Megalodon wrote:Thanks for your work this season!
I am really torn between starting either WAS or ARI.
Any additional thoughts?
ARI allows 21.6 ppg, has 22 picks, 36 sacks and 4 fumbles
WAS allows 25 ppg, has 17 picks, 25 sacks and 7 fumbles
All of those tip to ARI
CHI produces 22.9 ppg, 16 picks, 41 sacks and 3 fumbles.
PHI produces 18.1 ppg, 13 picks although Foles has only 4 INT in 6 games and only one in last 4, 42 sacks and a humiliating 17 fumbles
All of those tip to WAS
ARI with breakouts in week 11, 13 and 15 vs ATL, NYJ and DET of which ATL is a top tier offense. But below average to STL and SEA of which STL is a bottom tier offense.
WAS has one break out in week 11 vs. PHI and below averages to DAL, NYG, BAL and CLE of which CLE is a bottom tier offense (although sans RGIII). The other 3 are legitimate playoff contenders so that may explain why they didn't perform as well.
Overall, I think that tips to ARI given that they had a breakout vs. ATL and DET.
CHI gave breakouts in weeks 11, 14 and 15 vs. SF, MIN and GB. SF is a top tier defense but MIN and GB are middle tier. They did not give breakouts to MIN and SEA in between of which SEA is a top tier defense.
PHI gave breakouts in weeks 11 and 15 vs. WAS and CIN with CIN being a top tier defense. And gave above averages to CAR, DAL and TB which are all midling level defenses.
Tips again to ARI in that PHI has not given breakouts consistently to WAS level defenses.
Again, it's close as you can tell from looking at the stats and the trends but ARI really is ranked higher on my list because on the whole, I think those trends tip to ARI over WAS. Only the tos by PHI tips to WAS and those are nothing to sneeze at as they produce the chance for defensive TDs and lower points against. But otherwise, all of other factors seem to tip ARI's way.
c1turbo wrote:Thanks, for the chart.
It's usually my tie breaker for my WR/RB positions. It has worked very well for me as I'm at 9 wins in a row.
However this week is tough for me.
WR: Andre Johnson, Dez Bryant
RB: Jamaal Charles, CJ spiller
FLEX: Trent Ricardson? or Vincent Jackson?
With the path of resistance chart it stats
VJax - 28 score passing but path is 19 for the run.
Trent - 24.1 score for rush, but path -6 favor pass, but Trent is excellent receiver too.
even have a 3rd Hakeem Nicks, but he hasn't been performing. As he was actually dropped and I just grabbed him.
I would interpret the path of least resistance to be essentially non-existent for the TB vs. STL matchup. Both are midling level. As a gestalt, I'm betting Trent will be given the ball a lot more than poor Josh after last weekend's debacle and since there isn't a particular weakness from STL's point of view in passing rushing, I'd lean towards Trent. But, there are many more experts on such picks on the regular form and I'd yield to their wisdom.
Doctor P wrote:1st off, thank you so much for this thread, I look forward to it every week. In your opinion, or based on the stats, who's the better play between NYJ, SD, Cin, or Ind? I have NYJ and Cincy but could pick up SD or Indy?
I had been all set to play NYJ, but now I'm having 2nd thoughts, thanks!
Statistically, CIN is the best play of those not only for the high sacks/to ratio but also their recent trends but it looks like a great many other lists felt that it didn't even warrant a top 10 pick. I'm a little puzzled but I'm not an overly sentimental sort and perhaps the fact that CIN seems to frequently choke against PIT (and BAL) is why this didn't make it up there. CIN and NYJ were selected by a majority of the systems, SD only by me and IND only by me and NFL. So i think it's between CIN and NYJ.
wtr23 wrote:Broken record, I know, but I hate leaving points on the bench. Has cincy proved to be worthy of a start this week, or do I stick with Seattle?
Well, I preferred CIN based on trends and sacks/to ratio but SEA was well represented on the lists although not ranked higher than 6th by anyone. I'm probably too married to the statistics and numbers which don't really capture the essence of a game but statistically, I just don't see how SEA merits a top 10 pick based on either sacks/to ratio and SF as an opponent.
SEA exploded on BUF and ARI both bottom tier offenses, but below average vs. CHI. They earlier had a breakout vs. NYJ and above average vs. MIA, both bottom tier offenses. So against the one above average offense in CHI, they didn't really perform.
CIN has has breakouts vs. PHI,SD, OAK and KC all of which are bottom tier offenses and struggled vs. DAL. Going farther back, they also had a breakout vs. the NYG in week 10. So is PIT more like DAL or more like SD?
PIT has given 5 above average games in a row with breakoutsin weeks 11, 12 and 14 vs. BAL, CLE and SD. I'd rank CIN as good as BAl, better than CLE or SD.
Of course, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Don't get all confused with the facts. I'd rather lose with my intuition than mindlessly follow some statistical ranking list. May as well let the rank list play fantasy football instead of me
I appreciate everyone's support of the list and I very much appreciate people not rubbing it in when the Analyzer has picked incorrectly. I felt pretty badly when I gave advice that turned sour on gameday. But I'm glad that overall, the Analyzer has held up well.