Which 2 to Start?

[Brizzmodee 2]

Need to decide on WR/flex options to fill out my week 7 roster.

0.5 ppr 

pick 2 of these 3

Robert Woods vs CHI

Robbie Anderson vs NOS

Justin Jackson vs JAX

[RabidSeaCows 99]

Well the experts will tell you Woods and Anderson.

I think I'd go Anderson and JJ. I think they'll double cover Woods Monday.

[weepaws 2,459]

5 minutes ago, RabidSeaCows said:

Well the experts will tell you Woods and Anderson.

I think I'd go Anderson and JJ. I think they'll double cover Woods Monday.

I would also take Anderson and JJ. 

[Aj21 0]

Anderson and JJ for sure

[AxeElf 787]

3 hours ago, RabidSeaCows said:

Well the experts will tell you Woods and Anderson.

There's a reason for that:  Woods and Anderson are the correct picks.

[RabidSeaCows 99]

11 hours ago, AxeElf said:

There's a reason for that:  Woods and Anderson are the correct picks.

Experts told me to start Woods over Scott. I'll take the 17 points Scott gave me over Woods' potential on Monday night. Sometimes these experts get to this point of the season running on game averages instead of delving into the matchups...

JMHO

[AxeElf 787]

23 minutes ago, RabidSeaCows said:

Experts told me to start Woods over Scott.

There's a reason for that, too:  Woods was the correct pick.

[RabidSeaCows 99]

15 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

There's a reason for that, too:  Woods was the correct pick.

 

I guess we'll see

[AxeElf 787]

1 hour ago, RabidSeaCows said:

I guess we'll see

No, Woods was the correct pick.

We'll see if the correct pick axually scores more points than the other guy, but Woods was the correct pick.

[wolves111 69]

Woods is now questionable for this week. Never encouraging when a player shows up on the IR Saturday morning.

[RabidSeaCows 99]

8 hours ago, AxeElf said:

No, Woods was the correct pick.

We'll see if the correct pick axually scores more points than the other guy, but Woods was the correct pick.

Hmmm, to me the correct pick is always the player who scored more points. If FF was just starting people the "Experts" say; why play? Because, honestly, by telling me whom I should of started by rankings and not matchups, injuries, mental health, or differences in players you have to beat on the DEF, you might as well simulate the season on Madden 2021 and call it a season.

There's no way "Experts" can look at and rank 500 players in 2 days and "Rank" them. There isn't enough time. We own the players and pay more attention to them than a algorithm in a Excel spread sheet.

Which is cool, we have a fundamental difference in how/why we play FF. Makes it more fun

[AxeElf 787]

2 hours ago, RabidSeaCows said:

Hmmm, to me the correct pick is always the player who scored more points.

I think this is where your fundamental error lies.

The correct pick is the player who has the highest EV (expected value), although that player doesn't always score the most points.

Consider a Wheel of Fortune that has 10 white spaces, 5 black spaces and 1 red space.  You get to pick a color before you spin the wheel--what color do you choose?

That's right--you choose white, because white has the highest EV.

Now you spin the Wheel, and it lands on red.  "Should" you have picked red instead, or was white still the correct choice?

It's like how you should always fold when facing a 50x raise and drawing to an inside straight with four hearts on the board--because even though you MIGHT win by doing the incorrect thing and calling, the correct choice will always be to fold, even if the correct choice doesn't lead to the most favorable outcome!

And then people say, "See?  It's all luck!  There are no "experts"!"

Luck is involved, but it takes skill to know--and make--the correct choice consistently, even when it doesn't work out in your favor.  If you can understand that and do it on the reg, then you can call yourself an expert.

[Nomad99 405]

1 hour ago, AxeElf said:

I think this is where your fundamental error lies.

The correct pick is the player who has the highest EV (expected value), although that player doesn't always score the most points.

Consider a Wheel of Fortune that has 10 white spaces, 5 black spaces and 1 red space.  You get to pick a color before you spin the wheel--what color do you choose?

That's right--you choose white, because white has the highest EV.

Now you spin the Wheel, and it lands on red.  "Should" you have picked red instead, or was white still the correct choice?

It's like how you should always fold when facing a 50x raise and drawing to an inside straight with four hearts on the board--because even though you MIGHT win by doing the incorrect thing and calling, the correct choice will always be to fold, even if the correct choice doesn't lead to the most favorable outcome!

And then people say, "See?  It's all luck!  There are no "experts"!"

Luck is involved, but it takes skill to know--and make--the correct choice consistently, even when it doesn't work out in your favor.  If you can understand that and do it on the reg, then you can call yourself an expert.

I believe this to be sound logic. 

[RabidSeaCows 99]

2 hours ago, AxeElf said:

I think this is where your fundamental error lies.

The correct pick is the player who has the highest EV (expected value), although that player doesn't always score the most points.

Consider a Wheel of Fortune that has 10 white spaces, 5 black spaces and 1 red space.  You get to pick a color before you spin the wheel--what color do you choose?

That's right--you choose white, because white has the highest EV.

Now you spin the Wheel, and it lands on red.  "Should" you have picked red instead, or was white still the correct choice?

It's like how you should always fold when facing a 50x raise and drawing to an inside straight with four hearts on the board--because even though you MIGHT win by doing the incorrect thing and calling, the correct choice will always be to fold, even if the correct choice doesn't lead to the most favorable outcome!

And then people say, "See?  It's all luck!  There are no "experts"!"

Luck is involved, but it takes skill to know--and make--the correct choice consistently, even when it doesn't work out in your favor.  If you can understand that and do it on the reg, then you can call yourself an expert.

I think you're confusing "Safest" pick with "Correct" pick. 100% of the time you do not know what the "Correct" pick is until hindsight is involved. 

I agree. Woods is the "Safest" pick. I started him last week so I don't think he's garbage.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by RabidSeaCows
Got 2 separate posts confused!

[AxeElf 787]

26 minutes ago, RabidSeaCows said:

I think you're confusing "Safest" pick with "Correct" pick. 100% of the time you do not know what the "Correct" pick is until hindsight is involved. 

I agree. Woods is the "Safest" pick. I started him last week so I don't think he's garbage.

Now you're just trying to re-define the word.

The correct pick is the pick with the greatest Expected Value, and the pick with the greatest EV is not always the "safest" pick.

When choosing between the #8 WR over the past two seasons (who is currently a top-15 WR in all formats) and a backup RB who had 16 fantasy points all year (including a Week 1 start in which he faceplanted), Woods was the CORRECT choice.

In this case, Woods also happened to be the safest choice, as illustrated by Scott getting half of his total game points on the Eagles' final play of the game.  If he doesn't pull that 18 yard diving TD reception out of the fire, we're not even having this conversation.

[wolves111 69]

22 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

Now you're just trying to re-define the word.

The correct pick is the pick with the greatest Expected Value, and the pick with the greatest EV is not always the "safest" pick.

When choosing between the #8 WR over the past two seasons (who is currently a top-15 WR in all formats) and a backup RB who had 16 fantasy points all year (including a Week 1 start in which he faceplanted), Woods was the CORRECT choice.

In this case, Woods also happened to be the safest choice, as illustrated by Scott getting half of his total game points on the Eagles' final play of the game.  If he doesn't pull that 18 yard diving TD reception out of the fire, we're not even having this conversation.

Yeah but he did. Believe me he wasn't the correct choice. Wasn't even the luck factor. It was the refs throwing flags keeping their drives alive the last six minutes to cover the line. And I'm from Philly.

[RabidSeaCows 99]

42 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

In this case, Woods also happened to be the safest choice, as illustrated by Scott getting half of his total game points on the Eagles' final play of the game.  If he doesn't pull that 18 yard diving TD reception out of the fire, we're not even having this conversation.

Oh lord, i knew this was coming, lol

Say he would of gotten that on the first drive of the game and barely any stats later. Then it would be more legit?

I didn't think so. You and I know a game is 60 mins long. Next you'll start saying Crowder doesn't deserve his rank cause he gets most of his stats in garbage time.

[weepaws 2,459]

The correct pick doesn’t always perform up to par, so if you set your lineup with your best players, but some of them underperform, and some of your bench players outscore them, I don’t see that as  you started the wrong players. 

You started the right ones, they just didn’t produce. 

Its a game of luck, no skill needed   

 

[RabidSeaCows 99]

2 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Its a game of luck, no skill needed   

 

I take it you've never played football? Skill and Talent always wins over luck. Luck only has a role to play when the two opponents are closely matched. I.e. CB vs WR, LB vs RB

[dogcows 1,029]

Woods and Anderson

[weepaws 2,459]

16 minutes ago, RabidSeaCows said:

I take it you've never played football? Skill and Talent always wins over luck. Luck only has a role to play when the two opponents are closely matched. I.e. CB vs WR, LB vs RB

Playing football, isn’t playing ff. Don’t even see how the two would be related. I played football, it’s a game of skill, I play ff, it’s a game of luck, compare the two for me please? 

So their is no comparison. 

[AxeElf 787]

59 minutes ago, weepaws said:

The correct pick doesn’t always perform up to par, so if you set your lineup with your best players, but some of them underperform, and some of your bench players outscore them, I don’t see that as  you started the wrong players. 

You started the right ones, they just didn’t produce.

When weepaws grasps something and you don't, it's time for you to shut up.

[RabidSeaCows 99]

4 hours ago, AxeElf said:

When weepaws grasps something and you don't, it's time for you to shut up.

Noted

[RabidSeaCows 99]

4 hours ago, weepaws said:

Playing football, isn’t playing ff. Don’t even see how the two would be related. I played football, it’s a game of skill, I play ff, it’s a game of luck, compare the two for me please? 

So their is no comparison. 

I wasn't referring to FF. I misunderstood that you were. My bad. As Axeass so eliquently put it, "It's time for me to shut up now."