- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Anyone have a problem with getting RB1 and WR1 from the same team?
Posted on 8/4/14 at 6:00 pm
Posted on 8/4/14 at 6:00 pm
I've seen people in the first round net Forte/Jeffery and Lacy/Nelson. Could make your team more consistent in scoring I guess. I've never had a duo like this. Instead I've ended up in the past getting a QB/WR duo like Megatron/Stafford. What do ya'll think? Does it matter at all?
This post was edited on 8/4/14 at 6:01 pm
8
Posted on 8/4/14 at 6:08 pm to dualed
I don't like doing RB/WR from the same team.
You have to think about it in terms of points potential. Say a team averages 60 offensive plays a game. If you have a RB on that team, potentially he can get 60 touches in that game. If you have a WR too, then both players can get 30 touches each only. (The numbers are purely hypothetical for example purposes, but the theory stands.)
By taking two players that can never get points on the same play, you are cutting down their potential touches in half. Whenever that RB gets points, there is no way that WR can get points.
ETA: WR/QB is different because both players can touch the ball on the same play, maximizing both players potential touches, not cutting them in half.
You have to think about it in terms of points potential. Say a team averages 60 offensive plays a game. If you have a RB on that team, potentially he can get 60 touches in that game. If you have a WR too, then both players can get 30 touches each only. (The numbers are purely hypothetical for example purposes, but the theory stands.)
By taking two players that can never get points on the same play, you are cutting down their potential touches in half. Whenever that RB gets points, there is no way that WR can get points.
ETA: WR/QB is different because both players can touch the ball on the same play, maximizing both players potential touches, not cutting them in half.
This post was edited on 8/4/14 at 6:10 pm
Posted on 8/4/14 at 6:19 pm to dualed
If you think that Jeffrey or Nelson will outscore the rest of the WRs on the board. You go with them regardless if you have a Rb on the same team or not.
Posted on 8/4/14 at 6:25 pm to dualed
The last two seasons I've had Forte and Marshall. I don't see a problem with it at all.
Posted on 8/4/14 at 7:11 pm to dualed
Years of data says it doesn't matter
Posted on 8/4/14 at 9:14 pm to dualed
Points are points. Who cares if they are on the same team?
Posted on 8/5/14 at 7:43 am to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Points are points. Who cares if they are on the same team?
Not really. You can limit your teams potential to maximize it's peak from week to week. Sure, in the grand scheme it doesnt matter because your total points scored for the year wont change, but on a week to week basis it can matter. Do you think you have a higher probability of no.1 WR on Team A and no.1 RB on Team B going off in the same week, or no.1 WR on Team A and no.1 RB on Team A going off in the same week?
Posted on 8/5/14 at 7:48 am to dnm3305
Doesn't matter at all. You pick the best player available at the position your drafting for. Don't care if they are on the same team or not
Posted on 8/5/14 at 8:10 am to TigerBait0129
quote:
Doesn't matter at all.
But it does matter, no matter how minute. It can affect your week to week matchups. Period. I will not avoid drafting D. Thomas and Ball, or Bryant and Murray, but to say it doesnt matter is asinine.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 9:18 am to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Points are points. Who cares if they are on the same team?
yup
Posted on 8/5/14 at 9:36 am to CBandits82
Draft the best available.... If you end up with Stafford, Calvin, & Bush after the draft like I did last year just make some trades. When drafting I don't pay much attention to teams, BYE weeks, and to an extent positions either... I take who I believe is the best player available. After that is where the fun starts of managing the team.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 9:42 am to dualed
It's called primacy and I'm not a fan personally.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 11:15 am to dualed
I won a league once with Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Brent Jones, and Roger Craig as the majority of my starting line-up.
Come to think of it, I may have had Mike Cofer (or whomever their kicker was) also.
ETA: yes, I'm that old.
Come to think of it, I may have had Mike Cofer (or whomever their kicker was) also.
ETA: yes, I'm that old.
This post was edited on 8/5/14 at 11:17 am
Posted on 8/5/14 at 1:39 pm to dualed
It will make your team MORE consistent if both are legit #1 options. More consistency = higher floor from the two of them combined regarding weekly point totals. The argument regarding this limiting the amount of potential touches because they are on the same offense is moot because a WR will not steal any carries from a RB, and any passes that a RB takes from a WR would have been lost regardless. It actually increases your odds for getting a higher percentage of the offensive plays if it is a legit scoring offense.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 2:16 pm to Zoltan
I have no problem with that. I wouldn't necessarily try for it, but as others have said, you draft the best team possible.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 3:01 pm to Zoltan
quote:
It will make your team MORE consistent if both are legit #1 options. More consistency = higher floor from the two of them combined regarding weekly point totals. The argument regarding this limiting the amount of potential touches because they are on the same offense is moot because a WR will not steal any carries from a RB, and any passes that a RB takes from a WR would have been lost regardless. It actually increases your odds for getting a higher percentage of the offensive plays if it is a legit scoring offense.
I think it puts your eggs in one basket. What if you run into a juggernaut defense and get shutdown. Now two positions on your roster are vulnerable in that one game. I think it slightly hinders your chance week to week. Season long point totals, it's irrelevant, but this is a week to week game.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 3:36 pm to dnm3305
quote:
I think it puts your eggs in one basket. What if you run into a juggernaut defense and get shutdown. Now two positions on your roster are vulnerable in that one game. I think it slightly hinders your chance week to week. Season long point totals, it's irrelevant, but this is a week to week game.
Like I said, if BOTH are legit #1 options at their positions, and it is a high powered offense (GB, DEN, CHI) the defensive power house shouldn't matter. You don't sit your studs based on matchups. And I wasn't referring to season long point totals, I was referring to each week. You set a floor that is more or a less a threshold for weekly performance. It can always go up, and you can always play riskier upside plays at other positions to compensate. Bottom line, stats show that it doesn't hinder you.
Posted on 8/5/14 at 3:45 pm to dnm3305
quote:
I think it puts your eggs in one basket.
This is my opinion. Part of what makes fantasy so great is that it makes me interested in every game because there's usually at least one player from every game on either my team or my opponent's team.
But I have a friend who is a big fan of what he calls the "hook-up." He likes to take a running back and the quarterback from the same team--one that he has identified as being likely to score a lot of points. That way, he gets all the points scored by that particular team (except kicking unless he takes the kicker, too).
IMO, if you take Tony Romo and DeMarco Murray, you're going to get a lot points. On that rare occasion that the team sucks for an entire sixty minutes, you may not get a bunch of touchdowns, but you're still likely to get yardage credit.
This is not the same as getting a WR and a RB from the same team. I just don't see that as a combination, but rather as more of a coincidence.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News