11/23/01
Email Andy
|
|
I was arguing with a friend the other day. He was debating a Brett
Favre / Aaron Brooks trade, and pointing out the easier matchups
Brooks and his Saints would face the rest of the way. "Because
I assure you, and most experts would agree, that fantasy football
is 75% matchups."
After we'd fought each other into a bloody mess and then limped
home to stitch up our respective wounds, I thought about what he'd
said. Was he right? Do most people believe that? Is fantasy football
75 percent matchups?
Since this isn't Math class, and even if it were any such analysis
of fractions and player projections would probably be both impossible
and in any case excruciating, there may not be a definitive answer
that can be calculated. But short of coming to blows, a number of
arguments can be made.
- The Baltimore Ravens haven't allowed a running back to rush
for 100 yards in more than two full seasons. They don't give
up a lot of rushing touchdowns, either. Are the Ravens a bad
matchup for your running back, whoever he may be? All signs
point to yes.
Still, that old "matchups" argument was supposed to
extend to quarterbacks against the Ravens' fearsome defense, too,
which is why in Week 5, all the experts recommended benching Favre
against them. Three TDs and 337 passing yards later, I was glad
I didn't listen. Bench a RB against a D like the Ravens, okay.
But even Tim Couch has had two nice statistical games against
them this year, so don't be afraid to ignore the "matchup"
gurus to play your QB.
- The Rams offense shrugs off great defenses. Oh sure, there
are momentary glitches. But when Miami traveled to St. Louis in
Week 3, a lot of experts advised benching guys like Kurt Warner
and Torry Holt, who would surely be shut down by Miami's tough
secondary. Four Warner TDs and 328 yards later, the experts were
wrong again.
- Never bench your studs. Are there exceptions? Yes. (Running
backs against the Ravens defense, for example.) But they are
few and far between. This is one of those fantasy sports catch
phrases that usually battles with any statement about the importance
of matchups. It is the kind of thing people subscribe to when
it suits them - but give them a slightly fearsome Jerome Bettis
vs. Tampa Bay matchup, and they often back off it. Bettis' day
at Tampa: 143 yards, 2 total TDs.
"Fantasy Football is 75 percent matchups"? "Never
bench your studs"? People could go round and round on the
debate and never find an answer that they're willing to stick
by all the time.
Here's my answer. I don't bench my studs, regardless of matchups.
Have I ever regretted it? Sure.
But in my years of playing fantasy football, I've never regretted
playing Brett Favre, Curtis Martin, or Terrell Owens on the occasions
they had a bad day one-tenth (no this still isn't Math class)
as much as I've regretted benching them for a lesser player who
has a better matchup. Sometimes David Patten has a better game
than Torry Holt. But would you feel as bad wasting a great Patten
day as wasting a great Holt day? Or one from Favre, Martin, Or
Owens? I know I won't.
Want to fight about it? Bring your matchups. I'll bring stars.
And I think I'll win more than 75 percent of the time.
:: comments to andy
richardson
|
|
