I'm sure readers can peruse through my two posts on my fantasy football teams and note the strengths and weaknesses of my logic/decisions. As for my teams, well, the team discussed in Part 2 (the keeper league, PPR team) has already won its game and is heading to its fantasy semi-finals. The other team ran into a bit of bad luck (and perhaps questionable decision-making on my part in who to start) when Demarco Murray was injured with only 3.1 fantasy points. I will need 53 yards from Brandon Lloyd tonight in order to move on to the semi-finals in that league. I don't hold out much hope of Lloyd accomplishing this task, but, referencing an old cliche, "One can always hope."
***Update, my fantasy football team won the game by a final score of 96.98 to 94.04. :)
Sunday
My Fantasy Football Teams: Part 2
One of my other fantasy football teams is in the playoffs this week. As a brief background, the league is a PPR, keeper league and consists of 12 teams. 6 of those squads make the playoffs. Teams receive 6 points for any touchdown (including quarterback passes), 1 point for every 50 passing yards, 20 yards rushing, 25 yards receiving, sack, and reception. Players lose 2 points for each fumble/interception and defenses gain 2 points for these stats as well as for safeties. 1 bonus point is awarded when a passer reaches 200, 300, 400, and 500 yards and when receivers/running backs reach 100, 150, 200, 250, and 300 yards. Rosters consist of 16 players--three of these people can be kept to the next year (no fees or anything assessed to keepers). Teams start 1 QB, 2 RB's, 3 WR/TE's, 1 K, and 1 Def. The best scores usually range from 90-over 100, though only 1 or 2 teams (and sometimes 0) score over 100 in any given week.
My match-up is as follows:
My match-up is as follows:
My Team Competitor’s Team
| QB: Matthew Stafford QB: Tom Brady RB: Michael Bush RB: Arian Foster RB: Brandon Saine RB: Dexter McCluster WR/TE: Brandon Lloyd WR/TE: Mike Wallace WR/TE: Antonio Brown WR/TE: Jordy Nelson WR/TE: Jason Witten WR/TE: Stevie Johnson K: Mason Crosby K: Robbie Gould Def.: N.Y. Jets DEF: Detroit Lions On paper, my competitor has a pretty significant advantage over me. Arian Foster could outscore both of my running backs combined. Tom Brady is a slightly better fantasy quarterback than Matt Stafford. His three wide-outs are slightly better than mine. Usually, I would put the odds on the Jets outscoring the Lions (given the match-ups for each defense); however, the Lions have the edge if both Ponder and Peterson do not play (and it is highly likely that both player sit this one out). My competitor does not really have any choices to make before Sunday's start; those are his best players by far. I had to decide among three quarterbacks--Matt Stafford, Ben Roethlisberger, and Alex Smith. I chose Stafford over the other two because a) he plays in a pass first offense and has a great first wide-out and a decent (though inconsistent) second wide-out and b) he had the best match-up (even better than Alex Smith's in my opinion). I did worry that Detroit's lack of a running game would hurt their passing; however, I decided to roll the dice with Stafford. Perhaps that decision will come back to haunt me given that Ben scored 16 points on my bench on Thursday. I don't have a lot of good options at running back this week. I'm starting Bush because he at least has a chance of getting some fantasy points against Green Bay's defense. For my second running back, I would usually start Beanie Wells (on my bench); however, Wells has not been catching passes of late and won't likely score many points via the ground game. If he scores a touchdown, I might regret benching him. It then had to choose between Maurice Morris and Brandon Saine. Morris is a known quantity--he will likely catch 3-5 passes for 40-70 yards and run for another 40 yards, which will yield me 6-9 points. He might score a touchdown; however I doubt it. My other choice (and the one I went with) is Brandon Saine. He should get about half the RB touches this week since Stark is out. He is a high risk/high reward player in my opinion. Starting Saine represents a huge gamble on my part; however, I feel that it is necessary to take the risk, as I need to do something to "even the odds" in a match I am projected to lose by 20+ points. I started the wide receiving core you see above and benched Brent Celek and Laurent Robinson. I originally had Celek in for Brandon Lloyd; however, I changed that decision a few hours ago when I read that Bradford has a better than 50% chance to start. Again, Brandon is a risky start given the St. Louis QB situation and Seattle's recent defensive dominance; however, I think Brandon has a chance to score more points than Celek. Refer to Part 1 of my fantasy football post to see why I am benching Laurent Robinson. The rest of my line-up was a "no brainer." I only have one kicker on my team and only one other defense, Tennessee. I think that the Jets have a much better match-up this week. While my odds of winning this game are not very good, I did catch a break on Thursday when the Mike Wallace touchdown was overturned on review and Antonio Brown scored his long touchdown. I'm currently ahead 17-9 and at least feel I have a chance to win. We'll see what happens... |
Friday
My Fantasy Football Teams: Part 1
Well, all four of my fantasy football teams have made it to the post-season. Two of the fantasy playoffs start this week and two begin next week. As a result, I thought it would be worthwhile to posit some of my thoughts on starting line-ups for one of this week's playoff teams. I should probably note upfront that this post is not totally ad hoc/unedited. I have been mulling over who to start on this fantasy football team for several days. What might be refreshing/unique about this post is that it will provide readers with a real life fantasy footballs scenario.
My team is in a 10 team, non-PPR draft and play league; 8 of the teams make the playoffs. I finished in 1st place in the league and am playing the 8th place team. While that would normally be a good thing, in this match-up, I am likely the underdog. The points system generally follows Yahoo's default settings with the exception that quarterbacks receive 6 points for each passing touchdown.
First off: here's a side by side comparison of the starting line-ups with the caveat that either of us might change a player or two by Sunday.
As for my competitor, he doesn't really have any choices regarding who to start at qb, rb, def, or te. He may choose to sub out Deion Branch for Robert Meacham or sub Meacham for DeAngelo Williams in the w/r spot. He also has Vincent Brown on his bench; however, I doubt he will start him for obvious reasons (3rd wr on team that focuses on Floyd, Jackson, and Gates and running backs).
As for myself, I could have gone with either Matt Stafford (who is on my bench) or Drew Brees. The latter qb has been the most consistent scorer for me this year and has outperformed Stafford almost every week regardless of match-up; therefore, I opted to go with Brees. I think it unlikely that Brees will outscore Aaron Rogers; however, he might keep it close in that head to head match-up.
In respect to running backs, I had to choose between Ray Rice, Demarco Murray, Michael Bush, Toby Gerhart, Marion Barber, and Beanie Wells. I eliminated Beanie Wells from consideration because he is going against the best run defense in the league this week. I eliminated Marion Barber from consideration because I don't like the match-up against the Denver defense--especially considering Caleb Hanie's inability to focus a defense's attention on the pass. Marion Barber will be running against 8-man fronts and bunched up secondaries all day; that is not a good situation for him. I eliminated Toby Gerhart from consideration based somewhat on gut feelings; I just don't think he will perform well against Detroit's defense (even given the absence of Suh).
On the flip side, I decided to start Ray Rice (a "no brainer" IMO) because he is a) one of the top fantasy rb's in the league and b) he is running on one of the worst defenses in the league. I worry about Michael Bush's production against Green Bay. Will I see the Michael Bush that exploded for a lot of yards and a touchdown or two a few weeks ago, or will I get a repeat of last week's anemic performance. I think it will partly depend on whether or not the Oakland offensive line improves its play from last week and partially on whether the Raiders can keep the score close. That being said, I decided to run with Bush this week over the other choices on my bench. I have some of the same issues with Murray (and he also has to fight off Felix Jones). In Murray's case, I think that he will pick-up his run game this week for two reasons--a) the Giants run def. is not very good and b) his full back is returning to action.
I think that Ray Rice will be able to keep pace with Chris Johnson and Demarco Murray will score about the same number of points as Roy Helu. I hope that I have an edge in the Bush v. Williams category; however, that is somewhat of a wild card.
I think that my strongest advantage vis-a-vis my competitor is in the wide receiver category. I will take you through some of my thinking regarding this position.
At the start of the week, my fantasy roster contained Laurent Miles, Brandon Lloyd, and Vincent Jackson. I decided to drop Laurent Miles when it became obvious that a) Miles Austin is playing this Sunday and b) Laurent Miles is dealing with an injury issue that may limit his playing time or on field effectiveness. In his place I picked-up Malcolm Floyd. I decided to start both Floyd and Jackson this week for several reasons. First, I don't like Brandon Lloyd's potential vs. a good Seattle defense knowing that Lloyd may be catching passes from the third string quarterback. Second, I think (perhaps more like hope given San Diego's inconsistency) that the San Diego offensive will perform well against the fairly weak Buffalo passing defense, especially considering that the game will be played in warm weather (and not in cold, snowy Buffalo). I think that one or maybe even both of my wide-outs will score a touchdown and one or both will exceed 100 yards receiving.
It is quite possible, though certainly not guaranteed, that my wide receivers will outscore his two wide-outs by 15 points or more. This scenario is more likely given that Mike Wallace has already played and only scored 7.8. I will need to win these two match-ups if I have any hope of beating my competitor this week, especially considering that my kicker only scored 2 points. I am going to need to win the wr battle in order to offset what will likely be a 10-11 point differential in the kicking category.
I should have an advantage at the tight end position; however, that one is a real wildcard in my opinion, given the fact that Jermichael Finley has the potential to score a touchdown or two.
At the beginning of the week, my kicker was Robbie Gould. I picked-up Gould a few weeks back and have had success using him until Jay Cutler injured his hand and Caleb Hanie took over the qb reins in Chicago. After that point, Gould became more of a liability than an asset (3 points last week for instance). I don't expect things to improve this week, so I cut Gould and added Shaun Suisham. I had a choice between Suisham and Matt Prater (and other, weaker kickers); I chose Suisham based on his match-up with Cleveland and the fact that, over the course of the season, he has had more field goal opportunities. While my thinking may (or may not) have been sound, my pick turned into a disaster, as he only scored 2 points. Thank goodness than Mike Wallace (on my competitor's team) only scored 7.8; I would have been really feeling the heat if his touchdown catch had not been overturned.
I think our defenses are about equal with the wild-card being defensive touchdowns scored.
In conclusion, I think that I am a slight underdog this week. I will need my two wide-outs to really perform well to have a chance to win this contest. I will see what happens on Sunday!
***An update: I decided to switch out Malcolm Floyd and insert Brandon Lloyd earlier today after reading that Sean Bradford has a good chance of playing in Monday's game.
My team is in a 10 team, non-PPR draft and play league; 8 of the teams make the playoffs. I finished in 1st place in the league and am playing the 8th place team. While that would normally be a good thing, in this match-up, I am likely the underdog. The points system generally follows Yahoo's default settings with the exception that quarterbacks receive 6 points for each passing touchdown.
First off: here's a side by side comparison of the starting line-ups with the caveat that either of us might change a player or two by Sunday.
QB
|
(NO - QB)
 |
@Ten
|
23.77
|
0.00
|
QB
|
(GB - QB)
 |
Oak
|
29.83
|
0.00
| ||
WR
|
(SD - WR)
|
Buf
|
9.03
|
0.00
|
WR
|
(Pit - WR)
 |
Cle
|
10.89
|
7.80
| ||
WR
|
(SD - WR)
|
Buf
|
5.66
|
0.00
|
WR
|
(NE - WR)
 |
@Was
|
6.67
|
0.00
| ||
RB
|
(Dal - RB)
 |
NYG
|
13.11
|
0.00
|
RB
|
(Ten - RB)
|
NO
|
17.59
|
0.00
| ||
RB
|
(Bal - RB)
|
Ind
|
24.36
|
0.00
|
RB
|
(Was - RB)
|
NE
|
13.82
|
0.00
| ||
TE
|
(NO - TE)
|
@Ten
|
9.85
|
0.00
|
TE
|
(GB - TE)
|
Oak
|
7.25
|
0.00
| ||
W/R
|
(Oak - RB)
|
@GB
|
12.27
|
0.00
|
W/R
|
(Car - RB)
|
Atl
|
7.13
|
0.00
| ||
K
|
(Pit - K)
|
Cle
|
10.21
|
2.00
|
K
|
(Oak - K)
|
@GB
|
7.41
|
0.00
| ||
DEF
|
(Den - DEF)
 |
Chi
|
14.96
|
0.0
|
DEF
|
(NYJ - DEF)
 |
KC
|
12.48
|
0.00
|
As for my competitor, he doesn't really have any choices regarding who to start at qb, rb, def, or te. He may choose to sub out Deion Branch for Robert Meacham or sub Meacham for DeAngelo Williams in the w/r spot. He also has Vincent Brown on his bench; however, I doubt he will start him for obvious reasons (3rd wr on team that focuses on Floyd, Jackson, and Gates and running backs).
As for myself, I could have gone with either Matt Stafford (who is on my bench) or Drew Brees. The latter qb has been the most consistent scorer for me this year and has outperformed Stafford almost every week regardless of match-up; therefore, I opted to go with Brees. I think it unlikely that Brees will outscore Aaron Rogers; however, he might keep it close in that head to head match-up.
In respect to running backs, I had to choose between Ray Rice, Demarco Murray, Michael Bush, Toby Gerhart, Marion Barber, and Beanie Wells. I eliminated Beanie Wells from consideration because he is going against the best run defense in the league this week. I eliminated Marion Barber from consideration because I don't like the match-up against the Denver defense--especially considering Caleb Hanie's inability to focus a defense's attention on the pass. Marion Barber will be running against 8-man fronts and bunched up secondaries all day; that is not a good situation for him. I eliminated Toby Gerhart from consideration based somewhat on gut feelings; I just don't think he will perform well against Detroit's defense (even given the absence of Suh).
On the flip side, I decided to start Ray Rice (a "no brainer" IMO) because he is a) one of the top fantasy rb's in the league and b) he is running on one of the worst defenses in the league. I worry about Michael Bush's production against Green Bay. Will I see the Michael Bush that exploded for a lot of yards and a touchdown or two a few weeks ago, or will I get a repeat of last week's anemic performance. I think it will partly depend on whether or not the Oakland offensive line improves its play from last week and partially on whether the Raiders can keep the score close. That being said, I decided to run with Bush this week over the other choices on my bench. I have some of the same issues with Murray (and he also has to fight off Felix Jones). In Murray's case, I think that he will pick-up his run game this week for two reasons--a) the Giants run def. is not very good and b) his full back is returning to action.
I think that Ray Rice will be able to keep pace with Chris Johnson and Demarco Murray will score about the same number of points as Roy Helu. I hope that I have an edge in the Bush v. Williams category; however, that is somewhat of a wild card.
I think that my strongest advantage vis-a-vis my competitor is in the wide receiver category. I will take you through some of my thinking regarding this position.
At the start of the week, my fantasy roster contained Laurent Miles, Brandon Lloyd, and Vincent Jackson. I decided to drop Laurent Miles when it became obvious that a) Miles Austin is playing this Sunday and b) Laurent Miles is dealing with an injury issue that may limit his playing time or on field effectiveness. In his place I picked-up Malcolm Floyd. I decided to start both Floyd and Jackson this week for several reasons. First, I don't like Brandon Lloyd's potential vs. a good Seattle defense knowing that Lloyd may be catching passes from the third string quarterback. Second, I think (perhaps more like hope given San Diego's inconsistency) that the San Diego offensive will perform well against the fairly weak Buffalo passing defense, especially considering that the game will be played in warm weather (and not in cold, snowy Buffalo). I think that one or maybe even both of my wide-outs will score a touchdown and one or both will exceed 100 yards receiving.
It is quite possible, though certainly not guaranteed, that my wide receivers will outscore his two wide-outs by 15 points or more. This scenario is more likely given that Mike Wallace has already played and only scored 7.8. I will need to win these two match-ups if I have any hope of beating my competitor this week, especially considering that my kicker only scored 2 points. I am going to need to win the wr battle in order to offset what will likely be a 10-11 point differential in the kicking category.
I should have an advantage at the tight end position; however, that one is a real wildcard in my opinion, given the fact that Jermichael Finley has the potential to score a touchdown or two.
At the beginning of the week, my kicker was Robbie Gould. I picked-up Gould a few weeks back and have had success using him until Jay Cutler injured his hand and Caleb Hanie took over the qb reins in Chicago. After that point, Gould became more of a liability than an asset (3 points last week for instance). I don't expect things to improve this week, so I cut Gould and added Shaun Suisham. I had a choice between Suisham and Matt Prater (and other, weaker kickers); I chose Suisham based on his match-up with Cleveland and the fact that, over the course of the season, he has had more field goal opportunities. While my thinking may (or may not) have been sound, my pick turned into a disaster, as he only scored 2 points. Thank goodness than Mike Wallace (on my competitor's team) only scored 7.8; I would have been really feeling the heat if his touchdown catch had not been overturned.
I think our defenses are about equal with the wild-card being defensive touchdowns scored.
In conclusion, I think that I am a slight underdog this week. I will need my two wide-outs to really perform well to have a chance to win this contest. I will see what happens on Sunday!
***An update: I decided to switch out Malcolm Floyd and insert Brandon Lloyd earlier today after reading that Sean Bradford has a good chance of playing in Monday's game.
Thursday
Quick Thoughts
I have decided to posit some of the thoughts, ruminations, ideas that move through my head on a given day. Don't worry, each entry is only a sentence or two (or sometimes three) in length.
Pondering the Interstices between technology and U.S. culture/lifestyles...I would be interested in learning of any books which do an excellent job of delving into this topic. I've read Future Shock, The Third Wave, The Singularity is Near, and The Americans: The Democratic Experience among others. However, I am more interested in discerning the ways in which current technology has altered (and continues to change) Americans' views of reality, their work habits, lifestyles, etc. In other words, I would like to find a work which focuses on the last 30 years or less of changes.
My take on Relativism/Post-Modernism...Granted, this meme provides a lot of valuable information/insight into the interconnections between culture and values, beliefs, perspectives. It is obvious that my value system and personal philosophy are determined in part by the fact that I live in the U.S. Nonetheless, people who subscribe to the view that all values, beliefs, etc. are relative (and culture dependent) are in error. Some portion of every society's (and most individuals') values and beliefs derive from transcendent aspects related to human nature and the fact that people are not hermits (and thus have to live in a community). Given that fact, I am surprised at how many people seemingly support notions of pure relativism/extreme post-modernism (or whatever you'd like to call it).
On Commodification and Nature...Most of my ancestors were likely much more connected than I am to nature, to their society, and perhaps even to their families. Whether Paleolithic polytheists or 14th Century Christians, their lives depended upon their intimate interactions with nature (ie. tilling the soil), were enhanced and maintained by centuries old traditions, and revolved around their insular, close-knit families. We moderns might consider these individuals to be backward, primitive, benighted, or any of a hundred other, derogatory phrases. Personally, I believe that while most of my ancestors' lives were probably nasty, brutish, and short, they nonetheless had access to nodes of meaning and joy that are almost alien to me--cut off as I am from these experiences by technology, consumerism, and the commodification of society.
Why I Like Lord of the Rings...The trilogy has a lot of flaws, which include a lack of character development and depth, female roles/views, etc...Despite these issues, the book does a wonderful job of extolling and analyzing "good." Tolkien achieves this feat in part by contrasting a nuanced, multi-faceted "good" vs. a one dimensional, oppressing evil, thereby at once differentiating good acts from bad ones but demonstrating that goodness comes in many flavors and strengths.
Ok, enough for today...
Pondering the Interstices between technology and U.S. culture/lifestyles...I would be interested in learning of any books which do an excellent job of delving into this topic. I've read Future Shock, The Third Wave, The Singularity is Near, and The Americans: The Democratic Experience among others. However, I am more interested in discerning the ways in which current technology has altered (and continues to change) Americans' views of reality, their work habits, lifestyles, etc. In other words, I would like to find a work which focuses on the last 30 years or less of changes.
My take on Relativism/Post-Modernism...Granted, this meme provides a lot of valuable information/insight into the interconnections between culture and values, beliefs, perspectives. It is obvious that my value system and personal philosophy are determined in part by the fact that I live in the U.S. Nonetheless, people who subscribe to the view that all values, beliefs, etc. are relative (and culture dependent) are in error. Some portion of every society's (and most individuals') values and beliefs derive from transcendent aspects related to human nature and the fact that people are not hermits (and thus have to live in a community). Given that fact, I am surprised at how many people seemingly support notions of pure relativism/extreme post-modernism (or whatever you'd like to call it).
On Commodification and Nature...Most of my ancestors were likely much more connected than I am to nature, to their society, and perhaps even to their families. Whether Paleolithic polytheists or 14th Century Christians, their lives depended upon their intimate interactions with nature (ie. tilling the soil), were enhanced and maintained by centuries old traditions, and revolved around their insular, close-knit families. We moderns might consider these individuals to be backward, primitive, benighted, or any of a hundred other, derogatory phrases. Personally, I believe that while most of my ancestors' lives were probably nasty, brutish, and short, they nonetheless had access to nodes of meaning and joy that are almost alien to me--cut off as I am from these experiences by technology, consumerism, and the commodification of society.
Why I Like Lord of the Rings...The trilogy has a lot of flaws, which include a lack of character development and depth, female roles/views, etc...Despite these issues, the book does a wonderful job of extolling and analyzing "good." Tolkien achieves this feat in part by contrasting a nuanced, multi-faceted "good" vs. a one dimensional, oppressing evil, thereby at once differentiating good acts from bad ones but demonstrating that goodness comes in many flavors and strengths.
Ok, enough for today...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)