Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gameweek 29 Transfer/ FH Thread

Options
245678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,705 ✭✭✭✭Ace2007


    Fitz* wrote: »
    Anyone thinking of a Brighton triple up in defence? Maximum risk, maximum reward.

    I'm at that stage of the season where I have to take risks and punts anyways. Lot's of my rivals don't have FH or many playing players this week.

    What's the fascination with Brighton, they have conceded in each of the last 4 games, and Newcastle have scored in 3 of their last 4 games. If anything Fulham are the team in form for CS, but that goes against getting in Dallas/Raphaine and co?


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    Ace2007 wrote: »
    What's the fascination with Brighton, they have conceded in each of the last 4 games, and Newcastle have scored in 3 of their last 4 games. If anything Fulham are the team in form for CS, but that goes against getting in Dallas/Raphaine and co?

    Underlying stats. A team who should be doing really well against a team who should be doing really bad.

    Fulham have good underlying stats defensively too but they’re up against one of the top 3 most attacking sides in the league so I’ll probably just get Areola and leave it at that


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,624 ✭✭✭✭extra gravy


    Fitz* wrote: »
    Anyone thinking of a Brighton triple up in defence? Maximum risk, maximum reward.

    I'm at that stage of the season where I have to take risks and punts anyways. Lot's of my rivals don't have FH or many playing players this week.

    Yeah I was thinking Sanchez, Veltman and Dunk. Don't think I've ever tripled up on defence before though so I'll probably wimp out and get one of Gross/Trossard instead.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,511 ✭✭✭✭dsmythy


    CSF wrote: »
    Underlying stats. A team who should be doing really well against a team who should be doing really bad.

    Fulham have good underlying stats defensively too but they’re up against one of the top 3 most attacking sides in the league so I’ll probably just get Areola and leave it at that

    Brighton have had good underlying stats for a while and not translating them is the problem. Their goalkeeper seems to be letting them down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 443 ✭✭Starlord_01


    Currently have 6 players - do I -4 and go for 8 or use my FT and hope 7 will be enough :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    dsmythy wrote: »
    Brighton have had good underlying stats for a while and not translating them is the problem. Their goalkeeper seems to be letting them down.

    Yeah, I’m inclined to back the team who are underperforming good underlying stats over teams who are overperforming bad ones though.

    Brighton are a good team who have had awful luck. Sure, not all of it is luck (a lot of the time variance and luck get treated like they’re completely different things), but enough of it is for me to be willing to hope that my 3 guys can get 18+ points on the day.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    Ace2007 wrote: »
    What's the fascination with Brighton, they have conceded in each of the last 4 games, and Newcastle have scored in 3 of their last 4 games. If anything Fulham are the team in form for CS, but that goes against getting in Dallas/Raphaine and co?

    I think it's the manner of the goals Brighton let in that I have a problem with. The goals conceded against Palace and West Brom wouldn't inspire me with much confidence. Anyone on a free hit and using it, they are worth a punt since there ain't much choice this week. But I wouldn't necessarily say they are a better bet than Fulham or Newcastle either as a punt. Head wrecking fixtures.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    I think it's the manner of the goals Brighton let in that I have a problem with. The goals conceded against Palace and West Brom wouldn't inspire me with much confidence. Anyone on a free hit and using it, they are worth a punt since there ain't much choice this week. But I wouldn't necessarily say they are a better bet than Fulham or Newcastle either as a punt. Head wrecking fixtures.

    Reasonably good team against absolutely awful team is a good punt for me


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    Reasonably good team against absolutely awful team is a good punt for me

    On a free hit, it's worth a punt. Dunk certainly cos he is dangerous from set pieces. They have as much chance of keeping a clean sheet this week as anyone else. But that's about it. Pretty football that ends up going nowhere with a leaky defence at the wrong time. Palace scoring 2 goals playing for a 0-0 a couple of weeks ago pretty much sums it up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    On a free hit, it's worth a punt. Dunk certainly cos he is dangerous from set pieces. They have as much chance of keeping a clean sheet this week as anyone else. But that's about it. Pretty football that ends up going nowhere with a leaky defence at the wrong time. Palace scoring 2 goals playing for a 0-0 a couple of weeks ago pretty much sums it up.

    It’s not going nowhere though. They’ve created the 8th highest xG and just failed to take chances at a rate that outranks any reasonable variance.

    They’re also not a leaky defence. They have the 3rd best xG conceded. Only Chelsea and Man City have given their opponents lesser quality of chances.

    The lazy analysis that someone would say is that they just have bad finishers and a bad keeper. That may even be true to some extent, but that doesn’t even come close to covering how far their actual stats have varied from what their underlyings suggest it should be.

    We’re not talking minor differences. Their xG goal difference is about 19 goals off what it ‘should’ be.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    It’s not going nowhere though. They’ve created the 8th highest xG and just failed to take chances at a rate that outranks any reasonable variance.

    They’re also not a leaky defence. They have the 3rd best xG conceded. Only Chelsea and Man City have given their opponents lesser quality of chances.

    The lazy analysis that someone would say is that they just have bad finishers and a bad keeper. That may even be true to some extent, but that doesn’t even come close to covering how far their actual stats have varied from what their underlyings suggest it should be.

    We’re not talking minor differences. Their xG goal difference is about 19 goals off what it ‘should’ be.

    League tables are not decided by xG, they are decided by results. That Palace match is a snapshot of Brighton. Lots of "shots" that are going wide or over the bar to pad up stats. 2 sucker punch goals conceded. And more importantly, these goals have been going in over the last few weeks.

    If we want to talk about Brighton defenders being a good bet on a free hit (which I agree they are as they are as good an option as anyone this week) is that Newcastle are without arguably their 3 best attacking players in Almiron, Wilson and ASM. And that Brighton beat them 3-0 away earlier in the season.


  • Registered Users Posts: 690 ✭✭✭Newbie20


    It’s worth remembering that Fulham don’t play in GW 33. This is really putting me off taking a chance on Lookman etc this week. I already have plenty City and Spurs players that won’t play in GW 33, I certainly don’t need to be increasing that number.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    League tables are not decided by xG, they are decided by results. That Palace match is a snapshot of Brighton. Lots of "shots" that are going wide or over the bar to pad up stats. 2 sucker punch goals conceded. And more importantly, these goals have been going in over the last few weeks.

    If we want to talk about Brighton defenders being a good bet on a free hit (which I agree they are as they are as good an option as anyone this week) is that Newcastle are without arguably their 3 best attacking players in Almiron, Wilson and ASM. And that Brighton beat them 3-0 away earlier in the season.

    So what do we do instead, transfer in yesterday’s points? I can’t see a successful FPL strategy that does not focus primarily on the underlyings.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    So what do we do instead, transfer in yesterday’s points? I can’t see a successful FPL strategy that does not focus primarily on the underlyings.

    No, you are ignoring the main point here. Newcastle are poor because they have absolutely nothing up front. More than half their goals have come from the 3 players I mentioned. All 3 are injured.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    No, you are ignoring the main point here. Newcastle are poor because they have absolutely nothing up front. More than half their goals have come from the 3 players I mentioned. All 3 are injured.
    How can I be ignoring the main point? Someone asked why the fascination with Brighton, I explained why. You came back and said that you thought Brighton were a good punt this week but that you wouldn't necessarily say they are better than Fulham or Newcastle as a punt.


    I explained to you why I think they're a much better punt (and yes Newcastle being even worse attacking than usual is part of that), which surely is the main point.


    Surely the exact reason we spend so much time combing over stats like touches in the box, and looking at heatmaps is because these are the kind of stats which are much more repeatable than goals, which often only happen once if at all a game.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    How can I be ignoring the main point? Someone asked why the fascination with Brighton, I explained why. You came back and said that you thought Brighton were a good punt this week but that you wouldn't necessarily say they are better than Fulham or Newcastle as a punt.


    I explained to you why I think they're a much better punt (and yes Newcastle being even worse attacking than usual is part of that), which surely is the main point.


    Surely the exact reason we spend so much time combing over stats like touches in the box, and looking at heatmaps is because these are the kind of stats which are much more repeatable than goals, which often only happen once if at all a game.

    The great thing is everyone has a different opinion. I play the game using stats but I also use the eye test. I don't rate them going forward at all. What does the heatmap tell you? When they played Palace the ball was permanently in Palace's half but how many clear cut chances did they create? The same when they played Villa.

    Brighton have scored 1 more goal than Newcastle this season. 28 matches played. With Newcastle missing their best attacking players for a fair few matches this season. Averaging pretty much 1 goal a match for both teams.
    Must not lose match for both teams.

    To be honest I wouldn't be surprised by any result. That goes for the other 3 matches this weekend.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    When they played Palace the ball was permanently in Palace's half but how many clear cut chances did they create?.
    2.59 expected goals worth of chances.


    There is a chart in the below which denotes the area and quality of each chance. One of the key things to note is that the vast majority appear to have been chances from inside the box also.



    https://understat.com/match/14677


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,662 ✭✭✭sheroman01


    Had 7 players. Now 5, if Son and Bamford are out. Have 2FT's at least. Will try hold on to the 2 injured lads, in case they make an appearance.

    Mitchel and Cancelo out possibly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    2.59 expected goals worth of chances.


    There is a chart in the below which denotes the area and quality of each chance. One of the key things to note is that the vast majority appear to have been chances from inside the box also.



    https://understat.com/match/14677

    I just don't remember that many good chances Brighton had from that match. Will have to look back on it. The one thing I took from it was how badly they defended both Palace goals. Looking at that site, they had similar stats for Fulham and Villa. You wonder do they panic when they get in and around the box.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,127 ✭✭✭NabyLadistheman


    For those of us not using FH Leeds seem a good option to have 3 players. They play Sheff Utd in GW30 as well


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    I just don't remember that many good chances Brighton had from that match. Will have to look back on it. The one thing I took from it was how badly they defended both Palace goals. Looking at that site, they had similar stats for Fulham and Villa. You wonder do they panic when they get in and around the box.
    I actually haven't watched the game in question. That is why I find stats like that so useful. Means I don't have to watch the games that I don't have any footballing interest in, and still get the output from a FPL perspective.


    And from following those kinds of stats so closely, I can tell you that those kinds of regressions from the expected stats are way too big to just be 'bad finishers, this will repeat'. Yes, there clearly was some bad finishing on display, but the luck variable is far too big for these stats too repeat consistently, unless of course their underlying stats start to regress too


    Could they still mess it up on Saturday? Absolutely. But there is much more to suggest they won't, then most of the teams who have a game in 29 with their respective fixtures.


    They're the number 1 team this week for me. The gap between the other 6 teams that play each other isn't too big really. Especially with Son out and Lamela suspended.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    I actually haven't watched the game in question. That is why I find stats like that so useful. Means I don't have to watch the games that I don't have any footballing interest in, and still get the output from a FPL perspective.


    And from following those kinds of stats so closely, I can tell you that those kinds of regressions from the expected stats are way too big to just be 'bad finishers, this will repeat'. Yes, there clearly was some bad finishing on display, but the luck variable is far too big for these stats too repeat consistently, unless of course their underlying stats start to regress too


    Could they still mess it up on Saturday? Absolutely. But there is much more to suggest they won't, then most of the teams who have a game in 29 with their respective fixtures.


    They're the number 1 team this week for me. The gap between the other 6 teams that play each other isn't too big really. Especially with Son out and Lamela suspended.

    I'm finding it very difficult to motivate myself for this week without my free hit. I have 7 players including Bamford and 2 free transfers. I don't have Son so at least I don't have to worry about that. I would put in Dunk but I would be committing to a potential bench boost in GW30 that involves me taking him out for someone else. Really need Bamford to be fine for that to work.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    I'm finding it very difficult to motivate myself for this week without my free hit. I have 7 players including Bamford and 2 free transfers. I don't have Son so at least I don't have to worry about that. I would put in Dunk but I would be committing to a potential bench boost in GW30 that involves me taking him out for someone else. Really need Bamford to be fine for that to work.

    My opinion on this week is that without the FH there aren’t that many players you bring in with a transfer that you’re delighted to have a few weeks later.

    Of course it’s easier, if you have a wildcard in the pocket that you’re planning to use to do a hard reset on all the DGW/Blank GW tinkering that has taken our teams away from our preferred 11 to a very fixture centric team that I’m sure we all have depending on our varying strategies


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,222 ✭✭✭✭Father Hernandez


    For those of us not using FH Leeds seem a good option to have 3 players. They play Sheff Utd in GW30 as well

    I've already brought Dunk in but agree.

    Will be bringing in Raphinha for Gundogan and maybe Dallas for Holgate for -8. Raphinha has a huge ceiling and will get double digit points at least once more this season IMO.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭claw


    CSF wrote: »
    My opinion on this week is that without the FH there aren’t that many players you bring in with a transfer that you’re delighted to have a few weeks later.

    Of course it’s easier, if you have a wildcard in the pocket that you’re planning to use to do a hard reset on all the DGW/Blank GW tinkering that has taken our teams away from our preferred 11 to a very fixture centric team that I’m sure we all have depending on our varying strategies

    Used my wildcard a few weeks ago. I gambled on Villa-Everton being played in GW28 so I have Digne and DCL, along with Cancelo, Gundo, Dias, Bruno and Salah who have no match this week. Looking at the way it is going it will be two City players going out probably.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,379 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    claw wrote: »
    I'm finding it very difficult to motivate myself for this week without my free hit. I have 7 players including Bamford and 2 free transfers. I don't have Son so at least I don't have to worry about that. I would put in Dunk but I would be committing to a potential bench boost in GW30 that involves me taking him out for someone else. Really need Bamford to be fine for that to work.

    I'm the same, even if I had FH I wouldn't be confident of breaking 40 points


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,705 ✭✭✭✭Ace2007


    Based on injures and ownership - it would be safe to say that Kane will be the stand out captain choice? Is the best play therefore to captain him on FH, and hope to make up ground elsewhere?


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,024 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    claw wrote: »
    Used my wildcard a few weeks ago. I gambled on Villa-Everton being played in GW28 so I have Digne and DCL, along with Cancelo, Gundo, Dias, Bruno and Salah who have no match this week. Looking at the way it is going it will be two City players going out probably.
    I kind of gambled similarly with my transfers (not with a wildcard though) and have 3 Everton and 3 Villa in my team so eh I kinda need that double to happen in 30 now so that I can wildcard to a team that doesnt include 6 of those in GW31.


    I mean I'll do that wildcard anyway really, but it would be nice not to lose out on the doubles when doing so.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,824 ✭✭✭ShagNastii


    I haven’t had Martinez all year (been just as successful with other keepers).

    To cover the AV influx, is a Villa defender a must this week?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 914 ✭✭✭JPup


    ShagNastii wrote: »
    I haven’t had Martinez all year (been just as successful with other keepers).

    To cover the AV influx, is a Villa defender a must this week?

    No I wouldn't say so. See earlier discussion around triple Brighton!

    If you are thinking just this week, then I wouldn't particularly look at Villa's defence. Even without Son, Spurs will be dangerous.


Advertisement