Mano22

Yeah guy, I said most of the time you don't do it. But OCCASIONALLY it is the right thing to do. What a surprise that a bunch of people who frequent thehuddle don't understand variance.

Kind of. Less about the variables. More about the fact that Cutler's points cancel out Marshall's. you are right though, 99/100 (ish) you just play the guy you think you will get the most points. I am only saying that corner cases exist where it is correct to play a guy that is projected to score fewer points. In fact it is very similar to where you are winning small going into MNF and all you have left is your defense. If you wanna give yourself the best chance to win the game, YOU SHOULD BENCH YOUR DEFENSE. Sure they are not likely to get you negative points, but neither was CAR last week. If you bench them you are 100% to win, if you play them you are only 98% to win. This is exactly the same as the strategy I am suggesting regarding cutler, taken to it's logical conclusion.

Croe give it up. This is all over their heads.

Obviously anything can happen. I am just saying that the best way to win a weekly matchup when you are a favorite and have to choose between Cutler/River vs Marshall is to start Cutler. I only gave the specific example of the Monday Night game to make it obvious, but the point still holds regardless of who the Bears/Chargers play. Sure overall points/weekly high score/other stuff matters, but if you want the best chance to win this week, and you are a heavy favorite (weather it is Sunday at noon vs Monday at 8 PM) you play it like I have outlined. To argue against this point is ludicrous.

Guy, you are just dead wrong on this. Sure you almost always start the guy with the highest expectancy. But lets look at the scenario where it's Bears vs Bolts on MNF. You can either start Cutler or Rivers, you opponent is playing Marshall. You are up by 30. So you need Marshall to outscore your QB by 30 points in order to lose. You have to start Cutler in this situation NO MATTER what, even if he is expected to get 10 less points than Rivers! There is almost no way for Marshall to score 30 more than Cutler, because Cutler will get at least half a point for every point Marchall scores. So Marshall would have to put up like a 50 point game while catchign almost all of Cutlers passes for you to lose. What is the probability of this? Probably something like 1-2%. I could maybe see you losing this game 1 out of 50 times or so. But Marshall could easily outscore Rivers by 30. What if Marshall just has an amazing game, 10 catches, 150 yds, and 3 TDs or whatever (38 points in a half PPR) instead of al off the charts/all time record setting game? Rivers could easily drop a 5 point stinker, seen it a million times. So what is the probability you lose if you start Rivers? I dunno, you are certainly still a huge favorite, but maybe 4-5%? Certainly much more likely than you chances of losing if you started Cutler. Now obv I just made up numbers, and the scenario as well, but the underlying point still applies. It is clear you have a better chance of winning by starting Cutler, even if Rivers is expected to score more points. 46k posts and you don't understand this simple variance vs expectancy point? You must be REALLY lucky!

Um, the difference is (almost) any idiot can configure a router, but only a few hundred people can intercept an NFL pass and return it for a TD. As a corollary, no one gives a crap that you can configure a router, but tens of millions of people care about an NFL touchdown. Get off your high horse. The celebration penalties are atrocious. There should be no penalties for anything short of actual rude/lewd gestures. These guys are filled with adrenaline for doing something amazing, let em liver a little.

The point that you should always start the player that gives you most expected points is almost always true, but when my team is WAY better than my opponent (for whatever reason, good draft, luck, injuries, bye weeks, etc) I will sometimes start a QB who is throwing to my opponents WR, or vice versa (if it is a relatively close call.) If you are favored by 30+ points, they need to get pretty lucky to win. One of the ways this can happen is if one of their few good players (say, Marshall) blows up. In this case, if you start Cutler over Rivers, you are somewhat hedging this blowup potential. It is actually a situation where you can give up some expected points in order to increase the chance you win the game, as crazy as that sounds. Similarly if my team is way worse than my opponent, I would specifically start Rivers over Cutler in the above situation because I need to increase my variance, and starting Cutler vs Marshall lowers it.

Gore, not even remotely close.

Well you are crazy Jimmy Graham was a 1st rounder this year! I thought with that ranking finally people would see the true value of TEs. I would never trade Olsen for Lamar Miller. And I even like Miller! But he has been meh so far in his career and will be back in a platoon (at best) in 4-6 weeks. Check out this ranking, it scrapes all the major sites for their end of seaosn rankings, and has Olsen as the #43 overall flex going forard. Right next to top 15/20 RBs such as Spiller etc. http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/rankings/ros-half-point-ppr-flex.php

Thanks for your advice! Yeah in a perfect world where people correctly valued TEs and were willing to trade I would keep Olsen and hold out for something better. But unfortunately this league still abides by the "RBs are god and TEs are doghonda mentality" of yesteryear.

Thanks for the advice. No it's not a keeper unfortunately. That would make this a much easier decision

I posted this as it's own topic before seeing this thread 10 team league, .5 PPR, 2 RB, 2 WR, flex. I am well set at QB, WR, and TE (I have Julius Thomas and Greg Olsen) but need help at RB. I obv will (likely) never play Olsen over Thomas, so Olsen is just bye week/injury insurance/trade bait on my bench. Do you think I should move him for AP? I think this is actually too much to give up, but I could really use the upside from AP. Also this is a league where no one trades (and no one correctly values TEs) so I am unlikely to get much for Olsen. Thanks for the advice.

10 team league, .5 PPR, 2 RB, 2 WR, flex. I am well set at QB, WR, and TE (I have Julius Thomas and Greg Olsen) but need help at RB. I obv will (likely) never play Olsen over Thomas, so Olsen is just bye week/injury insurance/trade bait on my bench. Do you think I should move him for AP? I think this is actually too much to give up, but I could really use the upside from AP. Also this is a league where no one trades (and no one correctly values TEs) so I am unlikely to get much for Olsen. Thanks for the advice.

I butchered one of my drafts and have a team with no RBs (seriously my best 2 RBs are Trent Richardson and Danny Woodhead.) I am pretty stacked everywhere else though (Calvin, Rodgers, Julius Thomas, Andre Johnson, etc.) I also have Greg Olsen on my bench. I think the clear play here is to try and move Julius Thomas for a good RB. The only team that this lines up with has Peterson, Arian Foster, and LeVeon Bell. Is Thomas for Foster pretty fair? Is Foster better than Bell? I feel like I would do this trade for either of these 2 guys, and I don't really care which one. Am I off here? Thanks.

I butchered one of my drafts and have a team with no RBs (seriously my best 2 RBs are Trent Richardson and Danny Woodhead.) I am pretty stacked everywhere else though (Calvin, Rodgers, Julius Thomas, Andre Johnson, etc.) I also have Greg Olsen on my bench. I think the clear play here is to try and move Julius Thomas for a good RB. The only team that this lines up with has Peterson, Arian Foster, and LeVeon Bell. Is Thomas for Foster pretty fair? Is Foster better than Bell? I feel like I would do this trade for either of these 2 guys, and I don't really care which one. Am I off here?