This forum is archived and no longer active. You can visit us in our Discord Server here!

Interesting to note, Rotoworld has a blurb on ATL that essentially says they're shutting down RBs. Brought this up over at Rotogrinders and some folks commented that it's misleading because ATL has only played teams with a bad running game. When compared to how the backs have faced vs. ATL and everyone else, ATL actually giving up more yardage than the average to these bad backs.

Basically FC ranks ATL 24th against the run this week, not at all scary. Confirming what rotogrinder folks are saying, even when the mainstream stats make it look like a horrible matchup for Ingram and co.

TLDR: Nice job next level evaluation guys!

Appreciate the change, especially factoring in strength of opponent.

Curious how this is calculated. I ask because currently FC (on DK) is listing TJ Yeldon going up against HOU as the 2nd worst defense for a RB this week. On ESPN, through 5 weeks, Houston has given up the 8th most points to RBs (by standard scoring numbers). Scoring settings aside, I'm wondering why there's such a gap between FC's evaluation of the matchup and historical production for the position.

Thanks to his receiving opportunities he scored some fantasy points, but Washington's backfield is a hot mess right now as a three headed monster, and by monster I mean dumpster fire.

That's funny for a guy who's had at least 1pt in every game this season and double digit points weeks 3 and 4 and turning into the clear cut 3rd down back for Washington.

Game flow. Usually RBs/running plays are used more by the winning team- you're ahead, you want to control the clock/time of possession, keep the ball away from your opponent. If you're a losing team good chance you want quick points, more passes, take more shots downfield- running can be less reliable.

Obviously there are exceptions but it's a generally something you want to avoid.

Same goes for Keith Mumphry, Rookie WR for the Texans- I believe.

I've been tinkering with FC at work during my lunch break, setting custom exposures and projections, eliminating certain players from the pool, etc.

I noticed when I go home, and load up FC, the custom projections I set are saved but not the custom exposure values or my revised player pool. I was surprised projection values are saved, so it got me thinking why other settings are not.

Can't find the fella. Currently $3,500 on DK.

Posted Topic: Trial Feedback

1

First weekend using the product and it was intense. I completely underestimated how much time I’d spend tinkering day after day– right up until kick off. I wanted to bring up some issues I had; wondering what could be avoided, what could be changed, and what I have to live with.

==Here's a little background on my process and how it’s influenced my feedback. This is based me wanting to generate a lot of diverse lineups for GPPs==

I started with the QB position, picked a handful I liked, set the sum of their exposures to 100 (e.g. 20% each for 5) and then crunched lineups 100+ deep.

It didn’t take long to realize the global settings weren't very good at building lineups with multiple QB options like I wanted. Assuming I typically didn’t want more than 30-50% exposure to most players, FC seemingly used all my exposure of those top players on one or two of the “best” QBs leaving scraps for the other QBs with a lower projection who I felt had upside/contrarian play.

For example, prior to kick off, Tyrod Taylor and Datlon were top value plays week 4 while guys like McCown, Brees and Haselbeck were not. Lets pretend that regardless of how bad it might have been to use any of those last 3 on paper, I wanted to generate lineups with them. If I was really keen on Julio Jones Wk4 and wanted him on 50% of my teams I would set his projection high enough to make him an auto include, but limit his exposure to 50%.

The problem I ran into was the cruncher would see how much better plays Tyrod and Dalton were and use all of Julio’s exposure on lineups with those 2 QBs, and never put him on a lineup with the bottom 3 QBs. I just ran a test with 20% exposure to each of these 5 QBs, and generated 30 lineups. Julio showed up on all of Dalton/Tyrod lineups and half of Brees capping his 50% exposure (never showed up on a Hasselbeck/McCownteam). Ideally what I’d like is Julio to show up on 50% of lineups for each QB.

This led me to start building lineup groups using only one QB at a time. I liked my lineups better, and I started using custom settings based around only that QB. For example, I wanted a group of lineups with Cam Newtown, but i only wanted high exposure to Greg Olsen WK4 if I was playing Cam. When I was happy with my Cam lineups and ready to move on to my next QB I had to lower all my Olsen exposure settings. Then I did some lineups with Bortles and wanted high exposure to Allen Hurns, but again, not as much exposure to Hurns with other QBs. If something came up later and I wanted to scrap my Cam lineups, I’d have to go back and remember to redo my Olsen settings. As you can imagine, juggling between 4-5 QBs lineup tabs, and having custom settings for players based on my QB became a little frustrating.

I’m really torn on this one area. If I build my lineups around mutiple QBs I’m stuck getting an uneven distribution of top players across the top QBs and no ability to customize stats around specific QB combinations. If I build lineups based around only 1 QB it becomes very tedious remembering to set tweak settings as they relate to a specific QB and then having no way to revise that crunch later without starting over. Off the top of my head it feels like linking settings to each quarterback would be very helpful, but maybe that only works with my style of lineup building.


TLDR recommendations:

-QB stacking settings be applied to QBs individually, not globally.

- Ability to save/load multiple custom projections/exposure settings

- A setting that divides exposure to players (non-QBs) evenly across multiple QBs options- not so heavily weighted to the optimal QB lineups (this assumes building lineups using multiple QBs is even good idea).

- A filter for crunched lineups to only see lineups that use a specific player(s)- i.e. show me only my lineups with Julio Jones.

- Ability to trash crunches. I’ve found the best way to get lineups I like is to generate a lot of lineups I don’t like and weed them out. While It’s great I can select which lineups to upload, for organizational purposes I’ve love to keep that list cleaner by deleting crunches I definitely don’t want.

- Ability to combine crunches? Maybe this is what the saved lineup is really for.

- A setting that limits using multiple receivers from the same team. Currently you can set max/min players from a single team, but not set positional limits for a team. This weekend was a perfect example where I was high on the entire ATL offense, and wouldn’t have minded Ryan + Julio + Freeman or Ryan + Hankerson + Freeman, but I didn’t want Julio + Hankerson on the same team, but the cruncher was very keen on pairing those two WRs on the same team.

- Being able to deselect a player simply by clicking on his row, not just his check box, was a constant problem for me. I often found myself excluding a player by accident simply because I didn’t click exactly inside his exposure box. If you really want to keep this feature, maybe make it more obvious the player has been excluded, like set the color to something really obvious.


PIPE DREAMS?:
Manage lineups once they’ve been exported to DK and potentially revise submitted lineups. I found myself missing out on entering some tournaments because they filled up before I was done. I’d love to be able to reserve my spot(s) in a tourney by submitting lineups, but not feel like I have to fight my way through DraftKings terrible lineup interface to make changes.