BattleshipLorenzen
-
Content Count
113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by BattleshipLorenzen
-
-
Can they idp to offset you?
Haha nice one; I find this particularly amusing. We're all familiar with the challenge of occasionally rooting against yourself because of opponents in other leagues, and IDP leagues take it to another level. I had Chandler Jones as a DL (#2 in scoring, and significant gap, before injury), and he would easily offset NE DST at the time (e.g., IDP sack is 3), but if your IDP league has no DST, the bigger concern is knowing that getting IDP points in one league can mean your opponent's DST is getting points in another. Last week I started Jeleni Jenkins and Reshad Jones of MIA and needed points to win tiebreaker for BYE* while rooting for a weak game by MIA DST (<12 pts) in another league. The solution to such dilemmas? J.J. Watt. Yeah, two of his TDs are DST gamechangers, and his 5 FRs are a big DST boost, but the offensive TDS...Kubiak laughed him off when he lobbied for some passes once last year.
On topic, I'm feeling less good about BAL now that Ngata is out. We'll see how JAX OL and BAL DL play this week. I'd like to see them sack Tannehill (assuming that will translate to success against Bortles scrambles). If Tannehil actually completes a deep pass against them, I'll start getting worried.
-
jones would be an ass to abandon murray
i could see the niners entering the picture as well
If Murray cashes in elsewhere, it's a business win-win. Dallas's new model is clearly "all risk is on the player's side." Santa Clara just drafted Hyde; I don't know if someone will pay Gore more than they would or not.
-
down arrow McKinnon. where does AP land next year?
pats or seahawks
Put me in with the DAL crowd. For Pats, I'd have to hear from a Pats homer about what BB is willing to offer RBs. I don't see that cap money being taken away from either line, secondary, etc. Regarding SEA, I'm not sure that the local SEA market would embrace him; my guess would be the opposite.
If he's willing to accept money that is no more than what Murray asks for, then it should be an easy call for DAL. DAL is burning Murray's wheels off this year.
-
This was nailed by a few posters in an earlier thread. They did an excellent job of describing:
-What can make it a good idea in some situations
-How very difficult it is to know when it's a good idea
For most, the simple rule is that they have to be very close. Moncrief over Benjamin? Tempting if Vontae Davisis out for the Colts; NO gameplans Benjamin and Olsen away, and CAR's real hope is that Stewart can make them pay for it...
Allen over Julius is tough. Going against Luck means you need high upside. I'd need to hear something about Julius being pretty limited to do that.
Forget the strategy against Rodgers; pick who you think will score the most. I'd go with Roddy if healthy, but healthy is a legitimate question.
-
Players I'm starting Murray over (league not sigged because it's a stupid league and I only want to win because of how awful it is...but I don't wan to win that badly):
.25ppr, -3 for lost fumbles (!), +1 for TD of 40+, no fractional points (WTF?? This is simply incorrect, but I think it might actually be the default on Yahoo, which is no surprise...)
Crowell, Hill, R.Matthews, and J.Matthews.
-Crow makes more sense than usual because of the -3 for fumbles lost (-1 for fumble; my guess is the intent was -2 for FL, but Yahoo lists a "fumbles lost" penalty and implies that it is the total penalty including the fumble, rather than an add-on to the fumble penalty).
-
Well this is why you can't rely on player on bad teams. The NFL's bottom feeders are wore than they were three years ago. Ingram btw had 100 yards rushing against SF, Lynch had 100 all purpose last week. But that article just changed things.
I forgot to start Jeffery so will be relying on Watkins to start(in a blowout in Denver he's likely to get garbage time) because I don't like Mason and FJac this week.
PPR or something? DEN is No. 7 against #1 WRs in DVOA, and they only average 52.6 yards/game against DEN (compared to 66.9 for rest of league against #1WRs). Talib may be back this week, and their safety play has improved. Although Mason faces a solid run DEF, he showed well against a better ARI DEF despite limited touches.
There's plenty of reasons not to play Latavius Murray - Raiders stink, 49ers Defense is very solid against the run, Sparano's stubborn RB rotation, etc. -
but........logic also would've dictated sitting Latavius against the thought-to-be-stout Chiefs defense in week 12.
Idk but from what I saw, Latavius just looked nasty! Huge gamble to play him but my scoring system gives bonuses for long distance TDs and he's definitely a home run hitter.
I'm starting Latavius over Jeremy Hill.
Me too, in part for the fun of it (that probably doesn't help you). Only started him in one of two last time (so that I could change my team name to Murrayed for Life and then accuse a future playoff-opponent of being afraid of Murrage...but also because of KC's lower-than-expected DLine performance against RBs, per Football Outsiders). S(anta)F(Clara)'s dline is #18 in the run game, despite their #6 overall ranking in rush defense (again, both based on DVOA from FO ... http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl ).
Also, man, these two teams hate each other, though I'm not sure how much that is true between the players as opposed to the fans (and wasn't it, actually, the Santa Clara fans that were the main problem in preseason?).
-
The Cowboys need to ask themselves....What would Bill Belichick do? I think BB would part ways with both Demarco and Dez. Just a guess. Can't see him paying those guys anywhere near what they'll be asking for. JJ on the otherhand will probably find a way to pay both more than they're worth.
Still have to see how this year plays out but my spidey senses are tell me another historical implosion is coming over the next 4 games.
When did BB last have a great WR to refuse in the first place? He let Welker go, but Welker is hardly a guy who commands double teams and can fight for air balls. GMs predict when a WR is nearing steep decline in play (well, stupid ones might not); Moss and Welker were let go for good (business) reasons.
The Cowboys are actually taking a fairly dirty tact with salary negotiations right now, and I'm all for Dez fighting it. They are going for long-term "contracts" with little in the way of guarantees. It's win-win for the team. If the player is hurt...no risk for the team. If the player out-performs the contract...no risk for the team. If the player underperforms, they can cut or restructure. Making huge stacks of money off of owning an NFL franchise is an easier gig than, say, running a big cable/ISP company. Owners get their sacks of cash no matter how the team performs. Buffalo figured this out and stayed consistently well under the salary cap (post-Polian) because it was more lucrative to lose cheaply than to win expensively (now the CBA prevents this). So, the only financial risk lies with the players anyway; Dallas is trying to double-up on that.
All that said, I respect Jerry Jones because, if I recall correctly, he actually paid for the stadium that houses the team that gives him big sacks of money, right? As opposed to Irsay (and most owners), who basically have their huge revenue paid by local taxpayers. Granted, we effectively all pay Goodell's salary since the NFL is a tax-exempt organization, which...just doesn't help.
-
I'd play Cam in any match up where the opponent doesn't defend TE well - and I don't think NO is good enough on D to stop CAR from putting up 24 points.
I think I'd play Cam against NO were I you - though I've never been a fan of Cam.
I'm actually considering Cam over Romo (in a league that doesn't penalize anything), but the "no penalties" part is important.
NO actually defends TEs decently when they gameplan for them (I don't think they had Gresham at the top of their threat list); they are ranked #2 in DVOA against TEs and give up about the fewest points. Olsen had a poor game against them at home, and I think they challenge Cam to beat them without K.Benjamin or Olsen available.
-
It has to be Dez. ARI made Megatron disappear just as much after playing well against MIA (whose secondary was not injured as it is now). I had thought that Romo reportedly seemed fatigued in the Thursday night game. The OL played poorly, and he reportedly wasn't stepping into his throws, taking away power and accuracy.
I love Murray, but RBs are far more replaceable. As a Colts fan, I've had to deal with Richardson ever since the idiotic trade (obviously stupid from the start, although mainstream football media outlets do not make their hay by being informed). Ask Brady how much fun it is to throw the ball when Vereen+Gronk are hurt (especially early before Lafell chemistry was there). This year rookie WRs are producing all over the place, but how long have the Giants worked to restock their WR corps after failures from Nicks, Randle, etc.? At least for next year, they now have OBJ + Cruz.
Regarding Murray, I can keep him for a 1st in a 3-keeper, but I'm trying not to. Last year he had 270 touches. He has 332 touches already, and will break 400 (~430 without playoffs, 450+ with playoffs) or get injured. The 300 carry myth was busted, except it does hold true for an RB's FIRST 300 carry season. His durability this seasons may be attributable to his intense workouts in the offseason with Witten, but I have trouble believing we'll see the same RB next year (let alone catching lighting in a bottle with OL general health, similar to PHI last year).
Near-term, there is no draft prospect or WR free agent who would draw coverage like Dez, let alone produce at that level simultaneously.
-
1
-
-
WAS just made the IND defense look good (INID does well against poor-to-mediocre offenses, and gets exposed otherwise).
I would go STL if at all an option. I dropped BUF for them this past week (I'm hoping Latavius makes me not regret that Week 16). Their pass rush is coming alive, and they can run the ball well if they actually do it. WAS gives up big plays in the passing game--the type upon which the STL passing attack relies. STL gives up big pass plays a few times a game (usually) too, but WAS likes to throw picks, D.Jax is a little banged up, and no one has chemistry with Garcon. I trust Gruden et al. to coach this poorly.
-
no heres an interesting scenario
I am losing 126-117 right now, I have Lamar Miller
If I win I miss the playoffs, if I lose, I have a chance to make the playoffs but only if Miller scores between 4-8.5 pts
how does that happen...Ill give you guys a few to dissect
This is a winner.
1. Your opponent is in a division that can produce 1 or 2 playoff teams.
-The division winner (win-loss record)
-A wild card (points scored for the year, or points scored is the key tiebreaker)
2. Your opponent has more points scored than you for the season.
3. You can only make the playoffs as a wild card.
If you win:
-Your opponent loses the division but gets in as a wild card because of points scored.
If your opponent wins and you get 4+ points tonight:
-Your opponent gets the division, and you gets the last wild card spot based on points scored.
If your opponent wins and you get less than 4 points tonight:
-Your opponent gets the division, and someone else gets the last wild card spot.
No offense, but I'm rooting for Scenario C...that and a poor showing (i.e., 10 points or less) by the MIA DST tonight means my wife will overtake the No. 1 seed, and then I won't have to play her unless we both make it to the championship round.
-
I'll concede Revis gets away with more than most, but as a Pats fan it doesn't bother me since Browner gets flagged every time he looks at a guy crosswise.
Does Browner stick to his man as smoothly as Revis? Seems like he couldn't simply because he hasn't seen as much as Revis and is still learning. I'm betting it's easier to get away with more when refs are used to seeing you stuck to WRs like glue--proximity doesn't garner attention the same way it does for DBs who aren't as smooth/refined in man coverage. If I had to guess, I'd say that Browner probably still doesn't get called "enough" (meaning by the "typical" "standard," which, um, doesn't seem to exist), but I haven't seen him specifically this year enough to call that more than a shot-in-the-dark guess. As a Colts (now Colts+Broncos fan), I love BB's attention to detail (and have seen plenty of it in big games...). I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he told his DBs when they are facing a crew that doesn't call anything (Coleman...).
Count me as a Steeler fan that thinks their coaches teach their DBs to pretend WRs are made out of hot Lava, same with the football.
Well, the league also told them to, and then proceeded to treat the matter fairly inconsistently. I don't mind that there's room for intelligent coaching to be rewarded. I do mind that, as a fan, I don't even know what should or shouldn't be called sometimes (e.g., again, the perfectly-executed Arrington armbar on T.Y....Arrington didn't even go back for the ball, but he kept T.Y. from going back for it. Should T.Y. just fight through him and go for it? That makes sense to me. Alternatively, is Arrington only allowed to be in a position to block T.Y.'s route if Arrington is making a play on the ball? If so, well, Arrington didn't, but he "faced the ball," which is not at all the same).
-
Thought this was relevant: Which crews call more holding/DPI?
Revis has 2 DH, one DPI, zero Illecal Contact. Browner has 3 DH, 3 DPI, 1 IC.
http://www.nflpenalties.com/team/new-england-patriots?year=2014
For Seattle, 5 of 10 DH are against Byron Maxwell. Sherman has one DH and one DPI.
-
Agree with Murph on the general point; it seems obvious if you watch the games. Even the announcers noted during the IND-NE game that the refs seemed to be calling it more like a playoff game (why is it okay to call those differently again?). E.g., fade to Hilton in the end zone, Arrington had an arm barring Hilton from playing the ball, but he "faced the ball" extremely well. What is Hilton supposed to do? It sure looks like OPI if he pushes Arrington's arm away as the ball is coming in. I don't know how to answer that question, by the rules or otherwise.
BB seems to be, without competition, the most intelligent HC in the league (Carroll seems pretty bright too, and I'd put Payton up there, although running straight ahead with Ingram at the goal line when play BAL was just shocking...no misdirection? TMQ would not approve). Kelly *may* end up on the same tier. His DBs always seem well coached. He seems to have them playing with playoff rules all year, and so it gets called differently. It's a very smart gamble; general consensus seems to be that SEA made that gamble all year last year (not to take away from their fantastic secondary, disciplined tackling, etc.). My money was on SEA in the Super Bowl because I didn't know to whom Peyton would throw the ball--the SEA secondary was athletically a match for the DEN weapons, more physical at the LoS, and more skilled. I don't know why they didn't spend weeks having LBs and safeties jam the Thomases at the LoS in practice, but the NE game showed that DEN apparently didn't.
On the "rules are called differently for some players" note, it's okay to hold some linemen more than others (yes, anecdotally you "could call holding on every play," but some holds are obviously more egregious). A ref actually admitted to calling holding less often than he normally would when the DE was Dwight Freeney in his heyday. Regarding RtP against Peyton/Brady, the stats are informative, but I wonder if there's more context needed. Peyton famously doesn't give you the opportunity for RtP; his sack rate is low and he goes down when he thinks the sack is imminent. We would need someone to compare the few RtP calls on Brady/Manning, along with non-call hits, to calls/hits on other QBs...
-
When do you have to decide?If you have time, I'd wait for Murray. Otherwise, Tre Mason seems like the safest. More analysis below rankings:
If now/before this week's remaining games:
Mason
Hill
L. Murray
Gio
McKinnon
Hillman
If you can wait, my ranking (taking more upside into account):
L.Murray
Hill
McKinnon
Mason
Gio
Hillman
Tre Mason:
Check out the STL offensive line: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
11 in adjusted line yards (yards attributed to success of O-line), and that's lower than it has been. They are low in open-field yards, but that should be going up now that Tre is the entrenched starter. Oh, and a good defense that is finally performing is a plus.
L.Murray:
L.Murray has the most upside IMO. OAK has typically been able to run the ball, though changing schemes made it fluctuate. I played L.Murray Thursday because of how OAK's run/block performance/tendencies matched up against KC (and for fun--totally worth it).
McKinnon
McKinnon has the most glittery upside (i.e, the athletic freak thing, and "hey, what if they let him pass too??", though LT( LT2, for old people), played under the older Schotty, not Norv, right? But anyway, a promising defense (pass rush, secondary) is good for a fantasy RB. His advanced metrics are very good. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb
Hill
Good run game at GL, though more throwing/QB sneaks than I would like. Hill seems like the back that coaches like Lewis want to feed. BJGE? Hill's advanced metrics are also very good. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb
Edit:
I have McKinnon, Mason, L.Murray, and Sims as options in a 3-keeper (along with D.Murray and JT, but D.Murray would cost a 1st, while the rest are 21st; JT obviously from last year). I've been down this path a lot. Crazy part is, it will be hard to overlook Watt for an 8th because of the point differential.
-
again, this is incorrect. do you want to play the guy who will score the most points 99% of the time in fantasy football? of course. let me lay out a scenario where playing the player you think will score the least points absolutely gives you a better chance of victory.
going into monday night, you have a 20 point lead. let's say philly is playing new york, and your opponent has hakeem nicks. you have the option of starting either michael vick (let's say your projections peg him at 25 points), or eli manning (let's say your projections put him at 15 points).
the clear choice here is to play manning, even though you think he will score fewer points than vick. this is because the probability of nicks outscoring vick by 20 points is considerably higher than the probability of nicks outscoring manning by 20 points. when nicks has a good game, manning has a good game. if nicks blows up for, say, 200 yards and 3 touchdowns (38 points), then manning had at least the same numbers barring injury for a minimum of 22 points. on the other hand, vick could have 0 points, or 5 points, or 15 points, or whatever. it's possible to lose this game playing the player you believe will score the most points (vick), but it's virtually impossible to lose if you play the player you beleive will score fewer points (manning).
This. The whole discussion is on conditional probabilities. On the condition that the opposing WR does great, if you use that team's QB then you are very unlikely to be badly beaten. If the condition of the opposing WR doing great is the only one that matters (and in the above scenario it is), then it makes sense to do this. Ignore the condition where the opposing WR does not do great if you don't have a chance of losing in that condition. Saying that you always start the player who will score the most is a hindsight fallacy. This example is particularly good because it shows a 10 point difference in projected score between Eli and Vick.
It does get much harder with the WR, so you need the difference to be pretty small for it to be sensible. I agree that it doesn't work well with Tebow because a good Tebow game does not imply great DEN WR games...EXCEPT that Tebow does tend to throw all to one target (first Decker, then D.Thomas; I started D.Thomas and Tebow to win my playoff matchup for that reason). So in the condition that Tebow has a great game, the odds of D. Thomas having a solid game are increased, and if you aren't worried about the condition in which Tebow does not have a great game, then it makes some sense. But the condition of a WR having a great game is much more related to a QB having a great game than the condition of a QB having a great game is related to the WR having a great game. To play the gamble with the WR, you need to be pretty dang confident about the real team's mathcup and how the QB distributes the ball. I think I have to agree with those who say that you only play the WR to "cancel" a QB when all else is ostensibly equal.
-
Oh jeez. Now we (the Commishs) have to give participation trophies out in Fantasy Football?
Actually, we DO give participation trophies in my league
...in the form of draft order. Playoff teams are at the bottom like normal, with the SB winner last, etc. Non-playoff teams are basically reverse order based on points scored--most points for a non-playoff team gets 1st pick, second gets 2nd, etc. There is no incentive to lose in this league except for the consolation round of the playoffs (3rd vs. 4th). It's a 10-team, 3-player keeper league, and keepers are redrafted after 3 years. Foster, Rice, MJD, and maybe Turner are going to be available next year. Players fight for those draft picks no matter their records or standing with regard to playoffs. -
IMO the solution is both simple yet almost needlessly complicated.
Combine the double-header and defense-subtracts approaches. Luck plays a big role in who wins the H2H mathcup. As has been pointed out, having IDPs or DSTs subtract from the opposing team doesn't mathematically affect the H2H matchup. But it WILL affect the scoring game. In this scenario, you CAN influence your opponent's chances to win the scoring matchup by playing good defense. In this scenario, playing against a team with a monster defense is actually scary, because they can beat you H2H and cause you to lose in the scoring game as well.
-
then after you accept the trade, use Romo or Vick to get a good RB, whichever will drum up more interest is who I would trade, then add a guy from FA to play for your starter on bye-week filler. There is no need to have two starting QB's IMO. I would roll with Vick and trade Romo, but I am a gambler. If you prefer, you can move fast, and guarantee good value for Vick because he won't fall until he has a bad game.
I value McCoy significantly above Forte (compare their production vs. the Packers, for example), so you're going from a good RB starter to a crappy one...but the point about trading a QB for a better RB is a good one. Miles seems like a safer WR due to no ankle injury.
-
Yeah, JC is Jamaal Charles--gets abbreviation due to huge hype reputation. I'm sure no one else here appreciates some levity in their fantasy football world
. -
Good call on the risk of CAR running all game. CIN gives up 113y/game, but 4.9 per carry.
Bills played Pats very well both times last year; F.Jax tore them up. But NE def still scored well 2nd game.
I may lean toward MIA. Sanchez tore up a bad NE secondary; more of a fluke I'd imagine. Though his passes did look good.
-
Saw their starters demolish the 'Boys' starters during preseason. Texans are doing something they've never done--playing well as a team. Aside from questionable corners, they seem for real.
-
So, I'm only in one serious league this year, and I'm in two additional leagues that I've joined out of personal connections. I find both leagues some combination of amusing and embarrassing.
The first one is a 12-team redraft; everyone was there for the Yahoo live draft. My starters ended up as Kolb, Moss, Wayne, Floyd, ADP, JC, and Finley. Before Kolb gets hurt, I'm looking stacked, and it's embarrassing. I got JC in like the 7th. The 7th. Apparently none of them saw what he did last season. Of course, guess who has the lowest score week 1? Dominated week 2, but honestly, winning and losing in this league are both shameful--I should win every time (you should see these other teams), and yet I won't.
The second league is a wonderful foil, and no less amusing to me. It's a 6 (6??) person league due to not enough other personal contacts joining. I wasn't going to reject this friend, and like talking with her about FF, so I accepted her invite. Last year I dominated and won this league because my girlfriend and I were the only ones to show up online for the draft, and so I end up with Andre, Megatron, Wayne, Clark, etc. This year I forgot the draft date, and got autodrafted, and hadn't set my AD rankings. Now, an autodraft can't screw you THAT bad in a 6-team league, but what did I get? Brees, Rice, Green (my DND list this year), Austin, Hines (also DND), Smith CAR (also DND...), Clark, Addai, Garcon (also DND as a Colts homer)...it was ugly. My only hope is to siphon lesser talent from the other far more talented teams.
So last week's opponent dropped Gore, and of course there are no waivers. Now why would he drop such a talented player? Apparently to pick up a second defense worth starting this week. The 2nd def? Baltimore. The original? Pittsburgh. I think PIT DEF had an okay week last week. I think Gore had an okay week last week. I picked up Gore, played him against this guy, and won. But there was no honor; winning and losing in this league are both shameful.
Politeness is a great way to get into embarrassing leagues--people know you are a big FF fan, and they invite you, and you think "What the heck? I'll be polite, and it's not like it will take any more time since I'm already doing the research AND don't care." So what are your embarrassing leagues?
-
Yes, it was vetoed by the league, but the commish has decided to overrule the league veto because he feels it was only vetoed becuase it stood to make both teams better, and he felt the league vetoed it for that reason, not to prevent collusion (which is why trade vetoes exist).
I just wanted to gage if others thought this was a vetoable trade as I am sure some people in my league will be butt hurt, and the large majority thought it was not.
Good job by the commish. Pansy-ass vetoes like that should be overruled, and it DOES happen.
Week 14 St(r)eaming Def
in FFToday Board
Posted
High risk IMO. Which DSTs have gotten points from the Jets? Very strong run defense + turnover forcing, with the key being the run defense. Yeah, MIA didn't have its corners last week, but look at NE game (even though divisional matchup alters the dynamics). MIN stinks against the run, and Barr is out. Meanwhile, the CAR team just dominated by MIN has a terrible OL. I like MIN if the opponent passes (more with Barr in) with their pass rush and secondary, but the current NYJ M.O. seams to be to avoid losing in humiliating fashion by just not passing.
I like STL, and I think it becomes an easy call if D.Jax is actually out (STL will probably try to force the issue on him in-game anyway).