carlcon wrote: » Strikers score the most points. You only have 3 precious striker spots. Do you really want to dedicate 1/3 of those spots to someone you never heard of? Be cheap elsehwere. Danny Graham for 6m is a steal. Rangel Baines Vermaelen Evra Ivanovic This defence is insanely expensive. At most, you should have Rangel and 2 of the others. Then 2 4m or 4.5m defenders.
carlcon wrote: » Defenders give the best value when you look at those who scored in the last 2 weeks. That's not a fair use of stats at all. Those defenders who have scored thus far won't score likewise over a season. You're taking the best outliers over 2 weeks and predicting they'll keep form. They won't. If you can manage to swap and change your defenders each week, regularly predicting which ones will score goals and get assists, that's the only way you'll get more value from defenders. But if you can do that, I'd focus on the bookies instead. But seriously, they key is to find cheapish defenders who rotate home/away well and pick up clean sheets. You're much more likely to find a cheap striker or midfielder who scores or assists 4 or 5 times in 5 games than a defender who gets a clean sheet in 4 of those 5 games. You can get a maximum of one clean sheet per game - there's no limit on goals/assists.
blatantrereg wrote: » I dont really want to be having this conversation, because I've already had it a few pages back on this very thread Of course it's fair use of the stats - I said it supported the theory so far this season and it does. The two seasons I played this game before, the end of season stats showed the same thing. Whether or not you agree with the strategy, it's not a crazy approach. It's my opinion and how I choose to play the game. I've used it before, and been happy with the results. Not saying anyone else has to agree with me or do likewise.
carlcon wrote: » Nobody is trying to take away your opinion. "Investing so much in defenders is not worth it" is not just an opinion though, since we have seasons and seasons of evidence to prove it. You've made a team with three 7m defenders, two 6.5m, and a 5m. That's 39m. 39% of your budget on 33% of your team, which is the lowest scoring part of any team. Throw in the keepers and you've got 10.5m more invested in the lowest scoring half of your team. Or to be more precise, 49.5% of your budget spent on the lowest scoring 46.5% of your team. Even though these players tend to come cheaper than the rest. To do that, you've thrown away a striker spot and made a MF with only 3 reliable players. Any half-competent player will beat you if they invest 10-13m less in defence by looking at some very nice defenders from Newcastle, Stoke, Swansea, etc, and have a 3rd striker and 4th midfielder. I know you think it's "just an opinion", but the truth is that some opinions are wrong, and the expensive defence route is the wrong route to take if it means losing a competent striker and midfielder. If you're stuck in your ways and don't want to change things, that's 100% OK. Different ideas are a good thing to have on a discussion forum. But the "it's fair use of stats" line doesn't cut it. 38 weeks of stats last season are not blown away by 2 weeks this season. And even if we were going by this last 2 weeks, we'd see midfield is actually where most points have come from so far, not defence - both in totals and value. So why not 5 expensive MF's instead? Five 9m MF's will still be cheaper than your back 7. (I'm not saying anyone should do that, by the way, just showing how silly it is to think this way).
qwabercd wrote: » I think what he's trying to say is, two gameweeks is not a sufficient sample size to back up any stats. And it's not.
carlcon wrote: » Nobody is trying to take away your opinion. "Investing so much in defenders is not worth it" is not just an opinion though, since we have seasons and seasons of evidence to prove it.
You've made a team with three 7m defenders, two 6.5m, and a 5m. That's 39m. 39% of your budget on 33% of your team, which is the lowest scoring part of any team. Throw in the keepers and you've got 10.5m more invested in the lowest scoring half of your team. Or to be more precise, 49.5% of your budget spent on the lowest scoring 46.5% of your team. Even though these players tend to come cheaper than the rest.
To do that, you've thrown away a striker spot and made a MF with only 3 reliable players.
Any half-competent player will beat you if they invest 10-13m less in defence by looking at some very nice defenders from Newcastle, Stoke, Swansea, etc, and have a 3rd striker and 4th midfielder.
I know you think it's "just an opinion", but the truth is that some opinions are wrong, and the expensive defence route is the wrong route to take if it means losing a competent striker and midfielder.
If you're stuck in your ways and don't want to change things, that's 100% OK. Different ideas are a good thing to have on a discussion forum.
But the "it's fair use of stats" line doesn't cut it. 38 weeks of stats last season are not blown away by 2 weeks this season. And even if we were going by this last 2 weeks, we'd see midfield is actually where most points have come from so far, not defence - both in totals and value. So why not 5 expensive MF's instead? Five 9m MF's will still be cheaper than your back 7. (I'm not saying anyone should do that, by the way, just showing how silly it is to think this way).
Shane732 wrote: » What's your team name? Out of interest I'd like to see how you fair.
blatantrereg wrote: » Is he a worse choice than any other 4.5m forward? I dont even know who he is - I just got him because the numbers seemed the best for anyone in the position and price range. He's just there as a third sub.
shadowcomplex wrote: » I am very close to having this ,opinions please
Kerrydude1981 wrote: » Looks pretty good,anything left in the bank?
blatantrereg wrote: » Anyway I think I've nothing more to add to talking about the defence-oriented strategy. Let's agree to differ
bohsman wrote: » I have gone for the exact opposite strategy to you for similar reasons, we are both on opposite sides of the general consensus, will be interesting to see who comes out on top. Begovic Green Rafael Figueroa Cuellar Reid Clyne Hazard Bale Kagawa Yaya McClean Torres Tevez Pog I have basically taken a very strong position on my line that attacking midfielders will be by far the best bang for buck this season. Cazorla will be coming in for either Yaya or McClean at some point, all about the timing.
shadowcomplex wrote: » Swap Bale for Carzola Keep yaya Swap McClean for Michu
bezuaua wrote: » Greetings Fantasy Players! This is my 1st post and I would really like some feedback on my actual team (wildcard already played..) and plans to go with: DDG BEGOVIC CUELLAR ZABALETA CLYNE HARTE DEMEL MICHU ARTETA HAZARD BALE KACANIKLIC VAN PERSIE TEVEZ GRAHAM Planning on keep the free tranfer and after the international break (injuries apart..) go with: DDG for JAASKELAINEN (or green) ARTETA for KAGAWA still keeping enough money to upgrade harte for rafael / tottenham or everton defender Any thoughts?
RB100 wrote: » Yea thats a good plan and if you follow that you will have very solid team. Maybe try to upgrade Demel at some point because if you get Jaas(which would be better option than green as he wont play now that QPR have signed Cesar) tou would have doubled up on West Ham defence.
Shane732 wrote: » Agreed. Baines projected value to price - 18.9 Vermaelen projected value to price - 17.4 Evra projected value to price - 16.5 Evra is a mile down the projected value to price for defenders before you even look at forwards.
SpaceCowb0y wrote: » On that point there, of doubling up on west ham defence, im thinking of getting Vorm in for DDG sometime soon but i already have Michu and Graham, do you reckon that is Swansea overkill?? Still want to get Vorm in as i think at the cheaper price he represents better value then DDG but am seriously considering swapping graham for Petric as there seems to be a bit of a bandwagon around him?
RB100 wrote: » Well the first point about Swansea overkill is a tough one. Even though they have looked very good so far they have played two poor teams. It's hard to know if they will continue the good form and be as good as last season. If you think they will i'd say go for it because Vorm is reliable. But if swansea have a poor week you will suffer because of the 3. As for Graham I have him and I will probably keep him for now anyway. Petric seems like a good player but will Fulham find it hard to score now that Dembele and Dempsey are on the way out? his price has gone up mainly because of his double on the opening day. I would wait for another game and see how he performs and decide after that.
