Thoughts on owning linemates

[ericdaoust]

This. I've heard arguments that have led me to at least consider teammates as a factor in H2H (I haven't played in a H2H league ever), but still, why would you pass on a better player for a lesser talented player? Even players on the same team have up and down streaks, injuries, etc. Coaches rarely keep lines together for very long, as long as they are both on the PP, who cares what line they play on!

I've always considered the linemate factor to be a tiebreaker between nearly identical players. Nothing more than that. I've had a ton of success in H2H despite never giving it much thought.

[rataylor22]

This. I've heard arguments that have led me to at least consider teammates as a factor in H2H (I haven't played in a H2H league ever), but still, why would you pass on a better player for a lesser talented player? Even players on the same team have up and down streaks, injuries, etc. Coaches rarely keep lines together for very long, as long as they are both on the PP, who cares what line they play on!

I've always considered the linemate factor to be a tiebreaker between nearly identical players. Nothing more than that. I've had a ton of success in H2H despite never giving it much thought.

I mean this is mostly correct. You shouldn't take Hornqvist over Perry because you have Crosby. But when comparing 2 equal value players, I'll take the combo over the split every time.

[ericdaoust]

I mean this is mostly correct. You shouldn't take Hornqvist over Perry because you have Crosby. But when comparing 2 equal value players, I'll take the combo over the split every time.

Sure, that works (assuming the lines stay together, which is rarely the case) but I wouldn't lose much sleep over it and I would not reach in any way to acquire Hornqvist.

[rataylor22]

Sure, that works (assuming the lines stay together, which is rarely the case) but I wouldn't lose much sleep over it and I would not reach in any way to acquire Hornqvist.

Ugh. Like is it impossible to use names as an example without someone taking the statement to mean literally that player.

Want me to link 10 years of data showing Crosby-Kunitz, Getz-Perry, Benn-Seguin, Sedin-Sedin, Giroux-Voracek, Lecavelier-St. Louis, etc. consistently stayed together over long stretches. Jesus, take an example for what it is, an example.

[Pengwin7]

I use a dice theory for the concept of owning linemates.

Say you are playing a game of dice, combined total of two dice. Highest score wins.
You have two options.
You are competing against the dice scores of 11 other people (i.e. 12 person league).

Option #1: Roll two dice. Your score is total of the two dice.
Option #2: Roll one die & double that score.

Which option do you choose?
Think about where the "prizes" are in fantasy hockey - and it may help your answer.

[Big Ev]

I use a dice theory for the concept of owning linemates.

Say you are playing a game of dice, combined total of two dice. Highest score wins.
You have two options.
You are competing against the dice scores of 11 other people (i.e. 12 person league).

Option #1: Roll two dice. Your score is total of the two dice.
Option #2: Roll one die & double that score.

Which option do you choose?
Think about where the "prizes" are in fantasy hockey - and it may help your answer.

wut

[roberto_alomar]

wut

Read this.. cant stop laughing

[rataylor22]

I use a dice theory for the concept of owning linemates.

Say you are playing a game of dice, combined total of two dice. Highest score wins.
You have two options.
You are competing against the dice scores of 11 other people (i.e. 12 person league).

Option #1: Roll two dice. Your score is total of the two dice.
Option #2: Roll one die & double that score.

Which option do you choose?
Think about where the "prizes" are in fantasy hockey - and it may help your answer.

wut

I understand the theory, I just don't understand how it applies here, or which situation is which, or how they're relatable lol. I also don't know which side you would choose based on the prizes of fantasy hockey. I assume the roll one die and double is the combo, and it is also the more likely way to get 12 (needing to roll one 6 instead of two), but I dunno.

[LawMan]

I am on the “put no stock in linemates” side of things. If everything else was dead equal I’d likely pick against the line mates simply because my league is daily starts and I know teammates will always play the same night whereas non-teammates have fewer conflicts.

FWIW, look at it this way. Say you consider Gaudreau and Perry approximately equal (points only). At the end of the season, they probably finish with around the same points. In H2H, Last night, with a Getz-Perry combo you get 9 points. With a Getz-Gaudreau combo, you get 5. The 9 points is more likely to win you your week than the 5 points will. Next week, Gaudreau could get 4 points and Getz and Perry could each get 1. With a Getz-Perry combo, you only get 2 points. With a Getz-Gaudreau combo, you only get 5 points. Neither is likely enough to win your week. So after 2 weeks, with Getz-Perry, you're 1-1. With Getz-Gaudreau, you're 0-2. Reasons why combos are more valuable in H2H formats. Your stars slump and boom at the same time. Where as if you have 2 equal level players that aren't linemates, their slumps can offset weeks and lose you more weeks than the combo would.

This whole theory is based upon the assumption that a high correlation of points between 2 players will cause you to win more weeks than you lose, I don’t see how you can make this argument. You argument states that you’d go 0-2 without the combo and go 1-1 with it but without evidence it seems equally likely you can go 2-0 with the combo. Having line mates, who presumably produce together, will increase your swings, which should draw your head-to-head record more to the middle as it creates big wins in some weeks and big losses in others. Whereas the non-combo creates a steadier flow of points but not huge wins and thus a lot of close scoreboards. The result: if the rest of your team is better than average I would suggest you’ll do better without the combo because you win more close games than you lose, if the rest of your team is below average you will do better with the combo as you’ll need their big weeks to secure victories and suck it up and take the hit on their cold weeks.

[LawMan]

I use a dice theory for the concept of owning linemates.

Say you are playing a game of dice, combined total of two dice. Highest score wins.
You have two options.
You are competing against the dice scores of 11 other people (i.e. 12 person league).

Option #1: Roll two dice. Your score is total of the two dice.
Option #2: Roll one die & double that score.

Which option do you choose?
Think about where the "prizes" are in fantasy hockey - and it may help your answer.

Fantasy hockey prizes are top 2-3 in a 12 team league thus 4th-12 is worth the same and you should take a high risk/high reward approach as it increase your chance of finishing both top-3 and bottom-3. With 12 people competing on a dice roll you're going to need likely 10 or better to come first. The odds of rolling 10, 11 or 12 are 6/36 = 1 in 6 the odds of 5 or 6 (doubled to 10/12) is 2/6 or 1/3 thus take the single die roll and double it (this is of course assuming all the other people have to roll 2 dice, if all get the choice in game theory they all pick a single die and no one has an advantage over any other person.)

The problem with this example is again it ignores the rest of your team, and your skills in determining what players give your team a better chance to win. As I said above if your skill is average to below average you probably need more than your share of luck to come top-3 (and thus win the $$) in that case going boom/bust i.e. linemates is not a bad idea. Conversely, if you're much better than average in picking players you may be better off taking the lower risk option and taking the non-linemates thus if one is above expectation and the other below you get average return, which combined with the rest of your above average team puts you in the $$.