From my perspective the problem is there are just too many variables at play. Take a "keeper" defender that goes 105, 105, 85 and 85 first 4 games. You would probably keep him. But if he went 105, 85, 85 then would probably would not get the fourth rd 105 because after two 85’s he is out the door.
And that is just you and what is going on in your head (FOMO on the other guy that is knocking it out of the park)without even considering the reason why your selection scored the two 85’s. If that defender was an intercept defender (eg a McGovern type) then did the two 85 games result from the opposition playing small forward with quick entry and chaos balls? That gives no chance for the intercept player. Or was it a change of role for that particular player. Eg I saw an article posted earlier saying Doc was pushing up closer to stoppages and missing out on the easy intercept points. How could anyone have predicted that happening? Or players being forced to play unfriendly SC roles because someone else in their team is injured and they are the cover.
But then you need to watch the game to see these types of scenario unfold and understand how the role of a player has changed or scour the net to get the info. How many games do you want to watch in a weekend? Or read up on results? It becomes brain overload.
I have changed position over the years. I once made a selection and then backed them in even after poor starts, you know the drill, don’t chase points and you spent the pre season doing your research. These days I have almost dropped that. I still do it sometimes for a player but now as soon as I see a player I think has a good role or is a goer, I trade and jump on. The extra trades helps. It backfires sometimes but often it turns out better or at least no worse than holding on to the original pick. And it means a player does not get onto the dreaded “never again list” because you cut them before you get to the point of completely doing your bun at them.
And that is just you and what is going on in your head (FOMO on the other guy that is knocking it out of the park)without even considering the reason why your selection scored the two 85’s. If that defender was an intercept defender (eg a McGovern type) then did the two 85 games result from the opposition playing small forward with quick entry and chaos balls? That gives no chance for the intercept player. Or was it a change of role for that particular player. Eg I saw an article posted earlier saying Doc was pushing up closer to stoppages and missing out on the easy intercept points. How could anyone have predicted that happening? Or players being forced to play unfriendly SC roles because someone else in their team is injured and they are the cover.
But then you need to watch the game to see these types of scenario unfold and understand how the role of a player has changed or scour the net to get the info. How many games do you want to watch in a weekend? Or read up on results? It becomes brain overload.
I have changed position over the years. I once made a selection and then backed them in even after poor starts, you know the drill, don’t chase points and you spent the pre season doing your research. These days I have almost dropped that. I still do it sometimes for a player but now as soon as I see a player I think has a good role or is a goer, I trade and jump on. The extra trades helps. It backfires sometimes but often it turns out better or at least no worse than holding on to the original pick. And it means a player does not get onto the dreaded “never again list” because you cut them before you get to the point of completely doing your bun at them.
