Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)

FPL Chips / Wildcard Strategy 2016/17

1235»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,162 ✭✭✭ pimpmyhat


    So is the first dgw in GW 34 or do we know yet?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    pimpmyhat wrote: »
    So is the first dgw in GW 34 or do we know yet?

    More than likely although if city arsenal or utd make the fa cup semi final and go out of Europe there could be a dgw involving them before that date.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭ ElTel


    BB a serious consideration for me this GW.
    I've a FT and 2.2 itb. I'm rolling it all things been egual.

    Grant (Mannone)
    Alonso Brunt Chambers (Pieters, Funes Mori)
    Sanchez Hazard Siggy Phillips (Fraser)
    Ibra Kane Gray

    The big negative of course is the extra info we get before GW26 starts re. DGWs.
    The advantage (as I see it) is the "simplification" it gives me in the planning process for the final third of the season with a less constrained WC.


  • Registered Users Posts: 31,238 ✭✭✭✭ CSF


    ElTel wrote: »
    BB a serious consideration for me this GW.
    I've a FT and 2.2 itb. I'm rolling it all things been egual.

    Grant (Mannone)
    Alonso Brunt Chambers (Pieters, Funes Mori)
    Sanchez Hazard Siggy Phillips (Fraser)
    Ibra Kane Gray

    The big negative of course is the extra info we get before GW26 starts re. DGWs.
    The advantage (as I see it) is the "simplification" it gives me in the planning process for the final third of the season with a less constrained WC.

    Just looking at that team, I'd do it. Upgrade Gray with that money and you're ready to take on the world this week with that team.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Before the transfers thread goes any more off topic....
    It all depends on the fixtures. If they are decent I'm going for it. Its the only chance you have to BB and then wildcard to sort your team. Most won't entertain it due to the psychological boost at the end .

    I don't think it's necessarily the boost at the end that people are hooked on. From what I see here and on Twitter it's more that people can't separate the 4 bench players from the 11 you'd be playing anyway. Few see it that 20 for your bench boost in a SGW where you scored 65 in total is worth the exact same as 20 for your bench boost in a DGW where you scored 150.

    This mirage was compounded by DGW34 last season where people associated the massive 150+ scores with playing BB, regardless of the fact that they'd probably have scored most of their total without a BB.

    So the idea of playing BB in a DGW with 14 or 15 DGWers is stuck in the FPL psyche, with logic and maths falling by the wayside.

    You were possibly the first person I saw question this. And I certainly saw merit in your argument, but I'd incorrectly over valued team value issue I mentioned already. I also thought, and there is still merit in this, that 4 extra players x2 has good odds of scoring more than 4x1.

    That point is not completely out of the window. And just as the early BB plan depends on the fixtures the DGW BB plan totally depends on the DGW fixtures and (crucially) what teams have to play for. There are somewhat unusual circumstances for the big DGW this year just as there were last year.

    Last year, unusually, the title challengers and their big hitters had no DGWs. This year they do (although it could now be over halfway thru the double) but it's the cheap assets that are the problem. Most of the teams with good cheap attackers and defs either have no double (Hull, Swans, Palace) or those that do mostly have nothing to play for due to being safe or already relegated (Watford, Sunderland, Leicester, Southampton). This was predictable mind you with the big DGW being so late.

    That may not be the case next year. If for example Sunderland weren't already gone Pickford, Kone, Defoe and even Anichibe could've been gold. Even Watford if they were fighting could offer good options. As it stands the cheaper bench players with doubles who make up a BB for DGW37 are either rubbish, on the beach or both. In many cases SGW players with good fixtures are more appealing.

    In theory the 4 DGWers BB should have a higher baseline than a SGW bench. The circumstances make the DGWers look unappealing this year, but it remains to be seen whether benches full of muck FPL players like Kone, Britos, Capoue, Anichibe or Leicester lads with 2 atrocious fixtures still manage to rack up 20+ points from their doubles.

    So it's far from open and shut, and as ever flexibility is key. That is the main doubt I have over using the BB so early. Unless those early fixtures were really really good I'd probably be tempted to hold the BB and play it in a SGW in the second half of the season if the DGW landscape was looking dodgy - very late, or with lots of top teams out of the cups early.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭ ElTel


    FHFC wrote: »
    Before the transfers thread goes any more off topic....



    I don't think it's necessarily the boost at the end that people are hooked on. From what I see here and on Twitter it's more that people can't separate the 4 bench players from the 11 you'd be playing anyway. Few see it that 20 for your bench boost in a SGW where you scored 65 in total is worth the exact same as 20 for your bench boost in a DGW where you scored 150.

    This mirage was compounded by DGW34 last season where people associated the massive 150+ scores with playing BB, regardless of the fact that they'd probably have scored most of their total without a BB.

    So the idea of playing BB in a DGW with 14 or 15 DGWers is stuck in the FPL psyche, with logic and maths falling by the wayside.

    You were possibly the first person I saw question this. And I certainly saw merit in your argument, but I'd incorrectly over valued team value issue I mentioned already. I also thought, and there is still merit in this, that 4 extra players x2 has good odds of scoring more than 4x1.

    That point is not completely out of the window. And just as the early BB plan depends on the fixtures the DGW BB plan totally depends on the DGW fixtures and (crucially) what teams have to play for. There are somewhat unusual circumstances for the big DGW this year just as there were last year.

    Last year, unusually, the title challengers and their big hitters had no DGWs. This year they do (although it could now be over halfway thru the double) but it's the cheap assets that are the problem. Most of the teams with good cheap attackers and defs either have no double (Hull, Swans, Palace) or those that do mostly have nothing to play for due to being safe or already relegated (Watford, Sunderland, Leicester, Southampton). This was predictable mind you with the big DGW being so late.

    That may not be the case next year. If for example Sunderland weren't already gone Pickford, Kone, Defoe and even Anichibe could've been gold. Even Watford if they were fighting could offer good options. As it stands the cheaper bench players with doubles who make up a BB for DGW37 are either rubbish, on the beach or both. In many cases SGW players with good fixtures are more appealing.

    In theory the 4 DGWers BB should have a higher baseline than a SGW bench. The circumstances make the DGWers look unappealing this year, but it remains to be seen whether benches full of muck FPL players like Kone, Britos, Capoue, Anichibe or Leicester lads with 2 atrocious fixtures still manage to rack up 20+ points from their doubles.

    So it's far from open and shut, and as ever flexibility is key. That is the main doubt I have over using the BB so early. Unless those early fixtures were really really good I'd probably be tempted to hold the BB and play it in a SGW in the second half of the season if the DGW landscape was looking dodgy - very late, or with lots of top teams out of the cups early.

    You packed a lot in there.
    Notwithstanding fixtures, for me it's the advantage of the simplification of the second (probably earlier) WC planning and perhaps a squad of 12-13 versus 4 extra games for the BB chip used in tandem with a later WC


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    ElTel wrote: »
    You packed a lot in there.
    Notwithstanding fixtures, for me it's the advantage of the simplification of the second (probably earlier) WC planning and perhaps a squad of 12-13 versus 4 extra games for the BB chip used in tandem with a later WC

    Spot on. And shorter. :)

    I do think there's still a big bonus in having the second WC for the DGW planning even without BB. IF you don't need it earlier then thats the ideal for me. With no BB you can then put cheap enabler on bench (Ake for example) and make use of your team value for a great DGW 11.

    Another option for the BB would be to get in 3 or 4 cheaper doublers for the bench in a smaller DGW and have WC to sort it out for the main one.

    If DGW34 hadn't been sooo awful that coulda worked. Probably woulda worked well for DGW27 if we hadn't have written off Stoke.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,262 ✭✭✭ iroced


    I think the major flaw in people's mind with the BB chip is it is not in reality a 1 GW chip. People keep saying they got x amount of points from their BB on the GW they used it but most if not all of them planned for it. They got players in specifically for that BB GW. Many took hits for it. Maybe with a post BB WC in mind. Or they WCed and built their team in order to suit the BB. In the end, contrary to what most people look at (how much added pts I got on the BB GW), their BB influenced 4/5/6 GWs if not more of their season.

    Using it in GW1 will reduce its effect since many players go with an early WC (that would also correct the BB team if necessary) but it could be a lottery since we may not know who are the best players to have then. Pre-season games can be deceptive with players' form (it wasn't this year though).


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,267 ✭✭✭✭ FHFC


    Yeh there lots of ways to skin this cat. And a bit like the TC the variance between good (20-30pts maybe?) and bad (10-15pts maybe) is small compared to regular Captaincy or general FPL management.

    I think in some ways the issue of top sides not having DGWs (like last year) is less relevant. It's not having cheaper DGWers that is the problem.

    If the DGW could possibly be GW34 next year and the equivalent of say Hull (decent form, good home defence, 4m keeper and several defs under 4.5, cheap attacking mids) had 2 good fixtures then a bench of 2 or 3 from them alone, even in a small DGW, could push the ceiling towards the 30pt mark.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,262 ✭✭✭ iroced


    FHFC wrote: »
    Yeh there lots of ways to skin this cat. And a bit like the TC the variance between good (20-30pts maybe?) and bad (10-15pts maybe) is small compared to regular Captaincy or general FPL management.
    This is the part where I seem to be the only one seeing it differently.

    I BBed in GW22. Got 11 added pts from my bench. 1 player injured. So sounds pretty bad.
    But I had WCed the week just before where I had a monster 101 pointer boosting me up to 127k from 301k! This WC team had a couple of players I got or kept because I isolated GW22 as a good one for BB. My injured BB player in GW22 got a CS in GW21. So what I did not gain in GW22, I gained it in GW21.

    And when I say that BB can have a much longer influence on your team than what people would generally think, I'm carrying Randolph since this WC (thought he was great for GW22 but he wasn't) and he's been impeding me few moves because of the extra £0.5m he's eating with regards to Jakupovic for example (now it was a very unlucky timing since Jaku came back playing the very week I WCed). Now I could have gotten rid of him but never found a justfiable enough GW to take this -4.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 44 Dicky2016


    Wildcard GW36 and BB GW37 has been a disaster so far!
    Might have to re-think this strategy for next season.
    Teams having nothing to play for is a killer


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    Dicky2016 wrote: »
    Wildcard GW36 and BB GW37 has been a disaster so far!
    Might have to re-think this strategy for next season.
    Teams having nothing to play for is a killer

    I see ffs are finally having a discussion on the fact that maybe there is more than one way to play your BB.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,623 ✭✭✭ Western Pomise


    I see ffs are finally having a discussion on the fact that maybe there is more than one way to play your BB.


    What in essence are they suggesting?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    What in essence are they suggesting?

    Just exploring other options and being open to BB in a sgw whereas previous discussion was always there is only one way to approach it. I remain convinced that TC is the chip to value most . The TC does not impact on your team in the weeks before and after the gw you play it. The BB does so even if it works out well for you in the gw you play it. There are knock on effects either side of that gw. I really hope to BB in gw 1 next year.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,965 ✭✭✭ Shedite27


    While I feel by TC was wasted (on Aguero's DGW for 8 points), bench boost this week has been decent...
    Pickford - 6
    Zaha - 8
    Stephens - 0 (hopefully something tonight
    Mawson - 6


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 650 ✭✭✭ PVA


    With so many 100+ scores it's easy to attribute this to the Double Gameweek effect, however of the seven players of mine that were due a DGW, six of them were dropped for one of those games. Thankfully, the one player that has actually played two games this week was triple captain Sanchez.

    Double Gameweek my arse, this is Alexis week.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,074 ✭✭✭ Bleating Lamb


    A lad in one of my leagues who has an overall rank of around 12k only used the WC this week,seems strange unless he planned it .


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,707 ✭✭✭ Benimar


    A lad in one of my leagues who has an overall rank of around 12k only used the WC this week,seems strange unless he planned it .

    A guy in mine was ranked 15k and only used the WC this week. He is now 45k..fair to say it didn't work out for him :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,022 ✭✭✭✭ Iused2likebusts


    A lad in one of my leagues who has an overall rank of around 12k only used the WC this week,seems strange unless he planned it .

    If you have used the TC chip I think there is merit in waiting till gw37 as you have all the data and can get 4 cheapies and 11 really strong dgw players.


  • Registered Users Posts: 428 ✭✭ Metalpanic


    Through indecision and generally being happy with my team, I still have my WC to play. 15 points behind the leader in my league (hopefully less after tonight). We both BB'd this week, he had Sanchez as captain and went from third to first. I have some big choices to make!


  • Advertisement
Advertisement