Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

KnicksSeasonTix23

Playing guys based on your opponent's players

106 posts in this topic

Do you guys ever play certain guys based on who your opponent has? Normally we all go by the "play your studs" mantra, but in a coin toss type of situation do you ever play WR X because your opponent has the QB from the same team?

I wonder what the pros and cons of such a strategy would be? 95% of the time you know who you are playing, but in the instances where you need to make a pick up or are deciding between 2 relatively equal players, does it ever factor in your decisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have done that before. If Im playing against someone i know i have an advantage over based on match ups and studs i play a WR that will limit the upside of his QB. Last weekend I was up by 20 and he had Tony Romo still left to play. So i played Terrance Williams instead of playing Pierre Garcon. I figured if Romo had another 40 point game Terrance Williams would have to have a good game as well like last week of vice versa. Tony Romo ended up having only 8.8 FP and T will 8.7 FP so it didnt make a difference. I won. Garcon had 6.9 lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i never understood the whole "draft wideouts of the same team as your QB" thing. yeah it's double points, but it goes both ways.

if you have garcon and your opponent is RG3, you play him anyway because he will eat into RG3's points with every throw. it doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys ever play certain guys based on who your opponent has? Normally we all go by the "play your studs" mantra, but in a coin toss type of situation do you ever play WR X because your opponent has the QB from the same team?

I wonder what the pros and cons of such a strategy would be? 95% of the time you know who you are playing, but in the instances where you need to make a pick up or are deciding between 2 relatively equal players, does it ever factor in your decisions?

I never hedge my bet unless I'm a big time favorite to win the matchup already, where a play it safe approach should get it done.

But if say I have big players on a bye week and I'm playing the #1 team, I'll start all my all or nothing guys and hope for the best.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I definitely try to do is to get the kicker of my opponents QB. Usually if the qb has a good game, the kicker has something along the same lines. In my experience this has worked about 70% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play who I think my best players are, period. It doesn't matter who my opponent rolls out there, I worry about my team and I don't overthink things.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole concept makes absolutely no sense. You play the guy that you think will score the most points. Period.

If you have somebody that is so guaranteed to score a lot of points with a certain quarterback, you should be starting him no matter what.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you play your players with the best match ups you have no guarantee that they pull a dud and cost you the week. Thats why if you have a certain lead or have to pick between two risk players you play the one that will limit your opponents players upside. That way the opponents points are directly proportional to yours. Your WR has a good game his QB had a good game. Your WR has a bad game his QB most likely had a bad game. WR are unpredictable/ risky any given week thats why its good to have some sort of insurance. Obviously you play the best players on your team most of the time this is just a situational bye week type of scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you play your players with the best match ups you have no guarantee that they pull a dud and cost you the week. Thats why if you have a certain lead or have to pick between two risk players you play the one that will limit your opponents players upside. That way the opponents points are directly proportional to yours. Your WR has a good game his QB had a good game. Your WR has a bad game his QB most likely had a bad game. WR are unpredictable/ risky any given week thats why its good to have some sort of insurance. Obviously you play the best players on your team most of the time this is just a situational bye week type of scenario.

I started Alshon Jeffery last week because I thought he had the best chance at scoring me points. My opponent had Jay Cutler who finished with 20.3pts. Alshon Jeffery finished with 5.2pts. Just because you think that it Alshon Jeffery limited Jay Cutler's upside (somehow) doesn't mean that happens. In no way did starting Alshon effect Jay Cutler's upside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if you have to players you rank the same. Example Jordy and DJax and couldnt decide between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if you have to players you rank the same. Example Jordy and DJax and couldnt decide between the two.

There ya go. Yes, if you have two players fairly equally ranked and your opponent has the QB of one of your players AND it is a good matchup that week I would definitely play that WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you play your players with the best match ups you have no guarantee that they pull a dud and cost you the week. Thats why if you have a certain lead or have to pick between two risk players you play the one that will limit your opponents players upside. That way the opponents points are directly proportional to yours. Your WR has a good game his QB had a good game. Your WR has a bad game his QB most likely had a bad game. WR are unpredictable/ risky any given week thats why its good to have some sort of insurance. Obviously you play the best players on your team most of the time this is just a situational bye week type of scenario.

I started Alshon Jeffery last week because I thought he had the best chance at scoring me points. My opponent had Jay Cutler who finished with 20.3pts. Alshon Jeffery finished with 5.2pts. Just because you think that it Alshon Jeffery limited Jay Cutler's upside (somehow) doesn't mean that happens. In no way did starting Alshon effect Jay Cutler's upside.

In week 5 if you were up by 30points with one receiver left and your opponent had Romo left which would you have started Terrance Williams or Boldin or Colston. If you wouldve started Williams you wouldve won if you went with Boldin or Colston you wouldve lost. By starting williams you limited Romo's big game.

Only if you have to players you rank the same. Example Jordy and DJax and couldnt decide between the two.

There ya go. Yes, if you have two players fairly equally ranked and your opponent has the QB of one of your players AND it is a good matchup that week I would definitely play that WR.

and this. Like i said its situationally based on what other players you have and what your opponent has and what situation you will most likely be in. You can't predict the future but you can lower the risk of a dud or a boom or bust type player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play the kicker of my opponents QB. Reduces their passing TDs from 4 to 3. If they stall out in the red zone, I get 3 and he doesnt get a TD. Rushing td and your Kicker gets 1 and their QB gets 0

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while i like the kicker-of-QB strategy, it seems like that's not very feasible a lot of weeks

although it's still a kicker so who cares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play the kicker of my opponents QB. Reduces their passing TDs from 4 to 3. If they stall out in the red zone, I get 3 and he doesnt get a TD. Rushing td and your Kicker gets 1 and their QB gets 0

This still makes absolutely zero sense. I get that kickers are a volatile position, but you would be far better served by just picking a kicker that is expected to have a lot of opportunities to score you some points.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play the kicker of my opponents QB. Reduces their passing TDs from 4 to 3. If they stall out in the red zone, I get 3 and he doesnt get a TD. Rushing td and your Kicker gets 1 and their QB gets 0

This still makes absolutely zero sense. I get that kickers are a volatile position, but you would be far better served by just picking a kicker that is expected to have a lot of opportunities to score you some points.

A week or so ago, I literally beat Aaron Rodgers single-handedly by picking Mason Crosby off of the waiver wire lol. Another couple of weeks back, my opponent had Vick playing KC, i pick up Alexi Henry and win. This does work imo, i think i have won atleast a dozen games in the last 3 years just because the Kicker completely negated the other guy's QB lol. This really works well if the other guys QB is going up against a decent defense.

However when this doesnt work, its not common but it has happened and OMFG things can go down south real quick, for example teams fall behind and they go for 2 and convert lol.

Also all these strategies are somewhat advanced level strategies, people need to know what they are doing to employ them. You cant randomly start any opposing K, need to understand matchups, offensive injuries etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole concept makes absolutely no sense. You play the guy that you think will score the most points. Period.

If you have somebody that is so guaranteed to score a lot of points with a certain quarterback, you should be starting him no matter what.

Agreed but there's a probabilistic distribution associated with a player's performance. I am confident Antonio Brown outscores TY Hilton but this is based on a probabilistic distribution with each point total having a discrete probability. There is also a chance that Hilton out scores Brown and, a good chance that Luck's performance correlates with that. Thusly, I can hedge my bets by playing Hilton against the team with Luck.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while i like the kicker-of-QB strategy, it seems like that's not very feasible a lot of weeks

although it's still a kicker so who cares

Agreed. All the kickers you would want to employ this strategy against are already owned. Prater, Hartley, and Crosby being the main ones that come to mind,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play the kicker of my opponents QB. Reduces their passing TDs from 4 to 3. If they stall out in the red zone, I get 3 and he doesnt get a TD. Rushing td and your Kicker gets 1 and their QB gets 0

This still makes absolutely zero sense. I get that kickers are a volatile position, but you would be far better served by just picking a kicker that is expected to have a lot of opportunities to score you some points.

Yes, but kicker is super random to me. Too tough to predict expected points for kicking. Why doesn't it make sense? If a passing TD is worth 4 points-you reduce it to only 3 points. And if they stall out, you are guaranteed to get points. I don't think its the key to fantasy, but it can be helpful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play the kicker of my opponents QB. Reduces their passing TDs from 4 to 3. If they stall out in the red zone, I get 3 and he doesnt get a TD. Rushing td and your Kicker gets 1 and their QB gets 0

This still makes absolutely zero sense. I get that kickers are a volatile position, but you would be far better served by just picking a kicker that is expected to have a lot of opportunities to score you some points.

Yes, but kicker is super random to me. Too tough to predict expected points for kicking. Why doesn't it make sense? If a passing TD is worth 4 points-you reduce it to only 3 points. And if they stall out, you are guaranteed to get points. I don't think its the key to fantasy, but it can be helpful

No, just, no. You do not reduce it to 3. He still gets 4pts. I know what you are trying to say, but fantasy football doesn't work that way.

If you are trying to find a kicker it is best to look at RZ% for the offense and RZ FG for defense. Do that every week and you will almost always get 10+ points from your kicker. Thats what I generally do, but I am riding Crosby while he is actually making FGs (pretty rare).

Although, play the fake game however you want. I don't know why I came back to this thread. I will let people play however the hell they want to, even if it doesn't make sense. Haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, but i have picked up players to prevent the other team from getting them. for instance, my opponent this week has Brees on a bye this week, so I picked up both Cutler and Foles, who have great matchups. he was left with Tannehill. a lot less scary.

another good thing is that my QB is Luck, so when he's on bye next week I can play Foles against the porous NYG D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some guy is starting Foles this week so I countered him by picking up Cooper and Avant.

Playing chess, not checkers

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites