Wingers and Fullbacks

ATM I like Michael Gordon(297k) and Mansour (303k)
Ferguson(305k) will probably be in my centres due to lack of standout option

Have to look at Gordon as he wont switch to wing or be subbed. I'd also expect Parra to improve quiet a bit in 2016.

As for moneyball never pick Josh Hoffman last season he started 17 games and not once passed 80% of all fullbacks average (so never went higher then 23 points). If Dane Gagai gets named to start at fullback you want him in your team, he was a top 5 fullback for the week 60% of the time, never went below the 80% of Fullback avg and was above 150% of fullback avg 40% of the time. When he starts at centre he only gets a top 5 score 27% of the time. 55% of the time he is less the 80% of all centres avg (so less then 21 points)

69 % of stats are made up.

Shanbon wrote:Have to look at Gordon as he wont switch to wing or be subbed. I'd also expect Parra to improve quiet a bit in 2016.

As for moneyball never pick Josh Hoffman  last season he started 17 games and not once passed 80% of all fullbacks average (so never went higher then 23 points). If Dane Gagai gets named to start at fullback you want him in your team, he was a top 5 fullback for the week 60% of the time, never went below the 80% of Fullback avg and was above 150% of fullback avg 40% of the time. When he starts at centre he only gets a top 5 score 27% of the time. 55% of the time he is less the 80% of all centres avg (so less then 21 points)

Went cross-eyed halfway through this post

Clack Bocks wrote:

Went cross-eyed halfway through this post

80% cross-eyed?

Rude pricks. Got anything for other positions Shanbon??

40% of sportal users only understood 80% more of 57% of Shanbon's post than the average fantasy player

multiple.scoregasms wrote:ATM I like Michael Gordon(297k) and Mansour (303k)
Ferguson(305k) will probably be in my centres due to lack of standout option

You have to think the chances are small all those guys will bump up to the next tier.

Milchcow wrote:
40% of sportal users only understood 80% more of 57% of Shanbon's post than the average fantasy player

Had to read that twice

Big Diesel wrote:

You have to think the chances are small all those guys will bump up to the next tier.

Value to start with though considering the WFB spots appear to have had a tier split among the previous top tier. RTS and Tedesco are in their own tier going into the season, and the cost of them is much higher than the tier below. You take someone like Mansour/Gordon/Fergo so you can afford RTS rather than taking a combo of Inglis and Dugan.

Krump wrote:Rude pricks. Got anything for other positions Shanbon??

Yeah i got heaps.

I could have just used basic numbers but i dont want to make it too easy, i would still like win a few tournies myself.

I wish i had the players $$ from last season in moneyball so i could give you some value.

Moneyball player values change every few weeks anyway based on form.

EG guys like Bird/Aitken/SST who started out at $3,500 each only stayed that way for a few games before jumping in price to something more reflective of their output.
So if you find something of value you only get a couple weeks to use it before they get a price better reflective of their scores and you have to start again. And odds are everyone else has noticed the same value anyway

Milchcow wrote:
Moneyball player values change every few weeks anyway based on form.

EG guys like Bird/Aitken/SST who started out at $3,500 each only stayed that way for a few games before jumping in price to something more reflective of their output.
So if you find something of value you only get a couple weeks to use it before they get a price better reflective of their scores and you have to start again. And odds are everyone else has noticed the same value anyway

Value only plays a part and you want to combine it with different things/stats depending on if you play cash h2h or larger tournaments. Take Aitken he only went over 150% of centres avg (so scored more then 37.5 points) 18% of the time, Blake Ferguson went over that 37.5 points 39% of the time. So you need to balance out the value of Aitken to the much higher potential of Ferguson add into that in tournies most people would play Aitken and it might be better to go with a POD in Ferguson.

Shanbon wrote:

Value only plays a part and you want to combine it with different things/stats depending on if you play cash h2h or larger tournaments. Take Aitken he only went over 150% of centres avg (so scored more then 37.5 points) 18% of the time, Blake Ferguson went over that 37.5 points 39% of the time. So you need to balance out the value of Aitken to the much higher potential of Ferguson add into that in tournies most people would play Aitken and it might be better to go with a POD in Ferguson.

I would have thought in weekly games the best bet would be potential over consistency. It's not like you don't get a crack next week if they all flop.

Krump wrote:
I would have thought in weekly games the best bet would be potential over consistency. It's not like you don't get a crack next week if they all flop.

You want those big potential guys in tournies (like Fergo) when it comes to h2h consistency(high scoring and value) is the way to go, this is long term thinking though. If youre interested in this stuff i pm you a good link

Big Diesel wrote:

You have to think the chances are small all those guys will bump up to the next tier.

They are unlikely to bump up a tier but will be consistent and aside from Ferguson no real chance at Reps

Beast From The Big East wrote:

Value to start with though considering the WFB spots appear to have had a tier split among the previous top tier. RTS and Tedesco are in their own tier going into the season, and the cost of them is much higher than the tier below. You take someone like Mansour/Gordon/Fergo so you can afford RTS rather than taking a combo of Inglis and Dugan.

Fantasy sports would be a real easy game if all the mid price options who are supposed to improve actually did.

Shanbon wrote:

Yeah i got heaps.

I could have just used basic numbers but i dont want to make it too easy, i would still like win a few tournies myself.

I wish i had the players $$ from last season in moneyball so i could give you some value.

And you're not getting them from me.

Big Diesel wrote:

Fantasy sports would be a real easy game if all the mid price options who are supposed to improve actually did.

Wasn't my point. If you take it as RTS and Teddy are in a 50 point category, the next tier down is for the Inglis/Dugan group at 45 and the tier below is the likes of Gordon/Fergo/Mansour at 40. Cash wise it will be pretty similar buying RTS and Gordon vs buying Inglis/Dugan. The appeal of someone like Gordon is that you can get RTS and gamble Gordon improves to the Inglis/Dugan group or that RTS distances himself from Teddy. Some prefer taking the 2 middle options as it makes it easier to trade down to improve if you need to and means it takes less to trade up, but at the end of the day its all personal opinion and a gamble with how you pick.

If you want to get into mid tiers's improving then most of us here would probably say that the Gordon/Fergo/Mansour group would be most likely to improve because they could be in a very different situation from last year. Fergo may have a crack at the FB spot, Gordon on a new team where he will be FB and not shoved to the wing or bench, and Mansour is healthy going into the season. Yes everyone can improve but only by so much and it is the one's lower down who are likely to because they aren't already at a peak level.

But how do you quantify which one of those is the best options and will improve by the amount of points per games?

And you also have to factor in there are probably 10 thousand players who are looking at those three guys as well based on the same reasoning you are using.

And if you choose the wrong one then you're probably no chance to come close to winning the whole comp.