Message Forum "Keepers"

Football: Match-ups vs. Money

killerz User ID: 2860674	Oct 13th 7:11 PM I am guessing that a lot of people are switching strategy to match-ups over price gain and by doing so they will be affecting the price gain in itself. If you take a strong runner against a weak defense that is a match-up that is likely to happen to several managers, thus a price gain. So if you're thinking you have enough money it is wise to take match-ups. Even though some match-ups might not be the max gain for a position or even lose money, you're sure to make it up somewhere else and continue to grow in cash even if it is not a max gain.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 1021194	Oct 13th 10:32 PM matchups are how some will make trades. others will still chase last week's studs. in order to make $ it would be good to follow these leads-I agree. BUT don't assume good matchups are where the POINTS are at. just ask Lilly. Levens shouldn't have done anything last week but he did. BIG GAMES often break out the best in big players. Peyton against Miami, Favre against Tampa Bay. Back the STUDS into a corner and they come out fighting. Keep that in mind when trying to make points.
Lillypeutian User ID: 0554384	Oct 14th 11:13 AM I agree to a point, BAS. I think when some people refer to matchups, they mean team vs team. I would like to think I look at it a little more in depth. Here is an example: Most teams play defense to stop the run first. It has been proven throughout the years that rushing the ball + stopping the run = victory. If a team does not have a good defensive line, they will play "8 in the box" which means, they will cheat a safety close to the line to help with the run. The reason for this strategy is that most teams do NOT have a quarterback capable of beating a team with his arm. Taking this knowledge into the Tampa-GB game, we know that Tampa has an excellent defensive line and that Green Bay has an excellent quarterback. Therefore, Tampa cannot afford to play "8 in the box," nor does it want to. This leaves the middle open for draws and traps, especially since Green Bay also has a penchant for running swing passes and screens to the running back. In this case, Tampa had to "pick their poison." They chose to try to contain Favre. They failed miserably in that attempt. A lot of times, a team has inflated numbers in terms of rushing defense because they have played a lot of teams that have bad quarterbacks. I think Jacksonville is a good example. As long as they keep playing against guys like Mirer and K. Stewart, they will look attractive. But I wouldn't be the slightest bit afraid to start Eddie George or Edgerrin James against them. However, I wouldn't start either of them against San Diego. As far as wide receivers go, you have to look at the cornerback they are playing against. Right now, it is a tough call to play the #1 wideout vs Miami, because Sam Madison can cover anyone 1 on 1. Now I know that Marvin Harrison did pretty well last week from a Smallworld standpoint. But that was an anomaly. He only had three receptions as the go-to receiver. Other cornerbacks that are tough include Deion, Aeneas Williams of the Cardinals, both Eagle cornerbacks, Charles Woodson of the Raiders, and Dale Carter of the Broncos. Don't play WRs against these players. That is my $.02.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 0750024	Oct 14th 3:45 PM Lilly-that was about a 1.50 rather than .02. I've got another insightful viewpoint to consider. Team strategy. Most teams have a 'run the ball' first to set up the pass philosophy. But early in the game that strategy gets thrown away because teams fall behind. Then what OFTEN happens is that teams QB-if capable-begins to sling the ball for a busload of yards. This benefits him and his receivers. An interesting phenomenon. Look far back at Plummers games last year for Arizona-especially against Dallas(I remember because i had their defense that day and cried when they blew their 35-0 lead). Now is this impossible to predict? Perhaps. BUT - it's happened twice this year for teams playing Indianapolis. It's happened for Carolina, Dallas when playing Washington. And there are other examples-Dilfer against the Vikings, etc... If a team has a week defense and great offense(Washington, Indianapolis)- look to the other team's offense and possibly suspect great things. As Marino, Bledsoe, Beurlein, Aikman have produced their best numbers this year in these games-as have their receivers. Something to ponder in future games. Does that mean Mirer and Plummer are the QB's to get this week? I don't know. But if i had Keyshawn-i would certainly be keeping him on the possibility that my theory is good one.
steve houpt User ID: 3306294	Oct 14th 5:27 PM Some numbers that support WR's theory. I think the bottom line comes down to being able to predict the games that will have the most points (or at least it increases your odds), which usually is when teams are going back and forth or one is trying to come from behind. ---20 games in NFL where 45 or more points have been scored. In those games, 32 times WR's have scored 230 or better. On winning team 19 times (some teams more than one per game), losing team 13 times. ---52 games with less than 45 points, WR's have scored 230 or better 24 times. On winning team 15 times, losing team 9 times. Margin of victory did not seem to matter. 3 or less, 10 games, 9 WR's on winning team, 6 on loser. 4-10, 7 games, 5 WR's on winning team, 4 on losers. Greater than 11, 5 games, 5 WR's on winning team, 3 on loser. (Even Ike Hilliard had a good game in 50-21 loss to Wash, McCaffrey in 38-21 loss to Miami). So it definitely seems if you cam identify the team matchups that will score some (total) points, your odds for WR's scoring good increases in general. I think a being behind is going to work two ways for a QB. He either racks up yards and SWP's or racks up (-45's) for INT and (-10's) for sacks. Have not tracked the QB's, just WR's because I have had such a hard time trying to pick the right ones the right weeks.
Punishark User ID: 8834313	Oct 14th 5:44 PM Steve, you nailed that last part, regarding the impact on QBs. A prime example is the dirge of my office team - Randall Cunningham. He starts putting up the big yardage numbers near the end of the game, but they all go to waste when he chucks an INT. So, by looking at the Vegas over/unders and having knowledge of team defenses, it would be a wise choice to take any ARI or WAS WR or QB. I, personally, won't touch Plummer with a ten-foot pole, but all of the others deserve consideration.
Lillypeutian User ID: 0554384	Oct 14th 6:51 PM Interesting analysis, Steve. So does that mean you read the over/under lines before you play a receiver? That seems risky. BAS, I like your point about establishing a run or pass early. Again, it is difficult to determine but there are some facts that can be useful. I think Tom Coughlin, Mike Ditka, Tony Dungy, Bill Parcells, Bobby Ross, and probably a few others will normally commit to a run first philosophy. By the same token, I think you can reasonably expect the Colts, Patriots, and Packers to pass throughout the game. Perhaps the Redskins and Panthers also fall under that category. I think the most consistent theory to date is picking high profile players vs. bad defenses at home. I think there are only a few BAD defenses. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Washington, Carolina, Indianapolis, and Green Bay are bad. Maybe Minnesota, Detroit, and San Francisco are a step up from bad.
mad scientist User ID: 8924643	Oct 14th 10:32 PM Washington's poor def, coupled with it's amazingly rejuvenated offense (thanks to a good Carolina boy, Brad Johnson, Owen High School, Asheville, NC), makes it a good bet that every game turns into a scoring and yardage festival. Which makes me worry that Plummer is not up to the job to perform in such a way that B. Johnson and Westbrook will realize their potential... ;( Regards to the original post, I'm still looking mostly for points (J. Stewart and C. Enis this week, I hope), but where I think I see points plus guaranteed money (S. Davis, this week), I go for both. A random observation: this year (so far) it seems that WR (and hence, QB) is a more reliable point producing position than RB. Last year, I depended more on RB's. Perhaps steve houpt or another statistically gifted Gurupie could shed some light on this phenomena. ms
Superstar User ID: 9488873	Oct 14th 10:34 PM I could shed some light without statistical analysis. Their names are Terrel, Fred, and Jamal.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 1021194	Oct 14th 10:37 PM I hope this stuff is over most people's heads because i think we are doing some uncovering of how to really make points other than tossing a coin and it landing on the 'guy' that comes up big this week. Lilly-I think you may have misunderstood my thoughts/theory just a bit. Its the 'pass first teams' - St. Louis, Washington, Indianapolis-that have been ringing up BIG EARLY leads. Then its THEIR OPPONENT that must resort to a pass oriented gameplan that can rack up big numbers. i.e Miami last week, Carolina against Washington(actually this game was a little different), New England against Indy, etc.... They do that to get back in the game. And then their QB's/WR's end up with huge games. Only thing is St. Louis defense or their opponents offense has just been too sorry to come back at all whereas Indy/Washington's defense stinks. An interesting test will be to watch the Arizona/Washington game this week. Will Washington get a 21-0 lead early lead? If they do will Plummer go back to last year's Plummer and start slinging it? It will be hard without Rob Moore but certainly possible against a bad Washington defense? I know this is long but one last important note. I agree with your cornerback/WR theory BUT good teams will move their star receiver around to get them away from the pro bowl cornerback. It's easy to do against Dallas and Deion. he wont go inside. Against Miami last week, I don't think ANY of Harrisons three catches were actually on Madison. With today's defenses often being a mix of man/zone, that's why offenses run 15 different formations to see how defenses line up so later in the game they can create matchups for their star players AWAY from pro bowl cornerbacks. With that said-it is still a relatively good rule of thumb to stay away from Lilly's list of star cornerbacks.
Superstar User ID: 9488873	Oct 14th 10:42 PM Generally, star players will not allow themselves to be shut down by any other players-this is why they are Superstars.
mad scientist User ID: 8924643	Oct 14th 10:57 PM Terrel, Jamal, and Fred didn't do squat while they were in the game, this year. Neither has M Faulk. Injuries aside, it seems that the whole league is using the pass to try and set up the run this year. Even the top RB's seem to get a lot of points off their passing games. (George, Levens, Enis, Garner) Seriously, where's the running game? And don't answer by telling me it's in Miami, New Orleans, or with the Jets/Tuna's, where the coaches have been talkin' the run, but not living by the run. Did the rules change? other theories?
Superstar User ID: 9488873	Oct 14th 11:03 PM You are decrying the dearth of stud rb's right? Your first sentence answers your question. Barry is gone too. Teams are still running, but guys like Corey Dillon and S. Davis are racking up the most yards. That's it. Curtis Martin has been hurt by Vinny's injury. Hearst is gone too. Means has played in one game. Injuries are the answer.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 1021194	Oct 14th 11:04 PM Teams are trying to run first but are any succeeding??? only those that have a real qb...that's my quick assessment. Look at Tampa Bay. Arguably the most SMASH MOUTH football team in the league. If you put Favre on that team-they'd go 16-0 easy. But teams put 8, and 9 in the box because they laugh at Dilfer. Sometimes Tampa can still run (see last week) with 8 in the box. Teams who run first need a lot of things to go their way to have the run work-a good O line and a legit passing attack. Otherwise defenses will shut down the run. Injuries have been the major disturbance to the running games this year and not just to running backs. Vinny in New York has hurt that team's running game.
mad scientist User ID: 8924643	Oct 14th 11:10 PM What I'm saying is that the running game is unproductive this year, even when the "good RB's" are in the game and should be productive.
Superstar User ID: 9488873	Oct 14th 11:14 PM Davis and Jamal are the "good rb's" that you are talking about right? Elway is gone and Chandler has been hurt. See BAS for the reason why this has affected them.
mad scientist User ID: 8924643	Oct 14th 11:30 PM So what about M. Faulk, Levens, George, Enis, and Rob Smith. All were "good RB's" b4 the season, but they seem to be getting 1/2 their yards from passing this year. And don't tell me that Faulk can't get good running opportunities b/c Trent Green is hurt, and the Rams are stuck with Warner!
Superstar User ID: 9488873	Oct 14th 11:38 PM It's not like collectively they are having bad years, but they weren't the studs of last year. They were the second tier backs and they still are. Its just that the first tier has evaporated. The jury is still out on Faulk 2 good games, 2 bad games). Trent Green is hurt and the Rams are stuck with Warner whose success happens to be limiting Faulks carries. Personally, I think he will come around in the next few weeks.
steve houpt User ID: 3306294	Oct 15th 0:54 AM I think BAS and Superstar covered all the players that are out (QB's and RB's) and all the reasons. S Davis, Levens, Enis are not having bad years. But last year you had TD and Jamal (consistently 300+/G) with Hearst, Faulk, Sanders or Robert Smith filling in the third spot, bye week, whatever and did not have to really even pay attention to many of other backs. With that many "studs" out, gone or not performing everything is actually down after the first five weeks in the NFL from 1998. Rushing Yards/Team/Game 114 > 102 Passing Yards/Team/Game 221 > 210 Points/Team/Game 21.3 > 19.9 But it would only take a few good weeks to be right back up to last years average for yards and points per game. Just no "consistent 300+ studs" at RB (yet).
Mike D User ID: 0638514	Oct 15th 6:06 AM Let me be the first to say that I agree with all versions of the analysis given here, including Superstars, which reminds me of the baseball pitching philosophy. I agree the RBs he named are the top tier studs, and the ones left as second tier studs are more volatile (thus second tier). In baseball, I'd almost always pick up the 13 mill. man at P if the cash was available over the 7.5 mill. man at P (Anyone remember the one good month Irabu had?). True someone like Dillon, Levens, George, Enis, Faulk "might" score big in a given week, but none can really be counted on IMHO. Witness the multiple threads regarding trading Faulk, and not getting the production for the price. Top tier studs would be held, because the owners would know the player would have to bounce back, while second tier studs are often shuffled. Couldn't resist the baseball analogy (6 months of that game can't just end because SW says so!).
Jo Jo User ID: 1376304	Oct 15th 7:34 AM Lilly, I now know why you are killing us all, you do research on who is even covering your reciever, I was thinking of picking up Westbrook, but with Williams on him, he might not get the ball as much. Excellent stuff Lilly.
1stand10 User ID: 9872353	Oct 15th 8:13 AM Terrific thread!! I agree with BAS that the WAS/ARZ game this weekend will be a key to the theories presented here. Just a reminder that in two of the Skins games, it was their opposition that got out to the early lead with Brad having to sling it, not the other way around (Actually, the Dallas game went both ways!)
Mark L User ID: 0157524	Oct 15th 8:25 AM Re Ariz/Wash: one difference between the teams -- Plummer has been sacked about 4x/game, leading to a 2-12 TD/INT ratio, while Johnson has better protection (and better surrounding offensive talent) resulting in a 9-0 TD/INT ratio. Both teams have the capability to rush the passer, but the Skins have a decent O-line, while Arizona's is terrible. Even if Arizona gets behind and has to pass, I doubt that will lead to a big game for Plummer -- then the pass rushers will be able to dig in, ignore Murrell/Pittman and converge at the QB.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 0750024	Oct 15th 9:35 AM Mark L-I would disagree with you. Washington's defense is bad. If Arizona gets behind(and they will) and plummer is healthy and someone can get open-he will have his best numbers this year-i'm sure of it. Remember the Dallas game last year? With RB-some of you are missing the point. Steve Houpt was right-Levens, Enis have stepped up and played well so far. With injuries/retirement to Davis, Anderson, Hearst, F. Taylor, V. Testaverde, Elway, and B. Sanders gone. That's a lot of teams with running games. Another key point is look at how many teams are actually SPLITTING THE LOAD at RB-At a quick glance, Atlanta, Buffalo, Carolina, Detroit, Kansas City, Miami, New England, New York Giants, Oakland, San Fran, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Tampa. That's almost half the league. Many teams don't have a clear cut front runner. And that doesn't include teams that have had significant injuries. WE're getting off track with the original flow of this thread. Anymore analysis on how to figure points rather than why RB's stink this year? Hey Lilly-if you wouldn't get Westbrook-I'd bet my bottom dollar on Connell this week. I think this RB road is a little off basis with this thread anyways.
Lillypeutian User ID: 0554384	Oct 15th 9:38 AM 1st and 10, that's a good point. Usually the 2nd receiver has inflated numbers vs teams like Oakland and Arizona that have one stud cornerback. I think the idea is to determine the probability of success in a given week, then take those players in favorable circumstances. I will use the Miami-New England game as an example. The data available suggests that Bledsoe will have a big game because they normally scrap the run. But you also have to factor in Sam Madison as a first tier cornerback. The logical conclusion based on this data is that Bledsoe will have a big day but Glenn won't. Does that mean that you shouldn't pick Glenn? Not necessarily. But his chances of performing well are less than others. What I try to do is take the guys with the least chance of failure. Terry Glenn is still a better pickup than Andre Reed this week regardless of the data because Terry Glenn is a better player. I think all of the speculation leading up to each week is what makes football the best fantasy sport.
Markie User ID: 9781133	Oct 15th 10:34 AM Just to change gears slightly but in the spirit of "matchups vs. money": So far this season I have played both games somewhat successfully. I try to get players who were last weeks' stud (or coming off a bye) who I feel are most likely to be this week's point gainer. I had a good feeling about Levens last week so I jumped on his points and cash. I got the same feeling about Isaac Bruce this week. At times I have skipped the sure $$ gainer for a player who I felt would gain less $ (but still gain some) and put up more points. Has worked well for me with Garner and Walls this year, as I have not traded out of them for the sure $ gainers, and they have produced nicely for me. I guess my point is, it doesn't necessarily have to be "matchups vs. money." It can be both.
skinneej User ID: 9928103	Oct 15th 11:33 AM I am surprised. I thought more of you paid attention to the WR-DB matchups. I would add Ty Law to Lilly's list of top DBs as well. Before this year Ray Buchanen was on my list, but he has faltered in my opinion. The top WR will usually find a way to get involved, but his numbers will typically be down some, while the 2nd or 3rd WR will produce more. If a team has a poor overall pass defense, but a great cover guy (Oak) then definitely grab the 2nd receiver. I have another view on the WAS/ARZ game. Did anyone realize that Arizona has the second best pass defense in the league to this point in terms of passing yards per game? What does it mean though? First they have only played two teams with winning records (Miami and Dallas) and some bad teams (Phi, NYG). Secondly, their run defense is 26th in the league in rushing yards per game. Does this mean that other teams realize they don't have to pass to beat them and stay on the ground all day? Or does A. Williams make the defense that good? What does this mean for Washington which BAS proclaimed to be one of the "pass first" teams? If they do "pass first" and fail, does the Arizona defense pack 8 in the box to stop the run? Or do they start the game with 8 in the box because they do have a terrible run defense, and Washington airs it out? I am betting on S. Davis having a good day nonetheless, and Westbrook being blanketed by Williams. I think this will be a lower scoring game that many think (24-21)but we shall see. If Arizona had a great running game, I would pick them to win , but I expect them to struggle still offensively. Whew, long post.
Gary User ID: 9656233	Oct 15th 11:50 AM I agree with the individuals who say good receivers will find a way to get the ball even against the best DB. To add to this you get the good Offensive Cord. or Head coaches who design the plays to help get their star WR open like in Green Bay where they put Freeman in motion to help get the matchup they want. You also take into consideration the top receivers tend to have their best games when facing the top DB/competition, that is why they are primetime players and get the big bucks. So in closing I would like to add that this is the best thread I have seen on this board and I hope I see more. Gary
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 1021194	Oct 15th 12:06 PM One other note that i am assuming is being overlooked that Gary touched on. You have to know how some teams play defense. Those that have great DB's often keep them on ONE side of the field based on their coverage. So while Aeneas maybe covering Westbrook a lot on Sunday-because of their coverage schemes-there will be MANY times where he is covering Connell and someone else has Westbrook. So even if Williams shuts down Westbrook-Westbrook may still get plenty of opps. You have to know-that's why offenses run almost twenty different formations their first twenty plays then they get those photo shots of the defense to figure out how to get the matchups they are looking for. The offense does the best they can to get good matchups for their star players. So while it is helpful to look at star DB's against receivers. Don't go oh my god- i got to trade so and so because Deion is gonna be covering him! I would pick Moss against Dallas before I would pick Amani Toomer against San Fran. (no offense Amani). Star plaers-especially receviers can get 200 points on one play. that's all it takes. someone falls, misses a tackle and bam 200 points in 7 seconds.
steve houpt User ID: 3306294	Oct 15th 12:26 PM On a similar note - Lilly you mentioned Glenn against Madison. I read in rotonews Glenn may be playing more inside/slot this week with Troy Brown (likely) out with Simmoms and Brisby as outside WR's. Does anyone think this is to try and get him away from Madison's coverage or that they just don't like Simmons or Brisby in the slot?
Mike D User ID: 0638514	Oct 15th 12:57 PM A good defense, when on the field too long, becomes not so good. So looking at both that teams D and Offense is important. Philly has a darn good defense, but no one takes them because they can barely walk by the 4th quarter. Arizona may not have Plummer this weekend, which could kill even the best cornerbacks, IMHO.
Lillypeutian User ID: 0554384	Oct 15th 2:23 PM One more point about WR/DB matchups: Some coaches also like to shadow a WR with their best DB, some don't. When Arizona plays Dallas Aeneas Williams ALWAYS covers Michael Irvin all over the field. Now will JJ do that to Terry Glenn? I'm not sure, but I do know that both Moulds and Harrison had 1 TD each but under 100 yards receiving. Now, a word on Ty Law. He is a gambler in the mode of Terrell Buckley but taller. He can single-handedly shut down possession receivers but has problems vs the top tier guys, especially the taller receivers like Keyshawn. In my book, he is a bit overrated and should not be considered in the same class as the others I mentioned. Mike D. makes an excellent point that should not be overlooked. When a good defensive team like Philly has a bad offense, they tend to tire late in games. In Philly's case, that is why they are statistically a poor defense vs. the rush. You can put Tampa, the Giants, Seattle, and San Diego in the same class. Probably Oakland, too. Ball control passing teams like Green Bay eat these defenses for lunch because they got nothing in the tank late. Did you see Warren Sapp on that last drive? He was going on nothing but willpower.
Beta Alpha Sigma User ID: 0750024	Oct 15th 4:55 PM You know what i think-I think we got so many legitmate analytical strategies into games and how they are played into this thread that we find ourselves right back at square. Flip a coin, grasp a straw, roll a dice, your guess is as good as mine. maybe that's why St. Louis, Washington, & Indianapolis are doing better this year than Atlanta, Denver, Jets, Minnesota and others. It's a topsy turvy game.