Strategy Pros & Cons

[Def.]

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!

 

 

Your bringing up a very specific situation about changing your starters based off factors on games that have already played for that week. That was not the situation the OP presented and would be a very rare occurrence for a Sunday or Monday night game. Most likely you would have already had to decide between the two players before this situation would become as clear as you have stated.

 

I would also point out that a lot of $ leagues also reward total points or weekly high score, in which case you would again want to start your projected top scorer and not "hedge" based on the opposing starting line.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Def.

[Def.]

Just because you think Rivers will outscore Cutler doesn't mean it will happen. if you start rivers and he under-performs, and cutler and marshall connect for 150 yards and 3 TDs you just lost that projected edge you gave yourself. Where as, if you started Cutler and rivers goes off and Marshall doesn't have a big game, your margin of victory is still the same and may even go up if cutler throws a decent game but fails to connect significantly with Marshall.

 

Its the same as a decision to play a high-risk high reward guy like VJax or Darren Sproles over a TY Hilton or Monte Ball, Even though you may "project" VJax or Sproles to have a better game, you might give the consistent guy a start because your match-up tells you that it isn't worth the risk and vice versa. There is an inherent risk with all strategies that you employ with your weekly lineups, knowing when to mitigate risk or take risks based on match ups one of the keys to consistent performance. We all do it, none of us are fortunate enough to ever have studs at all positions. If you don't like the strategy of starting your QB based on the others stud WR when your team is projected to have a sizable advantage then don't do it. I think it is a good strategy in specific situations, why risk a qb throwing a dud, when, if your other qb throws a dud, a player from your opponents team gets a donut as well (when your projected totals are lopsided)?

 

 

What specific situations? Other then again the very rare one brought up involving changing lineups for a Sunday/Monday night game, when are these situations? What factors make you think I should bench a player I think will score more because this person has this other player in his starting lineup?

[stevegrab]

You also risk a situation where you start Cutler to counter Marshall and Cutler goes out, Marshall goes off and Cutler doesn't get enough points to keep your lead.

 

Anything can work, drafting & starting players with a certain birth sign might work, but it isn't a sound FF strategy.

[Mano22]

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.

[Def.]

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.

 

 

Apologies for reasonable thought and asking for more specifics.

[MTSuper7]

The only reason you would start Cutler in this situation is for psychological satisfaction. Somehow you feel like you are doing something strategic, but in reality you aren't. It just feels that way because Marshall's performance is so closely tied to Cutler's.

[Croe]

Just because you think Rivers will outscore Cutler doesn't mean it will happen. if you start rivers and he under-performs, and cutler and marshall connect for 150 yards and 3 TDs you just lost that projected edge you gave yourself. Where as, if you started Cutler and rivers goes off and Marshall doesn't have a big game, your margin of victory is still the same and may even go up if cutler throws a decent game but fails to connect significantly with Marshall.

 

Its the same as a decision to play a high-risk high reward guy like VJax or Darren Sproles over a TY Hilton or Monte Ball, Even though you may "project" VJax or Sproles to have a better game, you might give the consistent guy a start because your match-up tells you that it isn't worth the risk and vice versa. There is an inherent risk with all strategies that you employ with your weekly lineups, knowing when to mitigate risk or take risks based on match ups one of the keys to consistent performance. We all do it, none of us are fortunate enough to ever have studs at all positions. If you don't like the strategy of starting your QB based on the others stud WR when your team is projected to have a sizable advantage then don't do it. I think it is a good strategy in specific situations, why risk a qb throwing a dud, when, if your other qb throws a dud, a player from your opponents team gets a donut as well (when your projected totals are lopsided)?

 

What specific situations? Other then again the very rare one brought up involving changing lineups for a Sunday/Monday night game, when are these situations? What factors make you think I should bench a player I think will score more because this person has this other player in his starting lineup?

 

 

Why ask for something I provided in the statement you quoted? If you are projecting yourself to be a heavy favorite then I would employ this strategy to mitigate risk

Edited September 30, 2014 by Croe

[Mano22]

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

[stevegrab]

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

 

Yep you 2 are the only geniuses that get it

[KipperSD]

I get it.

 

99 times out of 100 though you go with the QB that you think will get the most points. In your scenario you are saying the QBs are equal but there are too many variables in my opinion- Defenses, home or away, dome or outdoor, weather, injuries, trends, hot or cold, the list goes on. Also you would want to consider PPR and +4 or +6 for Pass TD leagues.

 

But that 1 time out of 100, like that sunday or monday night game or heavy favorite scenario you gave examples of, i could see employing this strategy.

 

P.S. Rivers > Cutler

[Big Country]

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.

 

 

 

Can I borrow your crystal ball so I know ahead of time whether I truly am a heavy favorite in something as volatile as this game called fantasy football that we play?

 

The potential for the situation where even considering applying this approach (decent to large lead, I have two QBs yet to play, he has WR of one of those QBs and league rules allow me to change lineup still)is so unlikely to occur, that to consider it a viable strategy is ludicrous.

[Def.]

Why ask for something I provided in the statement you quoted? If you are projecting yourself to be a heavy favorite then I would employ this strategy to mitigate risk

 

 

You honestly don't see the flaws and subjectivity of the examples that have been provided? Do you not see the total lack of facts or statistics that this "philosophy" ensures you win a game? That it is the "standard".

 

Guess its like Crash says, if you think you're winning because you wear women's underwear then you are.

[Mano22]

I get it.

 

99 times out of 100 though you go with the QB that you think will get the most points. In your scenario you are saying the QBs are equal but there are too many variables in my opinion- Defenses, home or away, dome or outdoor, weather, injuries, trends, hot or cold, the list goes on. Also you would want to consider PPR and +4 or +6 for Pass TD leagues.

 

But that 1 time out of 100, like that sunday or monday night game or heavy favorite scenario you gave examples of, i could see employing this strategy.

 

P.S. Rivers > Cutler

 

 

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.

[Grits and Shins]

Cutler's points do NOT "cancel" out Marshall's points anymore than Rivers' points cancel out Marshall's points.

 

If you think Cutler will score 10 points and Rivers will score 20 points there is absolutely NO valid reason to start Cutler because your opponent is starting Marshall. To say there is a situation where it is "correct to start the guy you think will score the fewest points" is just ludicrous. When all is said and done the best way for me to win is for me to start the lineup that maximizes points scored.

 

This whole thing about "cancelling points" or "offsetting points" is inane.

1) Marshall can "go off" and Cutler can be mediocre. Marshall has 150 yards and 2 TDs, Cutler has 175 yards and 1 TDs (other Marshall TD was a half-back pass). How do you feel about your strategy to "cancel out Marshall's points with Cutler" now? ESPECIALLY if the QB your thought would score more points (Rivers) has 312 yards and 3 TDs.

2) Cutler experiences an injury in the first drive that puts him out the rest of the game but Marshall still goes off.

 

Lets envision your scenario where it is CHI vs SDC on Monday night and you are tied going into the game with your opponent having Marshall and you have Cutler and Rivers. You are projecting Cutler to score 15 and Rivers to score 18 ... and as it turns out your projects are spot on. Just because Cutler is throwing to Marshall is no assurance that Cutler will outscore Marshall. In fact it often happens that the QB has a mediocre night 200 yards 1 TD for less than 15 points while Marshall has an okay night with 5 catches for 65 yards and 1 TD or 17 points. You lose, because you didn't start the QB you projected to score the most points (18) which would have given you the win.

 

Bottom line. There is absolutely NO reason to start a player you feel will score FEWER points than another player on your squad. To think otherwise is just silly.

[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.

[Grits and Shins]

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.

 

 

LOL .. then you are only wrong OCCASIONALLY ....

[Qball86]

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.

 

 

 

Is this Michael Scott? No one touches the baler.

 

And I can't believe I just read this entire thread, the basis of which is to argue that it's better to start a player you think will score fewer points, and actually thought I was ever going to see the madness behind the method.

 

Although it is interesting we do have a case study to determine the validity of the strategy…Tom Watson just did this in the Ryder Cup. He started the players he thought would score the fewest points but really wanted to see Furyk play Garcia. What was the result of that?

Edited October 1, 2014 by Qball86

[KipperSD]

Cutler's points do NOT "cancel" out Marshall's points anymore than Rivers' points cancel out Marshall's points.

 

If you think Cutler will score 10 points and Rivers will score 20 points there is absolutely NO valid reason to start Cutler because your opponent is starting Marshall. To say there is a situation where it is "correct to start the guy you think will score the fewest points" is just ludicrous. When all is said and done the best way for me to win is for me to start the lineup that maximizes points scored.

 

This whole thing about "cancelling points" or "offsetting points" is inane.

1) Marshall can "go off" and Cutler can be mediocre. Marshall has 150 yards and 2 TDs, Cutler has 175 yards and 1 TDs (other Marshall TD was a half-back pass). How do you feel about your strategy to "cancel out Marshall's points with Cutler" now? ESPECIALLY if the QB your thought would score more points (Rivers) has 312 yards and 3 TDs.

2) Cutler experiences an injury in the first drive that puts him out the rest of the game but Marshall still goes off.

 

Lets envision your scenario where it is CHI vs SDC on Monday night and you are tied going into the game with your opponent having Marshall and you have Cutler and Rivers. You are projecting Cutler to score 15 and Rivers to score 18 ... and as it turns out your projects are spot on. Just because Cutler is throwing to Marshall is no assurance that Cutler will outscore Marshall. In fact it often happens that the QB has a mediocre night 200 yards 1 TD for less than 15 points while Marshall has an okay night with 5 catches for 65 yards and 1 TD or 17 points. You lose, because you didn't start the QB you projected to score the most points (18) which would have given you the win.

 

Bottom line. There is absolutely NO reason to start a player you feel will score FEWER points than another player on your squad. To think otherwise is just silly.

 

 

1. HB pass really??

2. You can't argue Cutler injury because you could just as easily argue Rivers injury..

 

Let's take that same MNF game scenario and say you are up 15 points going into the game. The only way you are going to lose is if he makes up points in big chunks and the only way that is going to happen is TDs. The only way to GUARANTEE you "cancel" out Brandon Marshall TDs is to start Cutler. You have a way better chance of winning in this scenario if you start Cutler over Rivers.

[Grits and Shins]

1. HB pass really??

2. You can't argue Cutler injury because you could just as easily argue Rivers injury..

 

Let's take that same MNF game scenario and say you are up 15 points going into the game. The only way you are going to lose is if he makes up points in big chunks and the only way that is going to happen is TDs. The only way to GUARANTEE you "cancel" out Brandon Marshall TDs is to start Cutler. You have a way better chance of winning in this scenario if you start Cutler over Rivers.

 

 

You can't GUARANTEE anything. If you think Rivers scores more points than Cutler you start Rivers, period. To do otherwise is just stupid. That would be like telling your boss that occasionally you want to be paid less.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Grits and Shins

[MTSuper7]

Why are we debating the strategy of a 1/100 situation?

 

Also, we're treating this like it's poker somehow. Like it makes sense to fold a pair of kings pre-flop in Texas Hold'em 1/100 times. You are a huge favorite with that hand against any hand. But you might consider a fold in extreme situations. The difference is that what your opponent has actually does matter in poker. In fantasy football, it doesn't. Don't kid yourselves folks - it really doesn't. Even if your opponent has Marshall, Jeffery and Bennett you wouldn't start Cutler if you honestly thought Rivers was the better play.

 

I think people are trying to turn fantasy football into something it isn't here.

[stevegrab]

Yep, people are just trying to be cute with their "strategy". Since they use it and have offered it to the masses they are convinced it is correct, and will defend that position until they die. The rest of us are dumb because we don't understand their brilliance. (Sorry I've simply resorted to insults and cliches, but facts and rational argument don't matter to these guys, so no reason to waste time providing them.)

 

As Grits said, you cannot gaurantee anything. Yes injuries can happen to either player, but if you're starting player X to cancel out player Y then you're banking on player X staying in the game to do that. And you're also assuming there's no other way for that player Y to score except with player X throwing to him. HB passes are rare, but there are other factors to consider.

[Croe]

All are valid points but the one thing you can count on is the fact that somebody is throwing Marshall the ball. Obviously one would want to start the QB they think will score the most points - but that isn't THE POINT of the discussion. Rivers and Cutler both playing the entirety of the game. If you are up 15 points and have the option, you start Cutler for the mere fact that he is throwing the ball to Marshall. If Rivers underperforms you can easily lose the game. If you start Cutler you reduce your risk of a loss. Obviously it would be a rare scenario in which you would start someone who you expect to produce lower totals, but you asked for a scenario and I think we've exhausted the point. In the end, who really cares? It is fantasy football. The vast majority of us happen to be very good at it, so the likeliness of such a strategy making or breaking your season is very low. But isn't the point of these forums to discuss strategy in order to make our collective understanding of how the game works better? No strategy is fool proof and most of them have their place. Just like in football there is a place for every strategy. How many times have you yelled at and NFL coach for kicking a FG when you think they should go for it on 4th down, or when the coach went for 2 points instead of the XP? Just because it isn't the strategy you would use doesn't mean its not a valid strategy.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Croe

[Def.]

What is your view on the pros/cons of starting your QB (if you have 2 equally ranked options), based on your opponent's WR?

 

I'm faced with Cutler vs. Rivers this week and my opponent starts Marshall. Not interested in a WDIS thread, but rather just curious as to your views on strategy in this situation.

 

From my perspective, on the one hand if you start Cutler, you're off-setting any receiving TD Marshall receives, but on the other hand an off-set gives him an advantage in the QB position (if you don't have the ability to start one of his QB's WRs)...

 

BTW, for what it's worth, I went w/Rivers...

 

 

Heres the OP...No specific situations presented. Just a pure what do you think about this strategy.

[Croe]

Yep, people are just trying to be cute with their "strategy". Since they use it and have offered it to the masses they are convinced it is correct, and will defend that position until they die. The rest of us are dumb because we don't understand their brilliance. (Sorry I've simply resorted to insults and cliches, but facts and rational argument don't matter to these guys, so no reason to waste time providing them.)

 

As Grits said, you cannot gaurantee anything. Yes injuries can happen to either player, but if you're starting player X to cancel out player Y then you're banking on player X staying in the game to do that. And you're also assuming there's no other way for that player Y to score except with player X throwing to him. HB passes are rare, but there are other factors to consider.

 

 

Can you point to one fact that will support your claim? Saying that starting the player who you project to score higher is always the best play, is not a fact, it is opinion. I have no facts to support the strategy in question as I have never had reason to think about doing such a thing and have never seen it used or if I have, did not realize that is why someone was making the decision. Only that I'm open to the possibility of using it if the need arises. I don't - and neither does any one else here - know the right move in ever situation this hobby of ours provides, but when something new comes up I don't dismiss it based solely on the fact that I think one player will score more, especially if I see a valid reasoning to the idea of it.

[MTSuper7]

Can you point to one fact that will support your claim? Saying that starting the player who you project to score higher is always the best play, is not a fact, it is opinion. I have no facts to support the strategy in question as I have never had reason to think about doing such a thing and have never seen it used or if I have, did not realize that is why someone was making the decision. Only that I'm open to the possibility of using it if the need arises. I don't - and neither does any one else here - know the right move in ever situation this hobby of ours provides, but when something new comes up I don't dismiss it based solely on the fact that I think one player will score more, especially if I see a valid reasoning to the idea of it.

 

 

I agree with the notion that no strategy should be completely dismissed, and I can see how one would see this as a way of mitigating risk since we don't know how any players will perform. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm willing to accept that possibility.

 

However, in all of my years of fantasy football, I have NEVER been in a situation where both of my starting QBs play on Sunday and/or Monday night, I am up on my opponent, and one of my two quarterbacks would be throwing to one of my opponent's receivers while the other doesn't. It makes more sense to discuss this situation without knowing any of "in progress" scoring, as 99.9% of the time, that's when we have to make lineup decisions.

 

And in those situations, you start the guy you think will score the most points. If you are convinced that they are equally likely to score the exact same number of points, then look at other variables (weather factors, playing on the road vs. home, etc.) to see if it sways you one way or the other. Your opponent's roster really doesn't mean squat.

 

In fact, I'd argue that with Cutler's history specifically, I'd rather start Rivers purely on the notion that he's less likely to sprain his vagina than Cutler.

Edited October 1, 2014 by MTSuper7