Comfort Zone: Drafting Players on the same team

[Shotskiees]

After a number of mock drafts I have come across some instances where I draft 2 high profile players from the same team.

 

I play in 3 10 team leagues and quite often have come across these duo's once my draft is complete:

 

Matt Forte

Brandon Marshall

 

Julio Jones

Steven Jackson

 

Demarco Murray

Dez Bryant

 

Jamaal Charles

Dwyane Bowe

 

My question to you is, are you comfortable with drafting players from the same team? If so which "duo" would you be most comfortable with. Personally I am always comfortable with a QB/WR or QB/TE duo and have benefitted from those "bonus td" points often.

 

Interested to hear your thoughts

[Axe Elf]

Typically a fantasy team that contains two players from the same NFL team is going to be more consistent than a team with all its players from different teams. The one exception is when the two players are a QB/WR or QB/TE; in that case, the pairing usually produces more "boom or bust" scoring than consistent production.

[stevegrab]

What bonus TD points, the ones from two players on your team that both happened to score a TD on the same play?

 

I don't draft guys from the same team, but also don't actively avoid it. A QB/WR or QB/TE combo can be nice, but if they have trouble passing it could also suck. A RB with QB/WR/TE can be better, as there's less chance they're both have marginal games. It also depends if these are starters or not, as having QB1 and RB4 from the same teams could mean both aren't often in your starting line up.

 

I had Dem Thomas and McGahee on my team last year, both starting most of the time and it was good. But that is also a high powered offense, so that may be the real key what team are they on. If you have 2 or more players from the same below average offense that is not good.

[darin3]

Typically a fantasy team that contains two players from the same NFL team is going to be more consistent than a team with all its players from different teams. The one exception is when the two players are a QB/WR or QB/TE; in that case, the pairing usually produces more "boom or bust" scoring than consistent production.

 

 

You're kidding, right?

[delusions of grandeur]

My question to you is, are you comfortable with drafting players from the same team? If so which "duo" would you be most comfortable with. Personally I am always comfortable with a QB/WR or QB/TE duo and have benefitted from those "bonus td" points often.

 

 

This is one of th biggest mistakes in FF.

 

First off, most all WRs and TEs don't score every week, so that doubling up is only helping you in a certain percentage of games anyway, and can hit you equally hard in ones where they both struggle. It may lead to advatage, but jsut as easily might lead to disadvantage, hence why it shouldn't be a factor in who you choose to draft.

 

But that "bonus TD means absolutely nothing if your QB and WR double up, but you could have had a QB and WR from different teams who scored better. You don't get bonus points for it happening at the same time. It just gives the appearance that you're getting double the points (and as I said, can also lead to double the lack of points when the QB has a bad game).

 

You shouldn't let it influence you whether players are on the same team or not if they are your best pick there (except when you're talking about 3 or more from the same offense, which can definitely be putting too many eggs in one basket). There's no way of telling you if it will be more beneficial that they double up on certain weeks or pick up each other's slack on other weeks by drafting from different teams.

 

What is certain, however, is that if you draft the best players who score the most, no matter whether they're on the same team or not, then you will give yourself the best chance to win... Looking at it deeper than that is overthinking it.

[delusions of grandeur]

You're kidding, right?

 

 

Unless he means consistently safer, but often mediocre.

 

Though I did this last year with Roddy and Julio (didn't plan on it, just worked out that way in a dynasty), and it was pretty nice to know that when one flopped, the other usually had a big game, though in most cases it's not a winning formula like it is to have guys who can even both go off on a single week and win you games.

 

But the reason it worked with them is because they're both talented to even both have good weeks simultaneously, not because they're on the same team. Talent and opportunity is what builds strong teams, not doubling up. That should be a moot factor in your decision.

[Axe Elf]

You're kidding, right?

 

 

Nope, and the fact that you had to axe only illustrates why this community needs more of Baby Jane.

[Big Country]

After a number of mock drafts I have come across some instances where I draft 2 high profile players from the same team.

 

I play in 3 10 team leagues and quite often have come across these duo's once my draft is complete:

 

Matt Forte

Brandon Marshall

 

Julio Jones

Steven Jackson

 

Demarco Murray

Dez Bryant

 

Jamaal Charles

Dwyane Bowe

 

My question to you is, are you comfortable with drafting players from the same team? If so which "duo" would you be most comfortable with. Personally I am always comfortable with a QB/WR or QB/TE duo and have benefitted from those "bonus td" points often.

 

Interested to hear your thoughts

 

 

Unless your league has a very unique rule that gives bonus points for having both ends of a passing/receiving TD in your lineup, there is no such thing as this "double dip" that many people refer to.

 

As to your question, other than loading up on the same bye week (which is a different discussion altogether), as long as you are drafting the player that you believe will score the most points at the position you have decided to draft, then what team they are on in relation to the other players you have drafted is basically irrelevant.

 

Typically a fantasy team that contains two players from the same NFL team is going to be more consistent than a team with all its players from different teams. The one exception is when the two players are a QB/WR or QB/TE; in that case, the pairing usually produces more "boom or bust" scoring than consistent production.

 

 

Please provide documentation supporting your assertion.

[darin3]

Please provide documentation supporting your assertion.

 

 

In other words.... you're kidding, right?

[Axe Elf]

Please provide documentation supporting your assertion.

 

 

I wrote a pretty thorough debunking of the QB/WR myth back in, oh, 2003 or 2004, something like that, but this article from 2008 summarizes things pretty nicely.

 

http://subscribers.f...en-sameteam.php

 

To wit:

 

"Bottom line: in most cases, starting two guys (other than a QB/WR pair) from the same NFL team is a conservative play, not a risky one. It's likely to make your team more consistent.

 

In these two studies, I have seen enough evidence to believe strongly that a same-team RB/WR, RB/QB, or WR/WR combination consisting of good players will usually (not always, but usually) make your team more consistent from week to week than a similar-scoring different-team pair. (Note that QB/WR pairs are very different. They will, in the vast majority of cases produce a postive covariance, and hence make your team less consistent.)"

Edited July 24, 2013 by Axe Elf

[MikesVikes]

 

 

You're kidding, right?

 

 

I was wondering if someone was going to call him on that.

[MikesVikes]

Ummm sometimes NFL teams have bad weeks. If you have two players from a team such as this, then you're going to Axe yourself. Your team is completely axed for the week. That is not a logical conclusion.

[Shotskiees]

This is one of th biggest mistakes in FF.

 

First off, most all WRs and TEs don't score every week, so that doubling up is only helping you in a certain percentage of games anyway, and can hit you equally hard in ones where they both struggle. It may lead to advatage, but jsut as easily might lead to disadvantage, hence why it shouldn't be a factor in who you choose to draft.

 

But that "bonus TD means absolutely nothing if your QB and WR double up, but you could have had a QB and WR from different teams who scored better.

 

 

I agree with you. I know that there are no "bonus" points but I related to the QB/TE & QB/WR theory because it reminded me of the days when I had the 2011 Brady to Gronk magic and last years "boom or bust" Matt Ryan to Julio Jones. Both of which resulted in championships.

 

What I've noticed and should have done a better job at explaning is that when I've drafted in certain positions in ESPN mock drafts I end up with the same players from the same NFL Teams. I have had no hesitation on picking them based on my pre draft rankings as most if not all of these players are RB1/WR1 or RB1/WR2 for example:

 

Drafting in the top portion (2-6) I have often ended up with a Arian Foster/Andre Johnson, Charles/Bowe, Forte/Marshall, Dez/Murray, Steven Jackson/Julio.

 

Loading up on the same bye week is an issue, but I will admit this is the first year I have noticed these tandems being paired up on my squads.

 

There is a lot that goes into a draft but from what I've read in terms of consistency/high powered offenses one could assume that based on the pairs ive mentioned the best duo would be Steven Jackson/Julio Jones and/or Roddy White.

[Shotskiees]

Ummm sometimes NFL teams have bad weeks. If you have two players from a team such as this, then you're going to Axe yourself. Your team is completely axed for the week. That is not a logical conclusion.

 

 

Amen to that. I remember all to well how my team was axed on Week 15 when the Giants, Bucs, and Chiefs were all shut out during the playoffs. What a terrible, terrible Sunday.

[Axe Elf]

Ummm sometimes NFL teams have bad weeks. If you have two players from a team such as this, then you're going to Axe yourself. Your team is completely axed for the week. That is not a logical conclusion.

 

 

You may mean that it is not an intuitive conclusion, but the numbers don't lie--it IS a logical conclusion based on significant negative covariance of QB/RB, RB/WR and WR/WR tandems--and significant positive covariance of QB/WR pairs.

[delusions of grandeur]

 

 

You may mean that it is not an intuitive conclusion, but the numbers don't lie--it IS a logical conclusion based on significant negative covariance of QB/RB, RB/WR and WR/WR tandems--and significant positive covariance of QB/WR pairs.

 

 

Yeah, I remember that year my team had negative covariance, they really kicked ass.

 

In my experience, people who rely on things like this are looking for ways to make up for them not being able to evaluate talent or feel the draft well enough. That's how you win. From what I've seen, covariance is a joke.

[Axe Elf]

In my experience, people who rely on things like this are looking for ways to make up for them not being able to evaluate talent or feel the draft well enough. That's how you win. From what I've seen, covariance is a joke.

 

 

You should get out more.

[delusions of grandeur]

 

 

You should get out more.

 

 

Its a shame that you've worn out your welcome here, because the response to that has endless possibilities of enjoyment.

 

Let's just say that I'm not too worries about who makes better use of their time (except of course when I take the time to respond to drivel like this)

[darin3]

You may mean that it is not an intuitive conclusion, but the numbers don't lie--it IS a logical conclusion based on significant negative covariance of QB/RB, RB/WR and WR/WR tandems--and significant positive covariance of QB/WR pairs.

 

 

Uh, what numbers? We're STILL waiting for you to show them. Tick tock.

[stevegrab]

Unless he means consistently safer, but often mediocre.

 

Though I did this last year with Roddy and Julio (didn't plan on it, just worked out that way in a dynasty), and it was pretty nice to know that when one flopped, the other usually had a big game, though in most cases it's not a winning formula like it is to have guys who can even both go off on a single week and win you games.

 

But the reason it worked with them is because they're both talented to even both have good weeks simultaneously, not because they're on the same team. Talent and opportunity is what builds strong teams, not doubling up. That should be a moot factor in your decision.

 

 

Exactly, and I would avoid 2 WR from the same teams, unless there was a huge drop off to the next player. I have Calvin Johnson and had an owner who kept trying to do trades with me and tossing out Titus Young. At the time (early 2012, or even 2011) Young had value, and looked to be a player who might really blossom. But I wouldn't want to be starting both of them, because chances are a player comparable to Youn on another team combined with Megatron would score more most weeks than Megatron-Young.

[Axe Elf]

Uh, what numbers? We're STILL waiting for you to show them. Tick tock.

 

 

Try following the link.

[MikesVikes]

Actually I can see what Baby Jane is saying about his theory. If the Packers are playing the Lions and they win by scoring 4 rushing TDs, it would be a great day to have a GB running back. Next week comes along, and the Packers score 4 TDs all through the air, then, if you also have a horse in that race you still do good. One if by land, two if by sea.

 

BUT, what if you had a QB and RB and/or WR from the 2005 Baltimore Ravens. They averaged under 12 points per game for the first 10 weeks of the season. They never scored 20 points in a game until the last game in November of that year. Do you want in on that action for your FF team?

 

Btw, I don't know if the effort is warranted. I do know that the Huddle doesn't like people giving out bad advice or intentionally misleading people. Exe Elf seems to be good with this.

Edited July 24, 2013 by MikesVikes

[Axe Elf]

You will be able to find counterexamples to every statistical trend. Sometimes the QB/WR pair will be good for your team, and sometimes the RB/WR pair will be bad for your team. However, in general, the RB/WR pair makes your team more consistent and the QB/WR pair makes your team less consistent. If you want to take your chances and bet against the odds, that's on you. Occasionally you will win, but most of the time you will lose, and you can't say it's because you were given bad advice.

 

In any case, it's not "my" advice per se. Sue the guy who wrote the article for Football Guys. I'm just using it as lesson material.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Axe Elf

[flemingd]

Actually I can see what Baby Jane is saying about his theory. If the Packers are playing the Lions and they win by scoring 4 rushing TDs, it would be a great day to have a GB running back. Next week comes along, and the Packers score 4 TDs all through the air, then, if you also have a horse in that race you still do good. One if by land, two if by sea.

 

And if the Packers score 9 points in each game, you are screwed at both positions. And if they score 4 by land and 3 in the air you're loving it. It doesn't matter their positions, or what team they play for, that's all irrelevant. The ONLY thing that's relevant is how often the biscuit goes in the basket. If the team scores a whole ton you want any part of that you can get.

 

FF isn't a zero-sum game. There's not a limit on what you can score in a week. You want the guys that score the most, regardless of all other factors. If you had Holt and Bruce or Carter and Moss in the late '90's you were loving it. And it wasn't about being teammates, it was about being huge fantasy producers.

 

The only way this has any impact on fantasy is risk. If you have a QB/WR combo and the QB gets hurt, that's going to impact the WR. If Brees gets hurt but Julio is your #1 WR then you're isolated there. Bye week risk, end of season benching starters to rest for playoffs risk, QB taking pressure off running game and vice versa risk, all those are impacted. But this nonsense of "do/don't draft team mates because you can/can't/might not/want" to is all bull crap.

[darin3]

Try following the link.

 

Sorry, not going to rely on information from 6 years ago. You see where he got his data? That's right, data from 2005-2007. Think the game has changed since then?

 

But hey, whatever floats your boat pal.

 

E2A: Since you obviously have far too much time on your hands, how about you run the data on ADPs from 2010-12 and see if the data still points to this supposedly-mathmatical-based assertion makes sense.

Edited July 24, 2013 by darin3