BattleshipLorenzen
-
Content Count
113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by BattleshipLorenzen
-
-
IMO it is a very good point to raise, especially given the OPs context (i.e., very active league with solid tenure). In the past, we have used it to help determine draft order (keeper league, 3 keepers, 3 years max before keeper must be released). The playoff teams get draft order based on finish (i.e., champion is last, etc.). The non-playoff teams were awarded draft order based on active games (actually, moved to the back of the non-playoff teams for inactive games). We switched to points scored for draft order for non-playoff teams - highest points scored gets 1st pick. This has roughly the same effect.
In your league, it sounds reasonable, but keep the fine, and then add some leeway for exempting the fine (e.g., one or two freebies/year, needs to be an unexpected change or other circumstance, such as a few weeks ago when Rotoworld said Mike Evans was going to be Active a few hours before kickoff, and then he was announced inactive pretty close to kickoff).
In one of my local leagues, you can designate "bench players" (one player at each position) to be used in case one of the players in your starting lineup is Inactive.
EX: An owner yesterday, had Antonio Gates in his starting lineup. When he originally made his lineup, he designated Jason Witten to be his replacement for the TE position. Since Gates was inactive, the commish swapped Gates for Witten and all is good.
Our league is hosted at MFL and this easy to setup. You simply check a box next to the bench players as you would anyone else in your starting lineup.
This sounds like a great solution.
-
That's my thought too. If he's this super "talented" guy, why can't he beat out a guy like Turbin?
I find the "doesn't get the running style" hypothesis plausible. In SEA, you're supposed to aim for a "dark crease" - a spot or lane that is not open yet but will be when the RB gets there (if I understand it correctly). If a runner doesn't get that (and is enough of a head case to try to waive Lynch off the field), then the talent doesn't matter. Wasn't DMC's last good year in OAK in a power run scheme? Coaching changes led to the team implementing a zone blocking scheme instead, and DMC stank even without injuries. If I recall correctly, it was a pretty stark and sudden contrast.
Had a die-hard Dallas fan in our league offer me Alshon for Michael straight up on Friday...it worked out well yesterday.
Niiice. I've been offered Knile for him, in a keeper league, last week...no thanks. I THINK I would have taken Jeffrey before the CHI game, but I'm not sure.
-
As a fantasy starter, Luck is just about back to where he was originally expected to be. His (in)accuracy stretches are concerning (I'm parroting Nate Dunlevy here, but it's hard to find better info/analysis), and 2nd half was mostly poor play, but the Colts defense is absolutely terrible, and the OC is great, so Luck should keep getting points. I bought low on him around the JAX game knowing that missing JAX = missing HOU at least (Ryan and Crow) and will be happy to get the weekly 25+.
As a football player, though, his second-half play was concerning. I'm hoping the "arm tired in second half" proposal is correct, and that he is still recovering.
He needs Andre Johmson to wake up amd make some moderately difficult catches.
Man, I'd like to see that too. Granted, I don't think Andre should see the field over Moncrief, and he's only shown up against HOU, but I was hoping for more.
-
Smart in that they don't want to kill the golden goose. The only DFS contests I enter into are with known associates. It's not hard to get 20 man leagues going among pards.
I've read about these engineering jokers who write programs specifically geared to DFS ie. picking sleeper players, sharking for weaker DFS opponents. If I was a software genius and this was my bread and butter, yeah, I may venture out into it. But otherwise no. The funny thing is I had good luck winning some money last season. But this year my goodness, you need to be perfect with every player.
Good call on known associates - I hadn't even thought about that, even though I won't play FF with strangers.
Regarding the data scientists / machine learning programmers, as has been noted on this board, if you are not one of them, you are losing or lucky. DFS is gambling - data scientists are the house, and if you aren't using some advanced analytics and automation skills, well, the house always wins (in the long run).
I got the same email and have been replying to their emails with 'Give me my money back'.
Also, I'm withdrawing my money $1 at a time. Surely they have to pay some hack to process that or maybe even pay a fee to do it.
Haha nice...
-
1
-
-
Dude, why are you bitching so hard about what the defaults are? Change them.
You're dead right about their IDP ranking though. They just rank them on offensive scoring, I think. Which DE is more likely to get rushing yards or something. Messed up. But preranking takes care of that. Just takes time.
Mainly because I think they are indicative of the degree to which Yahoo cares about putting out a decent product (not blaming them in a business sense, considering the breadth of their target market). As you said, their projections can actually be pretty good, but they just did not care to run the data for IDPs (not like they don't have it). The attention to detail simply isn't there. I'm not suggesting that they should be able to compete with MFL by any stretch, but expecting what Fleaflicker did ten years ago isn't much.
Wow dude. You don't even know what you're ranting about. Stuff from years ago? Get over it. The ONLY thing you posted that's correct is the IDP rankings. They don't even bother. Odd really because they do pretty accurate projections. If they ranked off that, no issues. Well, the irrational ones would still be there so you still have that.
Huh. I was wrong about all of the defaults for this year? A quick google brought up the default public leagues settings (never been relevant for me), and it looks like I'm at least wrong about fractional points. Playoff reseeding is unclear because I'm looking at settings for a 10 team league. Again, agreed on the projections, but I don't find it out of character for them.
Dude...there is ALWAYS IDP talent available.
...<snip>...
If you didn't pay attention to your team and make the necessary pick ups during the course of the year, blame yourself. Not yahoo.
Oh. And fractional points...maybe your commissioner could've done his or her job and changed the league settings to those that the league voted on.
OPIAFP
Your first assumption (that the IDP talent on my team is inadequate or on the wire is inadequate).The second doesn't apply to my leagues (and, apparently, no longer applies at all). Are you defending Yahoo as producing a good product (well, its users are), or pissed at me for ranting, or just trolling...?
-
How long has Crennel been DC of the Texans? Yes, he faced one of the best OCs in the game, but that defense is bad. Obviously, it isn't Colts-bad, but it's bad.
Hilton pushed off on that clinching catch. I've got not probs with a great WR making a savvy play like that, but they called it on Hopkins earlier erasing a long gain. On the throwing the ball penalty dude was pulling on his jersey long after he'd stepped out of bounds. I've seen refs blow those things off, especially late in games. Again, am impartial here but there were some bad calls and non-calls against Houston.
Oh and that job is Hoyer's. Period. I guess they could only take so much of Mallett's suckage, at least Hoyer was going down the field taking shots. I'll take that guy anyday. He probably didn't see that defender masked behind the receiver. Obviously you throw it out of bounds and go for it on 4th down. That punk Mallet couldn't throw for 300 yards sitting at home on his couch playing Madden.
Indy is the most over-hyped and over-rated team in football. Living large again off an AFC South which just plain sucks.
The crew was not very good - they also missed an OPI on one of Hasselbeck's TD's (rub route with too much pick too late).
Call on Hopkins was right, but I agree with the your point that it's pretty understandable that Nuk was annoyed; if he keeps looking up to Andre, he'll learn to reign that in. On Hoyer's pick, a hilarious tweet from Barnwell:
"Pretty rare to see an NFL quarterback throw a pass and wonder if the DB should have called for a fair catch "
That was very Hoyer (and very Texans against the Colts - along with the unnecessary penalties, which is not all of them). I'd still take him over Mallet as well, but to your point about the Colts, that defense is way worse than it looked last night. Vontae is probably still hurt, which means we have zero DB's. The guy who was faceguarding his teammates on the HoyerMary? Our NUMBER TWO CORNER. People have been quite HAPPY to have him back...because it's so much worse after him. Only way to ever pressure is blitzes, and not-awful QBs will eat this defense alive. The OC, Manusky, is brilliant at masking the talent weaknesses, but you can only compensate for lack of talent so much.
I hear ya Mick
I liked that Pagano went for the throat on 4th down and got the FG.He's learning. He's actually been learning. He may have been taught by the same dumb school that taught guys like Fox, but he actually learns.
-
He's not a good receiving back anymore. His last year with a good DVOA, and only one since at least 2010, was 2012. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb2012 . His last year with a positive Defense-adjusted Yards Above Replacement was also 2012, but still only 234 yards. 2010 was his last year as a solid FF RB receiver.
-
I am happy to have never been cursed by it. Yahoo loves to poop on fantasy football. They have been terrible at it from the start. I was first goaded back into playing in a league on their website back in '09, and I remembered having to dig and dig to find players who were absolutely buried because they didn't bother to rank them -- guys were just shoved onto the list (you know, QBs like Ben Roethlisberger).
Then, when they FINALLY added IDPs, their autodraft (based on their rankings!) RUINED any team for which it made picks, and it STILL DOES. That sounds funny until your opponents play the guy who got autodrafted and suddenly became busy for a month.
We were pencil and paper (okay, keyboard), and then Fleaflicker, and then that stupid (half-decent, but not really ever improving) phone app meant my old keeper league wanted to switch to Yahoo. I hate 'em. Even their defaults are ridiculous and stupid (more ranting):
-NO FRACTIONAL POINTS? WTF. Let's start off every season by giving people reasons to be pissed off because yardage totals are ending in 7, 8, 9. Nothing more rewarding than rounding down!
-No playoff reseeding by default? I didn't know what that even MEANT until Yahoo. Is it the NORM to be in a league big enough to have conferences? No? This isn't F'ing college basketball - top-ranked plays bottom-ranked in each round.
-No trade proposal notifications in app (yes, I know they are under pending transactions, but NO ONE ELSE DOES)?
-League trade veto by default, and only 4 votes required?
-Can't drop list by default (I think they changed this...)?
-Lock all players at start of first (Thursday night!) game by default? (may have been fixed finally; not sure)
The others are minor by comparison (no per-yard points for FGs, can't have separate scoring for the positions, can't get points for interception return yards), and they are slowly improving (TFLs work correctly this year!), but I'd happily pay for a premium product.
-
guys you are missing the point, Gore can catch passes too.... its not him. Its thier stupid oline and thier QB play...period ! Bradshaw isnt better than Gore in any way
You haven't seen a Colts game this year, have you? Gore has been terrible when used in the passing game. And some advanced stats to back it up:
-His DVOA is -36.8%, meaning his value as a receiver is substantially worse than the average back. Last year, Bradshaw was a positive 38.2% (Gore was -4.4% in 2014).
O-line is half-decent. Not good, but not bottom ten. FootballOutsiders has them at #16 in run blocking. Using a very different grading system, ProFootballFocus has them at 16th in run blocking so far (18th in pass blocking), and 19th overall (21st in penalties).
-
Thinking of rolling Fleener out (FFPC scoring) over him. Allen being active though is giving me pause.
FFPC scoring? Unless that's wildly different from standard or half PPR, I wouldn't. Only reason Allen wouldn't cut into Fleener's nubers is if they run two TE and just keep Allen in to block.
How have OAK's tackles been? PFF ranks the OAK line as having the 2nd best pass blocking execution so far this year. MIN, the next best-graded pass-blocking line that DEN has faced, is ranked 16th.
-
The Texans are basically starting Blaine Gabbert, and then benching him for Blaine Gabbert.
Kaep is bad, but I'd actually take him over Bryan Hoylett.
-
if had anything left, why then wouldn't another team in need of RB help sign him ?
A good and fair question. I actually can't think of a single team with compelling reason to use the roster spot/cap space on a 29 yo RB coming off of an injury. Buffalo was the only real candidate, but Boom Herron is cheaper and lacks the injury history, even though he has less talent.
Why can't you drop him? Or is it you don't want to drop him?
Haven't convinced myself yet, and not enough time to before kickoff probably (keeper league). We do have FAAB instead of the forsaken waiver priority system, so that will let me spend on Bradshaw after the game starts if I want (whereas CMike would clear waivers Saturday).
-
Best guess from @ColtsAuthority is that he wasn't signed this week because Josh Johnson is taking up a roster spot. According to @NateDunlevy , the lack of a receiving option out of the backfield has been the single biggest problem with the offense (ignoring Luck's injury, of course -- which very likely came from defensive play after an interception). Those are the guys to read for the Colts (to understand/evaluate the team; not necessarily for the first scoop on news). The local Indy writers are nice for feature stories, but terrible for any analysis.
Note that the "why wasn't he signed?" guess does not come from any leak. And yes, signing him makes at least as much sense as it seems on the surface. He's cheap and fantastically productive. If he gets hurt, it's still a net gain overall. Gore has not been good as a receiving back.
If I could drop CMike (added before last week's game, just in case he got 6 carries instead of, you know, 1), I'd add Bradshaw.
-
Looking for IDP underperformers or sleepers with good pedigrees who are flying under the radar so far. Thoughts/additions?
Aldon Smith, OAK. He was a dominant pass rusher. He's been with OAK for a few weeks, and his snap count has increased each week (started last week for the first time). He got two solos (one TFL, which adds 1.5 in my league, for 2.5 per solo TFL - compared to 3 for a sack), two PDs (1 each, same as solo), but no QB hits (and, if I recall, no pressures). You'd think that, opposite K.Mack, there would be some good pass-rushing opportunity. Part of it is his conditioning (and I guess he lines up on the left? PFF said he was against Joe Thomas), but anyone have any insight (i.e., actually saw the game?) into whether better production can be expected? The Bears are pretty weak at tackle right now, and seem likely to be in catch-up mode, so Aldon might be a sneaky play this week.
Anthony Barr, MIN. Good average last year after being the No. 9 overall draft pick and some big games. Two good games and a bad week 2 so far this year, but plays on a good defense.
Marcell Dareus, BUF. He just came off of suspension in week 2, performed decently in a plus-matchup away in week 3, and has a two more coming up (for DTs, not DL overall). He got 80% of snaps week 2 and only 63% week 3 (rested with the lead maybe?). I'm not sure that he's dominant enough to be a regular starter, but could be a good stash for BYE weeks.
Michael Johnson, CIN. I think he's graded out well by PFF. Did not start week 1, but started 2 and 3 and got 75% of the snaps. Two bad matchups (with my league's scoring) in weeks 1 and 3; had poor stats in week 2's better matchup against SD (2 solo, 1 assist, 1 PD). KC gives up points to DE, and one would think he'd be able to take advantage of the attention that Geno Atkins and Carlos Dunlap will demand. He's recently been added as well (hence not starting week 1), but really only had one noteworthy year with CIN stat-wise (2012).
Leonard Williams, NYJ. Grading out well for a rookie, increasing snap time, and still getting into shape on what looks to be a dominant defense. Has anyone seen this kid play?
Dont'a Hightower, NE. Very promising last year, and great start to this year before dropping only 1 point week 3 (Jags abandoned the run; Hightower still got 72% of the snaps, compared to 91% week 2 and 84% week 1). Seems (possibly) dependent on the defensive package that NE uses to defend an opponent (e.g., it looks like only 2 linebackers got snaps week 1, except Mayo got a handful while Hightower was out).
Any others? Thoughts on these guys? They are just a few who are on the WW in my IDP league (2 DL, 2LB, 2 DB). I'm solid at these positions (except DB), but it's nice to spot playmakers ahead of time instead of relying on JAGs during BYE weeks.
Short list of guys who are "WTF?" with their rankings each week, IMO.
Oliver Vernon
Fletcher Cox
Jason Hatcher
-
Sucks that Luck is my Qb in both my leagues and Mariotta is my backup in both. In my 2QB league, I had to drop David Johnson to pickup Hasselback as he is the only "starting" qb available. I'm praying Luck is available Sunday, but with a Thursday night game on the horizon I have to believe they rest him.
I don't think they do. Pagano is coaching for his job. Hasselbeck says Luck should be fine.
They showed a practice video of luck handing off and the reporter said that was all he could do in drills.
I'm not a doctor, but that's not good.
Fair enough; thanks for clarifying. I would definitely interpret that as the reporter taking liberties because it makes a better story. "Luck can't throw" is a much better headline than "Luck not throwing in part of practice open to media, and probably throwing minimally, if at all, but was seen throwing just a few days ago in a 4th quarter comeback."
I might be more concerned about Thursday, and suspect the roster move has to do with preparing for Luck getting hurt enough to be pulled mid-game or being prepared to sit him if he's too sore for the road game against J.J. Watt and friends. Doesn't Josh Johnson have some mobility? He might be the backup plan for HOU (as a backup, not a starter). Hasselbeck is terrible at this point - he's on the team to mentor Luck.
The Oline is one of the worst in football so im not sure how it has improved. Peyton had been to only 2 super bowls before Fox. He gets no credit for taking 2 different teams? Nah. Fox is a better coach. I am a Bears fan and know it doesnt matter anyway. I dont think Fox is a great coach by any means and dont expect much, but id still rather have him than Chucky who took a decent Indy roster and made it worse.
OT response spoilered so people can skip. TL;DR: Grigson did the roster, not Pagano. Both (stupidly) conservative; Pagano's players play hard in playoffs/look prepared (they play up); Fox's Broncos played down, hurt by conservative calls, and looked bewilderingly unprepared (intentionally so if I remember correctly! "Treat it like regular season" or some such nonsense).
Agreed that it is bad; I should have said "marginally" better, not "substantially" better. Enough to notice (I don't have subscriptions to check the advanced metrics), but people generally did not realize how much Peyton masked the O-line play, as sacks are almost all on the QB, not the line. The roster, again, is on Grigson, not Pagano. Knowing that, would you still rather have Fox? Granted, in an alternate reality wherein Pagano stays with the Ravens and then becomes the Bears HC instead of Fox, then he'd plausibly be just as bad with losing football philosophy, minus Fox's experience. I think being in Indy has helped him learn to be less conservative and to win ore with the pass (pressure from OC, GM, and having Luck), and that edges him over FOX IMO.
No, Fox does not automatically get credit for "taking two teams to the SB (...unless he does. Any CAR homers care to chime in on whether the HC contributed substantially?)." Pagano's team, btw, has gone progressively further each year with a far less talented roster. By the same logic, Pagano's Colts came in and beat Fox's broncos at Mile High. Was there a playoff game, other than SB, in which DEN was not the heavy favorite? Conservative coaching against BAL in '12 if I recall (please correct if I am thinking of something else). Losing in the playoffs isn't a big deal - the goal is to get there, and then they are a crapshoot. Losing playoff games is a poor justification for firing a coach. Looking completely unprepared, and making conservative (losing) decisions, however, is fair. Pagano's players haven't come out and rolled over like Fox's. They got demolished by a far better Patriots roster (with the most intelligent coach football has seen in the modern era). SEA was not a far better roster; both teams were stacked. DEN seemed completely unprepared for the way that secondary plays - with all of his playoff experience, does John Fox not know that the rules change in the playoffs? Defensive holding, etc., has to be 2014 Byron Maxwell-level egregious. DEN runs a timing offense (like all under Peyton Manning), which is the most susceptible to physical secondaries. DT and Decker aren't small - did they not get jammed and manhandled in practice?
I'd take Fox over Marvin Lewis, though.
-
I'm starting A. Robinson (or hurns), Marshall, and either Landry (though revis following him gives me pause), or Cooks (Have a feeling this will be his best game so far) and sitting Calvin...
Sat him last week too and have been trying to trade him in a keeper league but nobody wants him unless they are giving up sell high guys like Travis Benjamin (plus other junk) or dead legged Andre Johnson types, so I am stuck with him...
Between the coaches/qb/o-line problems and Seattle's home game defensive dominance I can't take another 13 lousy points from someone who should be killing it...
May come back to bite me if he goes off, but starting him just to start him then watching a 5 for 67 no td final stat line would P me O worse than hurns having the same stats considering how much more invested in Mega I am....
The thought of Vontae Davis on Robinson should give more pause than Revis on Landry or Sherman on Calvin. Hurns could be a pretty smart play - IND secondary is awful after Vontae.
-
That pure coach speak. It would be a shock to see Luck play this week. He can't throw a football 48 hours before a game.
Where did you get "can't? Just curious in case I missed something. There is a wide gulf between "can't" and "didn't." I was mistaken earlier - the top candidate for the onset of injury was the last pick in the Jets game. He's sore enough to need rest, but we don't even know the extent of the injury.
What? Pagano is horrendous. He helps put the roster together with the GM and their roster is straight up garbage. John fox has made it to 2 super bowls with 2 different teams at least.
What did John Fox do for an already-strong DEN roster? Fox is a "never met a punt he didn't like" kind of coach; my condolences to Bears fans. The IND roster is pretty bad, but a bit misunderstood. The DL is the best it has been in years (unfortunately, it's built for stopping the run), and the OL is substantially better than the last several OLs Manning had in IND (i.e., the line is kind of bad, but not flat-out terrible, unlike in the past). The linebackers are solid against the run (again, bad philosophy - I'm not a big Pagano fan), though the ILBs are terrible in coverage. Pagano should get the blame for building to stop the run, though Grigson, after pushing back against the emphasis on the run in a passing league, picked the players that matched Pagano's philosophy (who are actually reasonably solid at it). They didn't inherit much talent. Pagano also punts too much, and tries a 52 yd FG into the wind...but I'd still take him over John Fox. Maybe the numbers show otherwise, but I think Fox is actually even more conservative, and a conservative coach = losing coach (and, frankly, a not-so-bright coach).
-
Was going to post that he would play without much in the way of throwing practice reps, but yeah, given the confirmation (again),I'd put the risk of him being inactive at barely nonzero. No word of a setback of any sort, and it doesn't seem that the injury occurred during the week. Something would have to go wrong in pre-game warmups, and it would have to be something worse than, say, getting sacked by J. Casey of the Titans (again, assuming that this injury existed at least Week 3, if not all the way back to part of week 1, with exacerbation over later weeks).
Edit: Remember, although we've been hearing about teams with crappy QBs a lot, this isn't CLE. Luck led a 4th quarter comeback hurt last week, and if he can at all play, he plays. Colts are 1-2, and likely lose without him.
-
I don't know. If several teams conspired, that kinda sounds like collusion to me.
As for the D story, that sounds kinda shady.
How would you feel if someone churned the waiver wire to make all of one position unavailable? i.e. pick up each player and drop them immediately so that they go to waivers.
Back before the darn phone app drew my league from Fleaflicker back to Yahoo (Yahoo has never understood FF. So many BASIC mistakes. No fractional points - as a DEFAULT? Little cuts add up...), this was not an issue, as you were blocked from dropping players who were acquired before they could clear waivers (commish could execute transactions when legitimately needed - we all know each other, so it was easy). Does Yahoo prevent WW churn (thankfully not a commish at the moment)? Do other sites prevent it?
Regarding hoarding, I generally see no issues with it, and it tends to even out. I almost never have 2 QBs, but do hoard starting or soon-to-start RBs. Other teams could use them, but they hold more QBs and DSTs and TEs, and naturally make things difficult for me there.
-
I'm not worried about it... although, luck is my only qb in a fairly deep league...
plan on riding him to victory... or to go down in a fiery, bloddy crash of dispair
Hope they rest him IMO. I don't think they win the game without him, but he's plausibly been hurt since the interception tackle. For those who never saw the gif, he was caught wincing when Hasselbeck pattted on the chest during the TEN game. He has games where he sails his throws when healthy, but it would seem to partly explain his accuracy problems this year.
Coach still has zero doubt he will play. Then again Pagano is a terrible coach...
I'm okay with him as a fan, mainly because he seems to be actually be learning a bit (not as much of the stupid "stop run/ establish run" philosophy). I'd take a smart, aggressive coach in a heartbeat, but there's far worse than Pagano (Marvin Lewis, John Fox, any college coach save Pete, etc.).
-
Why does Yahoo projections have Randle's production drop significantly after his bye in week 6? Been trying to trade him but the trade evaluation makes trades seem so lopsided.
Been that way since CMike trade - they think he'll lose carries to CMike after the BYE (as another posted said above). It's actually respectable that they try to make calls like that instead of just projecting the same numbers + a few linear regression coefficients or something. The "evaluate trade" "feature" does, however, seem to hurt trading to me. You just end up either have to explain it away, or justify why it is for real, and that's not considering the "optimal lineup" that they use when calculating overall points gained/lost, either.
Yahoos projections are pertinent?
I see why this community gets the lowest traction of any of the fantasy communities, not because of the site and the product... but the horrible posters who care about garbage.
This has no point or use, a websites projections matters to a fantasy owner, how? How does it matter one bit?
This thread was/is so awful people thought it was a different Randle. LMFAO.
You may or may not realize that the best overall indicators of future performance (before adding qualitative insight, even though qualitative variables may be used to generate projections) come from aggregates of projections. A single website's projections can give a quick and dirty rundown of numerous variables - strength of schedule, competition for playing time, likely volume due to opponent offense, etc.
In this case, the OP may not have realized that Yahoo has that assumption built into their model. This thread answered it, and hits on a topic of interest to many players - factors that influence trade perception/likelihood.
There are actually great posters here IMO (over ten years reading), along with newbies, and a mix of not-so-great posters. Some threads stink, and some humor is crass in an unclever way (but the weekly F.U. thread can be pretty good for laughs), and some beat Rotoworld with news. I check here for, for example, Raiders analysis from R8RMick (Latavius owner in a long-running keeper league). I've grabbed all of the following guys before breakouts (and later avoided where appropriate) thanks to this board (off the top of my head):
Slaton, Foster, both Murrays, Stacy, Morris, Matt Jones, and others. In the cases of the Murrays, there were even good highlight clips posted (similar clips of ADP led him to be drafted very high as a rookie in my league, and I didn't touch Richardson because of his film).
If it's not worth your time, then no need to hang out here, but you might enjoy it more if you just filter the parts that seem irrelevant to you and, if you feel like it, contribute where you have some thought (e.g., the Forte trade thread).
-
.5ppr seems to be a good spot. It seems reasonable to reward skill players for actually running their routes (how often do players take plays off? That seems to vary, though it's hard to judge without the All-22 film). One point seems a little heavy because of the examples cited. I'd be in favor of 1st down points.
We've used .5ppr and .2ppcarry for a decade in one league, and I recently convinced my sig league to switch to .2ppc (already had .5ppr). I'm pretty happy with the effects those two settings have (especially when lost fumbles are treated differently than fumbles).
-
We've spent a lot of time trying to come up with something to solve these issues.* IMO, Victory Points isn't quite as good as all-played record. A consistent, very good (so well managed, and good players) team likely has a higher floor, so a bad week may put that team at 7th out of 12 (and the "bad" week may still be above the weekly average of the top 6 teams). All-played accounts for this, while VP does not.
I like all-played over points total for the reasons the OP and others listed. The performance of one FF team is generally correlated (positively) to the performance of other FF teams (e.g., a non-existent Denver passing attack can lower performance for several teams), despite some zero-sum effects (such as a lack of passing due to running game plan). There seem to be league "up weeks" and "down weeks" for overall scoring. All-played record rewards teams that still perform well when other teams are also performing well (specifically, they are rewarded for beating other high-performing teams).
Regarding the idea of rewarding team quality while keeping things simple enough and fun, the answer simply seems to be some variant of multiple games per week. E.g.,
1. Simple Double-headers: Two HTH matchups each week.
2. One HTH and one VP game each week.
Twist: I'd like a setup wherein your performance in a HTH matchup influences your opponent in another game. For example, winning your HTH could lead to you gaining 10 points for the Victory Points game. To be worth implementing, it would have to be more complicated than that IMO, as that doesn't sound any better to me than just option 2 above.
* though it doesn't matter now (for my leagues) because everyone likes Yahoo's mobile app (they make a nice app; they just don't know ANYTHING about fantasy football, despite getting far better over the years)
-
Slim, but not because of talent. They have some nice pieces on defense, and Murray changes the dynamic. Good use of Reese + Murray (start DMC again IMO while the OL get settled into the game and let the SF DEF adjust to DMC's pace). Then ride Murray but give some protection against run blitz so that he has time to protect his chin after getting the ball. If they were actually intelligent, they'd suit him with a special helmet/mouthpiece (yes, the mouthpiece can make a huge difference) to help keep him unconcussed. Virginia Tech has been studying this for quite a while, and I've never heard of the NFL actually putting it to use.
Luck - Does anyone think he's good?
in FFToday Board
Posted
This. It turns out that Luck is who he has been, not who some of us thought he'd be (a top-5 QB, by DVOA). Breax may still be underrated, but I think that's a mediocre NO defense, not a good one, right? For fantasy purposes, the fact that Luck's good game required the DB to fall down twice is a little concerning. With that defense, he should always be playing catchup, but I'm a little more concerned about his FF floor than I was. I still have to start him Monday at Carolina - his ceiling is still high, but I'd be afraid if the opposing team had Cam.