and I know what to expect. Team A, like someone else said, swings for the fences, and that makes them more dangerous.

Team B would take Rudi Johnson and his consistent, if unexciting, production later in the first round. Team B would do something like take Peyton Manning and get a 50 TD season and 5,000 yards out of him.

Team B would make sure he wasn't too invested in any one team; team A would take Wayne and Harrison, or Boldin and Fitzgerald and be dangerous.

Team B relies on conventional wisdom, team A calls his own shots (Yes, I'm into wild speculation now, but it's fun).

Team B mows the lawn every Sunday and gets a good night's sleep for work. Team A takes team's B's wife with him to Vegas...and team B will never find out.

Team B will die in a retirement home all alone. Team A will die penniles but happy, surrounded by friends.

Hope that answers your question.

 

[The Jerk]

I'd rather know how they finished in total points, because that will give me an idea who consistently starts the better players.

I don't know which team I'd rather be...but I'd rather face team B, who probably plays it pretty vanilla and I know what to expect. Team A, like someone else said, swings for the fences, and that makes them more dangerous.

Team B would take Rudi Johnson and his consistent, if unexciting, production later in the first round. Team B would do something like take Peyton Manning and get a 50 TD season and 5,000 yards out of him.

Team B would make sure he wasn't too invested in any one team; team A would take Wayne and Harrison, or Boldin and Fitzgerald and be dangerous.

Team B relies on conventional wisdom, team A calls his own shots (Yes, I'm into wild speculation now, but it's fun).

Team B mows the lawn every Sunday and gets a good night's sleep for work. Team A takes team's B's wife with him to Vegas...and team B will never find out.

Team B will die in a retirement home all alone. Team A will die penniles but happy, surrounded by friends.

Hope that answers your question.

I'm not sure how serious your post is, but you suggest that Team A is more aggressive by drafting two WRs from the same team. That actually has proven to be a more consistent arrangement than drafting two comparable receivers from different teams, i.e., something like what you think Team B would do.Link

I also don't think it's accurate to suggest that Team A is a risk-taker. Performance histories like these could also be caused by Team A being a poor FF player who hit the jackpot one year.

Even Team B's tendency to be good but not great could be caused by not being conservative enough. Perhaps he's always gambling at one position or another and that consistently leaves him short of fielding a great team.

As to the "dangerous" factor, I still think it comes down to which team produces the higher average score. Play enough games vs. this foe and you'll lose more to the higher average score team regardless of the variance. Team B would end up defeating you more often than Team A if you played a sufficient number of games.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I know which guy I'd rather play poker with.

 

[TBFL]

Scoreboard

Team A = 1

Team B = 0

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Who would you consider a better fantasy player if you were to look at results from the last 4 years and this is how the 2 fantasy players have faired in their respective redraft league. Let's say it is a 12 team league.

Player A)

4 years ago finished 7th

3 years ago finised 8th in the league

2 years ago finised 11th

1 year ago finished 1st

Player B)

4 years ago finised 5th

3 years ago finised 2th

2 years ago finised 4th

1 year ago finised 5th

My take: Consistency in fantasy is what seperates the good fantasy players from the get lucky and win a championship fantasy player. I would say that player b is the stronger fantasy player. Would you rather be player A or Player B?

I totally read your question wrong, the first time... I thought you were comparing NFL players. (RB A vs RB B) But, by "player" you mean FF owners, like us, right?

 

[cstu]

I think it's hard to question that B is the better player. You don't consistently finish in the top 5 if you're not good. They both got to one championship game, A won and B didn't, and that's mostly luck anyway.

I don't know how anyone could consider themselves a good fantasy player if they can't finish better than 7th in three straight years. A championship is nice, but it doesn't make you a good player.

 

[The Jerk]

ScoreboardTeam A = 1Team B = 0

WalletTeam B > Team AMost leagues compensate for division titles, runner-up finishes, etc., not just all or nothing

 

[jurb26]

ScoreboardTeam A = 1Team B = 0

WalletTeam B > Team AMost leagues compensate for division titles, runner-up finishes, etc., not just all or nothing

Pretty much every league I've ever played in gives something for making the playoffs.Team B = 4Team A = 1

 

[cstu]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Awesome post, actually. Consistency gets you in the playoffs. And, once you are in the play-offs anything can happen in FF.I've never finished below .500, and missed the playoffs in FF, and that's primarily due to having a good balance of consistent, underrated vets on my team. In recent years that has included, Garrison Hearst, Tiki (Not the past year), Westbrook, DDavis, Curtis Martin (Not last year), Rod Smith, Toomer (Not the past year or two), Kennison, McCardell, Trent Green, among MANY others. You have to have several of these safe picks on your team, or the long-shot hits will cancel out the long-shot busts, and you'll have a mediocre team.

You guys are both on target and in the money. Consistency is king and while A sucks and got lucky, B is better but still sucks. They are both losers in my book but I'd rather be B. B will have more fantasy fun throughout the season because he'll still be in the running for the entire season. Championships are important but you can't tell me it's about the money because there are plenty of ways to make money that are far more profitable than fantasy football.

B sucks even though there's a good chance they were in the playoffs every year? I think people underestimate the amount of luck that goes into winning in the playoffs.

 

[The Jerk]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

Awesome post, actually. Consistency gets you in the playoffs. And, once you are in the play-offs anything can happen in FF.I've never finished below .500, and missed the playoffs in FF, and that's primarily due to having a good balance of consistent, underrated vets on my team. In recent years that has included, Garrison Hearst, Tiki (Not the past year), Westbrook, DDavis, Curtis Martin (Not last year), Rod Smith, Toomer (Not the past year or two), Kennison, McCardell, Trent Green, among MANY others. You have to have several of these safe picks on your team, or the long-shot hits will cancel out the long-shot busts, and you'll have a mediocre team.

You guys are both on target and in the money. Consistency is king and while A sucks and got lucky, B is better but still sucks. They are both losers in my book but I'd rather be B. B will have more fantasy fun throughout the season because he'll still be in the running for the entire season. Championships are important but you can't tell me it's about the money because there are plenty of ways to make money that are far more profitable than fantasy football.

B sucks even though there's a good chance they were in the playoffs every year? I think people underestimate the amount of luck that goes into winning in the playoffs.

The luck factor in fantasy football increases as the number of games decreases.Over multiple seasons, the better players will emerge as luck evens out.In any one season, luck can promote some teams at the expense of others.In any one week, luck can be almost the entire deciding factor.

 

[tomarken]

Without looking it up, who lost the NFC championship game three years ago?

I assume you were using this example to make the case that player A is better, but it was a bad example...I don't think any good football fan had to look that one up. Everybody knows that the Eagles lost the NFC Championship three years ago, because for a span of four years they consistently made it to the NFC Championship game (and lost most of them, that's why everyone remembers it). Sure, they didn't pick up a title along the way, but look at it this way:Who would you say is the better team over the four year span from 2001 - 2004, the Eagles or the Buccaneers? This is surprisingly almost identical to the original fantasy-related question, and I think most people would agree that over that span of four years, the Eagles (player B) were the better team.

 

[BGP]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

It depends on the goals of the player.Maybe player A is more comfortable taking on risk, and so he has developed a plan that yields a title 25% of the time, but craps out 75% of the time.Maybe Player B might not be as comfortable with risk. He has developed a plan that yields a consistently competitive club but hasn't won anything yet.This is a LOT like the investment world. Some investors are more comfortable with risk than others.

 

[BGP]

I know a few wildly successful investors who are wrong like 70% of the time. The system actually works for them because every time its wrong, they get out with a small loss. But when they are RIGHT, they let that winner run and it turns into a HUGE profit, wiping out all previous losses and in the long run they are way, way ahead.

That would be the example of player A. It works for them.

 

[The Jerk]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

It depends on the goals of the player.Maybe player A is more comfortable taking on risk, and so he has developed a plan that yields a title 25% of the time, but craps out 75% of the time.Maybe Player B might not be as comfortable with risk. He has developed a plan that yields a consistently competitive club but hasn't won anything yet.This is a LOT like the investment world. Some investors are more comfortable with risk than others.

It could be that A has a certain strategy like you suggest. It also could be that A is consistently bad but got lucky one time when late-drafted players accidentally had very good/career years. In the leagues I've competed in, the latter explanation best fits the data.

 

[ScottNorwood]

I would rather be consistent and in the playoffs each year. Much like poker, catching a gut-shot straight draw on the river now and then doesn't make you a good player. I tend to think long term. You'll pull down plenty of titles if you consistently make your playoffs.

It depends on the goals of the player.Maybe player A is more comfortable taking on risk, and so he has developed a plan that yields a title 25% of the time, but craps out 75% of the time.Maybe Player B might not be as comfortable with risk. He has developed a plan that yields a consistently competitive club but hasn't won anything yet.This is a LOT like the investment world. Some investors are more comfortable with risk than others.

It could be that A has a certain strategy like you suggest. It also could be that A is consistently bad but got lucky one time when late-drafted players accidentally had very good/career years. In the leagues I've competed in, the latter explanation best fits the data.

It's also possible that A did more research last year, and drafted according the the tendencies of his leaguemates. That would still make A the better fantasy player.

 

[Bobcat10]

In one of my leagues, I AM player B. I have dominated with a run of division titles, double-digit win seasons, and solid runs in the playoffs (just never winning the big game). And this isn't a league of guppies for the most part. There is no way in heck I would want to be player A, because I KNOW I'm better than that owner, I just have not been fortunate enough yet to win one.

 

[ScottNorwood]

In one of my leagues, I AM player B. I have dominated with a run of division titles, double-digit win seasons, and solid runs in the playoffs (just never winning the big game). And this isn't a league of guppies for the most part. There is no way in heck I would want to be player A, because I KNOW I'm better than that owner, I just have not been fortunate enough yet to win one.

Looks like player B only made the playoffs 2 out of 4 years. That's hardly "dominating".