Gourdeau Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 So this week I play the Eli Manning owner, and I have Nicks as my #2 Receiver. Do you guys ever consider who your opponent is starting at QB before setting your WR's and TE's ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 So this week I play the Eli Manning owner, and I have Nicks as my #2 Receiver. Do you guys ever consider who your opponent is starting at QB before setting your WR's and TE's ?? No. Whoever I believe is going to score the most points is who i start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildTurkey Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I get the "start the guy who scores you the most points" thing and I always think that's the right idea, but it's undeniable you have a matchup advantage IF you have the _QB_ 1/2 of your opponent's top WR. You gotta figure it's going to be hard for Calvin Johnson to score points without Matthew Stafford also scoring points. So, your opponent IMO has the advantage because he has Eli. You may be able to negate some of Eli's scoring by starting Nicks, but, I would base the decision on who your other WR's are, and what their matchups are. So, I guess it really does come down to who will score you the most points! :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildTurkey Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 and, in looking at your bench, I would start Nicks (assuming healthy) over any of the other guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted November 13, 2011 Author Share Posted November 13, 2011 and, in looking at your bench, I would start Nicks (assuming healthy) over any of the other guys. Ya, my Sig isn't updated, I actually have Laurent Robinson plugged in for Nicks right now at #2, and Daniels at flex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I'm not so sure about starting a TE at flex over Mendy. Sure he's been a bust but Owned Daniels hasn't exactly been lighting things up. While my local doesn't give a full point per reception, he's still only scored in double digits twice this season. Mendy's not much better with 3 but his touches are way higher and even against a tough run D like Cinci, it's a Division game and those kind of stats go out the window. Look what he did against the Ravens D last week, 13 for 52 and a TD... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 No, you just start the players you think will score the most points. You could start Nicks and have Eli throw TDs to everyone but Nicks, which would be twice as bad. Start Nicks because he's one of your best options and that's reason enough. That's like owners who draft WRs just because they already drafted the QB who throws to him. That's all well and good when they both have a great day but you're gonna have the days when they both suck too. Diversify your roster (sorry went off on a tangent). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted November 13, 2011 Author Share Posted November 13, 2011 My other concern is Nicks is a 4:15 start, Robinson is a 1:00 start, With Nicks being a GTD, that would leave me with only Crabtree to go in as WR2 :S, this is why I love Sundays! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 So this week I play the Eli Manning owner, and I have Nicks as my #2 Receiver. Do you guys ever consider who your opponent is starting at QB before setting your WR's and TE's ?? Why would you ever consider who your opponents starts when determining who you start? Will Eli Manning get fewer points if you start Nicks? Will Nicks get more points because your opponent starts Eli Manning? You look at your players and start the ones you believe will score the most points ... it is irrelevant who your opponent starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Why would you ever consider who your opponents starts when determining who you start? Will Eli Manning get fewer points if you start Nicks? Will Nicks get more points because your opponent starts Eli Manning? You look at your players and start the ones you believe will score the most points ... it is irrelevant who your opponent starts. yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Where is Henry Muto btw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
injendsm Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I consider it but I don't necessarily make it a deciding factor. While it's true it has its advantages since the WR could potentially pace the QB depending on the type of game he has, it also has its downfalls. Your opponents QB could decide or be forced to go to his other options, thus eliminating the advantage of starting a WR on his team. Case in point: I'm facing the Rivers owner this week in my money league and I started VJax (hard to sit after last week). Rivers got him 32 after a shaky first 3 quarters and VJax managed to get 3.2 for me (Last week Rivers had 49 and VJax had 39 which would have worked out much better for me). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 My other concern is Nicks is a 4:15 start, Robinson is a 1:00 start, With Nicks being a GTD, that would leave me with only Crabtree to go in as WR2 :S, this is why I love Sundays! Crabtree wouldn't be a bad fall back option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I consider it but I don't necessarily make it a deciding factor. While it's true it has its advantages since the WR could potentially pace the QB depending on the type of game he has, it also has its downfalls. Your opponents QB could decide or be forced to go to his other options, thus eliminating the advantage of starting a WR on his team. Case in point: I'm facing the Rivers owner this week in my money league and I started VJax (hard to sit after last week). Rivers got him 32 after a shaky first 3 quarters and VJax managed to get 3.2 for me (Last week Rivers had 49 and VJax had 39 which would have worked out much better for me). You either start VJax because he is worthy of a start (i.e. you believe he will score more points than your other options) or you bench him because your other options are better ... the fact that your opponent may or may not be starting Rivers is irrelevant. There is ZERO "advantage" from starting VJax when your opponent is starting Rivers. When your opponent starts Rivers he will get the points Rivers scores regardless of who you start or do nto start. VJax will score the points he scores regardless of whether or not your opponent starts Rivers. If you bench Steve Johnson so you can start VJax because your opponent is starting Rivers and SJohnson scores 20 points while VJax scores 4 points ... did it matter that you countered his Rivers with VJax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 . . .but it's undeniable you have a matchup advantage... I'll deny that. While it's true it has its advantages since the WR could potentially pace the QB depending on the type of game he has, it also has its downfalls. It has neither. So, I guess it really does come down to who will score you the most points! :-) There you go. See G & S above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Where is Henry Muto btw? I think he was one of those WCOFF winners that didn't get paid. As a result of the financial hardship he had to drop his internet service and/or get a second job. accoding to his profile he hasn't been here since 10/29/11 and hasn't posted since a week before that PS A lot of lengthy responses to this thread, even from G&S the master of "start the guys that score the most points" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 I think he was one of those WCOFF winners that didn't get paid. As a result of the financial hardship he had to drop his internet service and/or get a second job. accoding to his profile he hasn't been here since 10/29/11 and hasn't posted since a week before that PS A lot of lengthy responses to this thread, even from G&S the master of "start the guys that score the most points" FPPC guy, but never in the high-stakes leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) FPPC guy, but never in the high-stakes leagues. Do you get some kind of alert when somebody uses that emoticon? Man you're good. Edited November 13, 2011 by stevegrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Misfit Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Ah, before heading out to watch the Bengals upset the Steelers today I felt like responding to this (my first post in 26 years), a point of view that's been echoed at the huddle for so long everyone is convinced it's so correct you're stupid for thinking otherwise, as the mocking responses indicate. All information is relevant in making any decision. The classic example is the Monty Hall Problem, which wiki explains pretty well: Monty Hall Problem. In short, the correct answer is against all "common sense" -- the huddle corollary of Always Choose the Player You Think Will Score the Most Points. You are presented with 3 doors to choose a prize, and you think the car is behind Door #1, so that's the door you pick. Monty opens Door #2, and you are given a chance to switch your pick to Door #3. It is to your mathematical advantage to always switch your pick. What you are being told here is "Pick the door that you think has the car behind it -- duh." So you would never switch, because you obviously think the car is behind the door you picked first. That's the wrong answer. All information matters when you do not know the outcome. Heck, I'll consider my opponent's lineup, which games are nationally televised, or pick against any player ESPN did a weepy human-interest story about, whatever. When you are making a guess, there is no such thing as irrelevant information. Does this mean you'll always be right? Of course not. But you'll be right more often than the guy who picks Door #1 and sticks with it because that's the door he thinks the car is behind. It also makes it a bit more fun. Do you play poker? Ask a poker player if he only makes decisions based on "playing the hands that have the best chance of winning." If he does do that, he's a poor poker player -- but he probably thinks he's really smart, and just has bad luck sometimes. Have a great football Sunday, Huddlers! Good night, spain, wherever you are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
injendsm Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 If you bench Steve Johnson so you can start VJax because your opponent is starting Rivers and SJohnson scores 20 points while VJax scores 4 points ... did it matter that you countered his Rivers with VJax? I guess I could have spelled it out in my OP a bit better by stating that the consideration I put into it is very minor, so much so that it occupies maybe half a percent of the time (and that's being generous) I put into deciding my starting lineup, but I figured mentioning that it wasn't a deciding factor would suffice. My aim with said post was just to point out one way to perceive the situation. Sure, I may toy with the idea of starting a WR who plays on the team of my opponent's QB but ultimately it comes down to what matchup I like best out of my available WRs. Case in point, this week I thought VJax had a decent matchup and hoped, although it was probably naive, that he may finally have gotten on Rivers' good side with his game last week. I could have started Julio Jones or Victor Cruz in his place but didn't want to get burned by Jones's hammy again and Cruz didn't do much for me last week in an ideal matchup so I decided to roll with VJax. The fact that Rivers played for my opponent was nothing more than an afterthought when taking into consideration the perceived advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Ah, before heading out to watch the Bengals upset the Steelers today I felt like responding to this (my first post in 26 years), a point of view that's been echoed at the huddle for so long everyone is convinced it's so correct you're stupid for thinking otherwise, as the mocking responses indicate. All information is relevant in making any decision. The classic example is the Monty Hall Problem, which wiki explains pretty well: Monty Hall Problem. In short, the correct answer is against all "common sense" -- the huddle corollary of Always Choose the Player You Think Will Score the Most Points. You are presented with 3 doors to choose a prize, and you think the car is behind Door #1, so that's the door you pick. Monty opens Door #2, and you are given a chance to switch your pick to Door #3. It is to your mathematical advantage to always switch your pick. What you are being told here is "Pick the door that you think has the car behind it -- duh." So you would never switch, because you obviously think the car is behind the door you picked first. That's the wrong answer. All information matters when you do not know the outcome. Heck, I'll consider my opponent's lineup, which games are nationally televised, or pick against any player ESPN did a weepy human-interest story about, whatever. When you are making a guess, there is no such thing as irrelevant information. Does this mean you'll always be right? Of course not. But you'll be right more often than the guy who picks Door #1 and sticks with it because that's the door he thinks the car is behind. It also makes it a bit more fun. Do you play poker? Ask a poker player if he only makes decisions based on "playing the hands that have the best chance of winning." If he does do that, he's a poor poker player -- but he probably thinks he's really smart, and just has bad luck sometimes. Have a great football Sunday, Huddlers! Good night, spain, wherever you are! A fine display of authetic frontier gibberish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildTurkey Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 My point was... starting a WR solely because of who your opponent is starting at QB = bad idea with no advantage in head to head matchup starting a (STARTABLE) QB because of who your opponent's STUD 1st round WR is = a definite advantage to the QB's owner Of course like everything else this is based on scoring system and is contingent on staying healthy throughout the game, but if your opponent has, say, Calvin Johnson it's going to be hard for him to blow you out with a monster game if you happen to have Stafford as an option @ QB. In that case, I would give him a nod over any other starting QB options based on who I was playing that week. So, all things being equal, I would choose Stafford over a comparable QB based on my opponents' stud WR. that's the only scenario I advise caring about who your opponent is starting. If there are holes in that logic please feel free to rip it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 My point was... starting a WR solely because of who your opponent is starting at QB = bad idea with no advantage in head to head matchup starting a (STARTABLE) QB because of who your opponent's STUD 1st round WR is = a definite advantage to the QB's owner Of course like everything else this is based on scoring system and is contingent on staying healthy throughout the game, but if your opponent has, say, Calvin Johnson it's going to be hard for him to blow you out with a monster game if you happen to have Stafford as an option @ QB. In that case, I would give him a nod over any other starting QB options based on who I was playing that week. So, all things being equal, I would choose Stafford over a comparable QB based on my opponents' stud WR. that's the only scenario I advise caring about who your opponent is starting. If there are holes in that logic please feel free to rip it up. AGAIN ... YOUR OPPONENT'S STARTERS ARE IRRELEVANT ... ALWAYS START THE PLAYERS THAT YOU THINK WILL SCORE THE MOST POINTS. Either you start Stafford because he is the player you believe will score the most points or you start your other QB option because you believe that QB will score the most points. The fact that your opponent might or might not be starting Calvin Johnson is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. If Calvin Johnson has 2 TDs and 100 yards that is a pretty good game for him ... in the same game Stafford could have 150 yards and 2 TDs ... that is a mediocre game by a QB. How did starting Stafford mitigate the points by Megatron? Amazing to me how hard some have grasping this concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) Ah, before heading out to watch the Bengals upset the Steelers today I felt like responding to this (my first post in 26 years), a point of view that's been echoed at the huddle for so long everyone is convinced it's so correct you're stupid for thinking otherwise, as the mocking responses indicate. All information is relevant in making any decision. The classic example is the Monty Hall Problem, which wiki explains pretty well: Monty Hall Problem. In short, the correct answer is against all "common sense" -- the huddle corollary of Always Choose the Player You Think Will Score the Most Points. You are presented with 3 doors to choose a prize, and you think the car is behind Door #1, so that's the door you pick. Monty opens Door #2, and you are given a chance to switch your pick to Door #3. It is to your mathematical advantage to always switch your pick. What you are being told here is "Pick the door that you think has the car behind it -- duh." So you would never switch, because you obviously think the car is behind the door you picked first. That's the wrong answer. All information matters when you do not know the outcome. Heck, I'll consider my opponent's lineup, which games are nationally televised, or pick against any player ESPN did a weepy human-interest story about, whatever. When you are making a guess, there is no such thing as irrelevant information. Does this mean you'll always be right? Of course not. But you'll be right more often than the guy who picks Door #1 and sticks with it because that's the door he thinks the car is behind. It also makes it a bit more fun. Do you play poker? Ask a poker player if he only makes decisions based on "playing the hands that have the best chance of winning." If he does do that, he's a poor poker player -- but he probably thinks he's really smart, and just has bad luck sometimes. Have a great football Sunday, Huddlers! Good night, spain, wherever you are! Welcome Back! And spain is still gone Edited November 13, 2011 by Big John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheddar Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 So I have Aaron Rodgers and Big Ben on one of my teams, and I was facing Mike wallace this week. By your logic i should bench Rodgers and play Big Ben? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.