When preparing for fantasy football drafts, I have a small outline that I consider my ideology for drafting......
1) In the early rounds (roughly rounds 1 & 2 or 1, 2 & 3) draft high floors, dependable players
2) Pick value, let everyone else make mistakes and you pick up the value left ........having no plan is better than having a plan as things happen that are hard to anticipate
3) At the end of the draft, pick players who will either make a big impact or will be easy to cut, fungible, but potentially potent........
The reason I emphasis these points is that over and above the projections I will use to calculate players values, these 3 guidelines help me to manage risk effectively. With Point 1, I am trying to avoid losing the league, taking safe players, with reasonable injury histories, players that might not be the #1 pick in the near future, but are likely to remain close to this years draft position in future drafts.
Point 2 is basically to remind myself to go with the flow and allow the market to provide opportunities. It is a point that many people have issues with as they like to have a plan of what positions they will draft when and who will be on their team..........not following #2 often ends up costing more than helping..............you might like a certain player and draft that player too early, you might panic during a run, etc..........no need to paint yourself in a corner early.
Point 3 is another that I see as rarely used........in the last third of your draft, you should be selecting the obligatory, K, TE & DEF, as well as players who will either be cut, or make a big difference in your league. In this years draft there are a ton of rookie or 2nd year runningbacks that will either be the starter shortly into the season, get a share of the carries as the #2 or be in prime position to start should an injury prone starter go down. Constantly I see the old stand by wide receiver with very low ceiling being drafted ahead of the high risk high reward rb.........remember, you are buying lottery tix at the end of the draft.
keep these points in mind when undertaking your next draft....
Monday, August 31, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Non-Diversified Portfolios?
I have recently been listening to rotowire's Fantasy Football podcasts with Chris Liss. I find Chris to be incredibly knowledgeable and often use many of his ideas and thought processes, but I find this statement from his recent blog named My Portfolio to be flawed
"I've drafted six leagues over the last couple months, and figured I'd put them up side by side to see how the portfolio looks as a whole. As you'll see there's a lot of overlap, and that's by design - both because I like the guys I like, and because it's far better to have a big stake in a few players than a small stake in everyone in the entire league - in which case, you're always rooting for and against everyone."
There is significant downside risk to this idea, especially if the big stake you have is in players at the top of the draft. With Injuries playing a large part in fantasy football, taking a big stake in a few players could crush many of your teams. In this example, Liss has Pierre Thomas as his #1 RB in 4 of his 6 leagues, so he is putting lots of risk into the fact that this barely proven RB is going to 1 - Stay Healthy, 2 - Continue to be the primary back throughout the season. I don't think this is the optimal idea when it comes to fantasy leagues in which you believe you have an edge, I think more diversification is ideal. If you play this many leagues and don't believe you have an edge then by all means go ahead and blast away at loading up on a single player, but if that is the case, I have to ask why you would be in that many leagues to begin with.
Don't get me wrong, I think in the later rounds, when you are buying lottery tix with a smaller shot at breaking out, it is fine to have a bigger share of the same players, because of the positive effective of holding one of these breakout candidates, because the downside risk is almost non-existant..........so go ahead and grab Chris Henry in every league and LeSean McCoy in every league............but at the top, if you play to play 6 leagues and draft a top receiver in the 1st round of each, I would suggest an even spread of Fitz, Moss and AJ.............but that is just me.
"I've drafted six leagues over the last couple months, and figured I'd put them up side by side to see how the portfolio looks as a whole. As you'll see there's a lot of overlap, and that's by design - both because I like the guys I like, and because it's far better to have a big stake in a few players than a small stake in everyone in the entire league - in which case, you're always rooting for and against everyone."
There is significant downside risk to this idea, especially if the big stake you have is in players at the top of the draft. With Injuries playing a large part in fantasy football, taking a big stake in a few players could crush many of your teams. In this example, Liss has Pierre Thomas as his #1 RB in 4 of his 6 leagues, so he is putting lots of risk into the fact that this barely proven RB is going to 1 - Stay Healthy, 2 - Continue to be the primary back throughout the season. I don't think this is the optimal idea when it comes to fantasy leagues in which you believe you have an edge, I think more diversification is ideal. If you play this many leagues and don't believe you have an edge then by all means go ahead and blast away at loading up on a single player, but if that is the case, I have to ask why you would be in that many leagues to begin with.
Don't get me wrong, I think in the later rounds, when you are buying lottery tix with a smaller shot at breaking out, it is fine to have a bigger share of the same players, because of the positive effective of holding one of these breakout candidates, because the downside risk is almost non-existant..........so go ahead and grab Chris Henry in every league and LeSean McCoy in every league............but at the top, if you play to play 6 leagues and draft a top receiver in the 1st round of each, I would suggest an even spread of Fitz, Moss and AJ.............but that is just me.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Poker - Balanced Play
I would consider my blog to be more of an intermediate gambling blog, you have to at least know a little bit about each situation to grasp the ideas in this blog.
Here is something that is more advanced and I am blatantly stealing it from Bart Hanson's Podcast "Deuce Plays" which is on www.deucescracked.com, a training site, but the podcast is free. Bart used to be the man on his podcast Cash Plays that was on PokerRoad, but he moved to Deuces for a more financially rewarding deal. Anywho, his podcast is the absolute best on the web. The focus is mainly cash games, but I would more call it an intellectual take on poker. The podcast is NOT math heavy, which makes it an easy listen and you often pick up some golden ideas with each podcast.
Balanced Play, was his topic at the start of a podcast that featured Shaun Deeb (this podcast actually dealt with tournament play, but that's neither here nor there). Quickly, balanced play is when you play different hands in the same manner or the same hands differently, confused yet? Basically, you play in a fashion that theoretically extends your ranges for situations, ie, usually upfront in a cash game you would raise the top 3% of hands, but occassionally, you might raise a suited connector for balance. Same thing flop, turn or river play, you throw in some plays that aren't your usual play to balance and add doubt to your opponents about your play.
Hanson told a story of a hand he played in a live game in which based on his opponents unbalanced play, he had an easy river decision, in what looked like a difficult spot. He talked about how against unbalanced players, you can play a couple different situations similarly because they are always doing the same thing. Another point he made was that depending on your game, you don't need to be balanced to be successful. This is the point I loved......
When playing in a game with good, thinking and attentive players, balanced play is important, you need to have your opponents guessing as to what your range of hands is......on the other hand and more importantly for 99% of us who are playing poker............you never need to balance your play when playing against players that are strictly recreational and won't think too deeply into the game, you just make the best plays (equity-wise) possible and live with the results.
Remember, thinking (balancing) is only important if others are also thinking. If they aren't just think about the best equity play and execute it. Keep It Simple Stupid, when applicable.
Here is something that is more advanced and I am blatantly stealing it from Bart Hanson's Podcast "Deuce Plays" which is on www.deucescracked.com, a training site, but the podcast is free. Bart used to be the man on his podcast Cash Plays that was on PokerRoad, but he moved to Deuces for a more financially rewarding deal. Anywho, his podcast is the absolute best on the web. The focus is mainly cash games, but I would more call it an intellectual take on poker. The podcast is NOT math heavy, which makes it an easy listen and you often pick up some golden ideas with each podcast.
Balanced Play, was his topic at the start of a podcast that featured Shaun Deeb (this podcast actually dealt with tournament play, but that's neither here nor there). Quickly, balanced play is when you play different hands in the same manner or the same hands differently, confused yet? Basically, you play in a fashion that theoretically extends your ranges for situations, ie, usually upfront in a cash game you would raise the top 3% of hands, but occassionally, you might raise a suited connector for balance. Same thing flop, turn or river play, you throw in some plays that aren't your usual play to balance and add doubt to your opponents about your play.
Hanson told a story of a hand he played in a live game in which based on his opponents unbalanced play, he had an easy river decision, in what looked like a difficult spot. He talked about how against unbalanced players, you can play a couple different situations similarly because they are always doing the same thing. Another point he made was that depending on your game, you don't need to be balanced to be successful. This is the point I loved......
When playing in a game with good, thinking and attentive players, balanced play is important, you need to have your opponents guessing as to what your range of hands is......on the other hand and more importantly for 99% of us who are playing poker............you never need to balance your play when playing against players that are strictly recreational and won't think too deeply into the game, you just make the best plays (equity-wise) possible and live with the results.
Remember, thinking (balancing) is only important if others are also thinking. If they aren't just think about the best equity play and execute it. Keep It Simple Stupid, when applicable.
Friday, August 14, 2009
In contention - what to do now?
Okay, lets assume you are close, but not quite in first..........this is often the time to get very aggressive, mainly because your equity is considerably larger by increasing your chances of winning vs finishing in the lower money positions.
1) Be aggressive. If you have to trade Prince Fielder for Michael Bourn because picking up 20 SB's in the 2nd half gives you an outside shot at winning, then you should do it. If you desperately need pitching, go give up a top hitter and make sure you get it. The worst thing a team in the lower money positions can do, is sit back and not take shots at winning. Do not assume your team will suddenly jump up and take the lead, unless you have evidence to believe this can actually happen....ie injuries or slumps from major players
2) Leverage the waiver wire. In some leagues, you don't need pay for moves, so this play can work and really is a solid idea for teams of every place. Prime examples/ Assume you are close in the counting stats in Hitting, but your BA is dead last by a mile, you can now churn players on Monday and Thursday (assuming your league has daily transactions) and catch up in counting stats by using many more at bats. Same thing in pitching if your ratios stink, you can pick up Wins and K's by streaming pitchers.
3) Analyze the teams ahead of you and see where there is potential for catching up, not just in the standings, but look at places where their team will likely be susceptible.......are they an older team? did they have a young overachieving team in the first half? You can sometimes draw conclusions based on this. In one league i was in, I saw a team that I trailed in SB's (and we were neck and neck for 1st) had a player who was now injured who provided a big chunk of steals, so they were susceptible, so it made sense for me to deal a good player to get a player that got SB's. These little windows of value may be small, but no stone should be left unturned.
In the end, teams in the lower money position should be a very aggressive while minimizing their downside risk to falling out of the money. Certainly a tough position.
1) Be aggressive. If you have to trade Prince Fielder for Michael Bourn because picking up 20 SB's in the 2nd half gives you an outside shot at winning, then you should do it. If you desperately need pitching, go give up a top hitter and make sure you get it. The worst thing a team in the lower money positions can do, is sit back and not take shots at winning. Do not assume your team will suddenly jump up and take the lead, unless you have evidence to believe this can actually happen....ie injuries or slumps from major players
2) Leverage the waiver wire. In some leagues, you don't need pay for moves, so this play can work and really is a solid idea for teams of every place. Prime examples/ Assume you are close in the counting stats in Hitting, but your BA is dead last by a mile, you can now churn players on Monday and Thursday (assuming your league has daily transactions) and catch up in counting stats by using many more at bats. Same thing in pitching if your ratios stink, you can pick up Wins and K's by streaming pitchers.
3) Analyze the teams ahead of you and see where there is potential for catching up, not just in the standings, but look at places where their team will likely be susceptible.......are they an older team? did they have a young overachieving team in the first half? You can sometimes draw conclusions based on this. In one league i was in, I saw a team that I trailed in SB's (and we were neck and neck for 1st) had a player who was now injured who provided a big chunk of steals, so they were susceptible, so it made sense for me to deal a good player to get a player that got SB's. These little windows of value may be small, but no stone should be left unturned.
In the end, teams in the lower money position should be a very aggressive while minimizing their downside risk to falling out of the money. Certainly a tough position.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
