Does anybody else hate HTH in fantasy?

[lkirc]

I have to agree with Blitz on this one.

 

If your opponent has Manning and he scores 40 points and you start Stokley who scores 15 points you didn't cancel anything out. You just had 15 points. If you benched DJax to start Stokley and DJax had 20 points, you just screwed yourself out of 5 points.

 

The WR cancelling out a QB may seem like a good concept, but in reality, it shouldn't even enter into your decision making process.

[Jrick35]

... you are so wrong.

 

614076[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

This may be a better example.

 

Week 3 I had R. Moss, D. Mason & J. Walker at WR. We start 2 WR.

 

R. Moss was my #1 and then I had to choose between Mason & Walker. Mason is a proven Top WR and Walker had been the talk of the off season though only average through the first 2 weeks. In fact through the first 2 weeks he and Mason were pretty much even, points wise.

 

My opponent that week had Favre so I opted to go with Walker over Mason so that Walker's points would neutralize Favre's.

That was the week that Walker scored 35 points,

Favre scored 42 and

Mason put up 4.3,

so starting Walker over Mason was a 31 point swing and

Walkers 35 turned Favre's 42 into a 7.

It worked well for me that week for sure.

 

I realize that you disagree with this strategy but that doesn't mean it is a bad strategy or that I am wrong to use it.

 

I have been using this strategy all season and I have advanced to the 2nd rd of the playoffs so it at least hasn't hurt me thus far.

[Avernus]

This may be a better example.

 

Week 3 I had R. Moss, D. Mason & J. Walker at WR. We start 2 WR.

 

R. Moss was my #1 and then I had to choose between Mason & Walker. Mason is a proven Top WR and Walker had been the talk of the off season though only average through the first 2 weeks. In fact through the first 2 weeks he and Mason were pretty much even, points wise.

 

My opponent that week had Favre so I opted to go with Walker over Mason so that Walker's points would neutralize Favre's.

That was the week that Walker scored 35 points,

Favre scored 42 and

Mason put up 4.3,

so starting Walker over Mason was a 31 point swing and

Walkers 35 turned Favre's 42 into a 7.

It worked well for me that week for sure.

 

I realize that you disagree with this strategy but that doesn't mean it is a bad strategy or that I am wrong to use it.

 

I have been using this strategy all season and I have advanced to the 2nd rd of the playoffs so it at least hasn't hurt me thus far.

 

614124[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

there is nothing you can do to justify your point cancellation theory...if Favre had a bad game, then Walker does too..

[Swashbucklers]

Then your opponent's WR outscored your WR by however many points he scored because your WR had a zero from cancelling out the quarterback.

 

Once again, you are giving an example of two high-scoring players.

[Jrick35]

there is nothing you can do to justify your point cancellation theory...if Favre had a bad game, then Walker does too..

 

614138[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Granted but that could have happened if I started Mason as well. If I start Mason and McNair has a bad game then so could Mason.

 

By starting Walker, who was comparable to Mason so either choice was basically the same choice, I was allowing for the fact that if Favre went off that Walker might also.

 

Like I said I would not bench a Harrison or a Moss for a lesser WR to follow this strategy. I am using it when having to choose from players of comparable skill level and comparable potential for points that week.

 

You guys know that we do not have studs at every starter position every week, so when I am having to fill a Starter spot and I have to choose between two so-so players I go with the QB matchup whenever I can. It just so happens that I have had that chance 2 or 3 times this year and it has worked out for me.

 

I'm not trying to talk you guys into using it, I never even said you guys were wrong for not using it. I was simply implying that there could be strategy involved in H2H FF.

[Grits and Shins]

there is nothing you can do to justify your point cancellation theory...if Favre had a bad game, then Walker does too..

 

614138[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

This may be a better example.

 

Week 3 I had R. Moss, D. Mason & J. Walker at WR. We start 2 WR.

 

R. Moss was my #1 and then I had to choose between Mason & Walker. Mason is a proven Top WR and Walker had been the talk of the off season though only average through the first 2 weeks. In fact through the first 2 weeks he and Mason were pretty much even, points wise.

 

My opponent that week had Favre so I opted to go with Walker over Mason so that Walker's points would neutralize Favre's.

That was the week that Walker scored 35 points,

Favre scored 42 and

Mason put up 4.3,

so starting Walker over Mason was a 31 point swing and

Walkers 35 turned Favre's 42 into a 7.

It worked well for me that week for sure.

 

I realize that you disagree with this strategy but that doesn't mean it is a bad strategy or that I am wrong to use it.

 

I have been using this strategy all season and I have advanced to the 2nd rd of the playoffs so it at least hasn't hurt me thus far.

 

614124[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

If it had been week 12 of the season that you played the Brett Favre opponent your strategy would have blown up in your face:

 

Mason - 22.70 points

Walker - 9.50 points

Edited December 16, 2004 by Grits and Shins

[Jrick35]

Then your opponent's WR outscored your WR by however many points he scored because your WR had a zero from cancelling out the quarterback.

 

Once again, you are giving an example of two high-scoring players.

 

614152[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yeah but I also still had my QB going as well, let's not forget him.

 

And my choice netted me 31 points over what Mason would have netted me.

 

And Walker had not done anything spectacular yet at the time that I played him for week 3.

 

Walker scored something like 3 points week 1 and 10 points week 2. Mason had scored 5 & 10 for the same 2 weeks. So they were virtually even, Mason was actually slightly ahead.

 

Week 3 is the week that Walker started his scoring this year.

[Bender Rodriguez]

If you are in a league with strangers I guess that is fine ... but H2H is all about going straight up against a buddy, smack talking and then bragging about kicking his ass.

 

FF wouldn't be near as fun in a total points league.

 

613859[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Agreed. When you know the guys in your league HTH is the way to go. For instance, I'm playing my dad this weekend for a trip to the finals. He's got a 42" plasma TV with the NFL ticket. It's gonna be a hell of a Sunday.

[Jrick35]

If it had been week 12 of the season that you played the Brett Favre opponent your strategy would have blown up in your face:

 

Mason - 22.70 points

Walker - 9.50 points

 

614157[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Mr. Grits & Shins are you insinuating that your strategy for FF is fool proof?

 

That it never blows up in your face?

 

Again I never said anybody else had to utilize my strategy, I never implied that it was fool proof.

 

I simply stated that when I have had the chance to use it this season, it has worked out for me.

 

Now, if you ever do stumble on to a FF strategy that is fool proof and never fails I hope that you will let me in on it.

[Grits and Shins]

Yeah but I also still had my QB going as well, let's not forget him.

 

And my choice netted me 31 points over what Mason would have netted me.

 

And Walker had not done anything spectacular yet at the time that I played him for week 3.

 

Walker scored something like 3 points week 1 and 10 points week 2. Mason had scored 5 & 10 for the same 2 weeks. So they were virtually even, Mason was actually slightly ahead.

 

Week 3 is the week that Walker started his scoring this year.

 

614161[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

7 catches for 102 yards win week 2 doesn't qualify as "anything spectacular"? Then in week 3 Walker was facing the porous Indy defense while Mason was going against the Jaguars.

[Avernus]

Mr. Grits & Shins are you insinuating that your strategy for FF is fool proof?

 

That it never blows up in your face?

 

Again I never said anybody else had to utilize my strategy, I never implied that it was fool proof.

 

I simply stated that when I have had the chance to use it this season, it has worked out for me.

 

Now, if you ever do stumble on to a FF strategy that is fool proof and never fails I hope that you will let me in on it.

 

614169[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

there isn't a fool proof one...but never let your opponents decision dictate what you are going to do...it only limits you...all you can do is play your studs and play the best matchup....

 

allowing your opponent's lineup to dictate your lineup just shows you're a rookie at this....seriously...

[Jrick35]

7 catches for 102 yards win week 2 doesn't qualify as "anything spectacular"?  Then in week 3 Walker was facing the porous Indy defense while Mason was going against the Jaguars.

 

614170[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Not compared to what he put up against the Colts.

 

Why am I not allowed to have a strategy different than yours?

 

Whenever possible I start the best player.

 

When confronted with a less than obvious choice I use the method I described in this thread.

 

I'm not disparaging your strategy or your right to use it.

[Grits and Shins]

Mr. Grits & Shins are you insinuating that your strategy for FF is fool proof?

 

That it never blows up in your face?

 

Again I never said anybody else had to utilize my strategy, I never implied that it was fool proof.

 

I simply stated that when I have had the chance to use it this season, it has worked out for me.

 

Now, if you ever do stumble on to a FF strategy that is fool proof and never fails I hope that you will let me in on it.

 

614169[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Nope ... I am saying the "strategy" you are endorsing is NOT a strategy at all. It's just plain dumb.

 

In the example you provided Walker and Mason are both top notch WRs and any given week are both good plays. Walker had just come off a 7 catch week for 102 yards in week 2 and was going up against a porous Indy defense, an Indy defense Mason had just torched for 8 catches and 104 yards. Mason was going to face Jacksonville.

 

Anybody looking at that would naturally start Walker over Mason and it has nothing to do with who your opponent starts.

 

It NEVER NEVER NEVER does you any good to leave a player on the bench that scores more points than the player you started EVEN if the player you started is the WR for your opponent's QB.

 

It's a dumb strategy to attempt to employ.

 

You start the players you believe will score the most points and it should not matter in the least whom your opponent starts.

[Grits and Shins]

So if you happened to play the Favre owner in weeks 3, 5, 7, 11 or 13 then your strategy paid off ...

 

If you played the Favre owner in weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 12 or 14 then you left points on the bench.

 

So in your specific example you had a 5 out of 12 chance of getting lucky.

Edited December 16, 2004 by Grits and Shins

[Jrick35]

Nope ... I am saying the "strategy" you are endorsing is NOT a strategy at all.  It's just plain dumb.

 

In the example you provided Walker and Mason are both top notch WRs and any given week are both good plays.  Walker had just come off a 7 catch week for 102 yards in week 2 and was going up against a porous Indy defense, an Indy defense Mason had just torched for 8 catches and 104 yards.  Mason was going to face Jacksonville.

 

Anybody looking at that would naturally start Walker over Mason and it has nothing to do with who your opponent starts.

 

It NEVER NEVER NEVER does you any good to leave a player on the bench that scores more points than the player you started EVEN if the player you started is the WR for your opponent's QB.

 

It's a dumb strategy to attempt to employ.

 

You start the players you believe will score the most points and it should not matter in the least whom your opponent starts.

 

614191[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

And now I'm dumb.

 

I disagree with you and I refrain from calling you any names or even condemning your strategy and now I am dumb.

 

Are you saying that every player that you have started has scored more points than the other players at that position that you have on your bench?

 

I could use hindsight to look at every strategy out there and poke holes in it like you're doing.

 

No strategy is 100%.

 

As for Walker being the obvious choice over Mason you are using your knowledge of Walker today to make that assessment.

 

Yes Walker had just had a 100 yd game. But you are leaving out the fact that it was only the 2nd 100 yd game of his entire career to that point.

 

Yes they were going up against Indy but Walker was not, at that time, either a Superstar or an obvious choice to start over Mason.

 

Mason had been a Top Notch WR for years, Walker was coming off his 2nd 100 yd game ever.

 

I had seen enough of Walker to like his potential but no real reason to believe he would get 200 yds and 2 TD's. I was just hoping to stem the tide of what Favre was going to do, and it worked.

 

Was I lucky? Yes, but did I create that luck by starting Walker, Yes. Every Strategy out there needs some luck to succeed. Read my sig line, even Lombardi admiited that.

 

Now looking back from Week 15 of this season, yes Walker was the obvious choice but during the week leading up to week 3's game, no he wasn't.

 

And as I said, people are free to employ whatever strategy they choose. This is mine. When confronted with a less than obvious choice I look for matchups.

 

A different choice than you but not necessarily dumb.

Edited December 16, 2004 by Jrick35

[Avernus]

this reminds me of this argument I got into 2 weeks ago..

 

someone said Urlacher was the best LB...better than Ray Lewis in his prime...

 

I was baffled...

 

pointless to argue...

[Jrick35]

this reminds me of this argument I got into 2 weeks ago..

 

someone said Urlacher was the best LB...better than Ray Lewis in his prime...

 

I was baffled...

 

pointless to argue...

 

614261[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I agree, I was simply responding to the post that said there was no strategy in H2H FF.

 

I didn't realize that there was a rule on what strategy was allowed to be employed or not.

 

Wouldn't it be boring if every team in the NFL had the same playbook, and ran the same gameplan, in their attempt to win games?

[Grits and Shins]

:shakeshead:

 

Have I always made the right line up choices? Certainly not. Have I ever let who my opponent is starting influence who I start, nope.

 

Here's another clue for you ... your opponent's QB can have a GREAT day and your WR can be left out. This is especially true when an NFL team has more than 1 good WR to throw to.

 

Good luck to you with attempting to win games employing that strategy. I would be willing to bet that after you have a couple more years experience with fantasy football you will see that I am right.

[Avernus]

I agree, I was simply responding to the post that said there was no strategy in H2H FF.

 

I didn't realize that there was a rule on what strategy was allowed to be employed or not.

 

Wouldn't it be boring if every team in the NFL had the same playbook, and ran the same gameplan, in their attempt to win games?

 

614265[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

thats why you have your andy reid's, bill belichick's....and then you have your Mike Tice's..or even Dave Campo's....somebody has to suck..

[FredGSanford]

HTH can be a drag but that's just the way it is, and should be, in fantasy football. Last week I got knocked out of the playoffs even though I had a very good week. I scored 2nd highest of the four teams that played. As luck would have it I played against the team that scored the most. The team that won the other playoff game had less points than me, UGGHHH! Very tough to take after a long season of hard work. It sucks, but that's just how it is.

[Grits and Shins]

Back to topic ... here is how the scorers in my local were seeded:

 

1st - 2 seed

2nd - 1 seed

3rd - 3 seed

4th - 5 seed (me)

5th - 8 seed (toilet bowl)

6th - 7 seed (toilet bowl)

7th - 6 seed

8th - 10 seed (toilet bowl)

9th - 9 seed (toilet bowl)

10th - 12 seed (toilet bowl)

11th - 4 seed (won his division)

12th - 11 seed (toilet bowl)

[Grits and Shins]

Also ... in the first round of the playoffs all the higher seeds defeated the lower seeds

 

6 defeated 3

5 defeated 4

 

12 defeated 9

11 defeated 10

[Jrick35]

:shakeshead:

 

Have I always made the right line up choices?  Certainly not.  Have I ever let who my opponent is starting influence who I start, nope.

 

Here's another clue for you ... your opponent's QB can have a GREAT day and your WR can be left out.  This is especially true when an NFL team has more than 1 good WR to throw to.

 

Good luck to you with attempting to win games employing that strategy.  I would be willing to bet that after you have a couple more years experience with fantasy football you will see that I am right.

 

614274[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I have been playing FF for over 10 years.

 

Had I known that you are the end-all for strategy choices I would have consulted you years ago.

 

Simply because I employ a different strategy than you I first am called dumb and now I must be a novice.

 

I wish I could be as amazingly intelligent and right as you are.

 

I also wish I knew why you are taking such offense to me using a strategy that you disagree with.

[Jrick35]

:shakeshead:

 

Have I always made the right line up choices?  Certainly not.  Have I ever let who my opponent is starting influence who I start, nope.

 

Here's another clue for you ... your opponent's QB can have a GREAT day and your WR can be left out.  This is especially true when an NFL team has more than 1 good WR to throw to.

 

Good luck to you with attempting to win games employing that strategy.  I would be willing to bet that after you have a couple more years experience with fantasy football you will see that I am right.

614274[/snapback]

The point that I think you are missing is that I do start the players that I think will score the most points.

 

I do not start a WR to match up against my opponents QB over another WR whom I think will outscore the 1st WR.

 

I go for the matchup if and when I am presented with a choice of two players whom I think are of similar abilities and have the same potential for points that week.

[weekapaug]

Agreed Grits, always play the guy you think will have the most points. Problem is you can never know who will have the most points and you have to decide sometimes between guys that look pretty even.

 

Also agreed Grits, it's a stretch to hedge a QB by playing a receiver on the same team. The QB can throw to anyone, that's not really a hedge IMO.

 

But to reverse it and hedge a WR with a QB is not a bad strategy IMO IF you have some evenly matched QBs to decide between. You know that if the WR goes off, your QB will share in the points (who else is going to get him the ball). If he doesn't, your QB may still have a good day by throwing to others, at least just as likely as your other QB choice to have a good day. So if I were to have 2 QBs that I think are pretty evenly matched (I don't KNOW before hand who will be better at the end of the day), I would be inclined to hedge the opponents WR by playing the QB from the same team. This circumstance is not going to happen too often though.

 

BTW - My local has always been total points. We give some incentive to stay in it by awarding weekly prize for most points scored, so even if you are out of the big money, there is still some incentive to keep up your team.