Having 2 WR on the same team (Hill/Waddle) (1 Viewer)

[Panda13]

Any thoughts on this strat? I've never attempted it nor have I been in a league where I've seen this so I'm curious what your guy's thoughts are. I have the 9th pick and I think if Hill falls to me, I could scoop up Waddle with my early 2nd pick.

One could argue this caps your ceiling, but I love the idea of having a WR1 and a borderline WR1 on your team....it would be very consistent. My only concern is Tua....he can never stay healthy. Now Miami has Mike White as their QB2 which I think is an upgrade to Teddy, but I'm still unsure.

Thoughts? If I manage to grab both these guys...do I also take Tua late...?? And maybe pair him up with Geno as insurance?

 

[zamboni]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

In my upcoming keeper draft, I have London and looks like Pitts will be the value pick for me - I won't hesitate to take him if the value is there despite what *appears* to be a low volume passing offense. Things often turn out differently from the way we expect - such as many shying away from the Seattle passing game last year before the season started.

 

[Boston]

I would rather stay away from it (I am really directing that towards my starting line-up) for obvious reasons but that is not set in stone...all depends on the situation.

 

[zamboni]

I would rather stay away from it (I am really directing that towards my starting line-up) for obvious reasons but that is not set in stone...all depends on the situation.

Agree with that - it's a somewhat different calculus owning Hill/Waddle or Chase/Higgins, versus say, McLaurin/Doctson or Deebo/Aiyuk

 

[Boston]

I would rather stay away from it (I am really directing that towards my starting line-up) for obvious reasons but that is not set in stone...all depends on the situation.

Agree with that - it's a somewhat different calculus owning Hill/Waddle or Chase/Higgins, versus say, McLaurin/Doctson or Deebo/Aiyuk

Exactly...also, plus (for me)I play only play Dynasty and both leagues play 3 WRs with two flexes so it is not unusual for this situation to occur but if it was a redraft situation, I would definitely not target two WRs from the same team with my first 2 picks.

 

[SoBeDad]

I don't think White is an upgrade to Teddy. White wasn't the 2nd best QB on the team in minicamp. The verdict on White is still out.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I don't think White is an upgrade to Teddy. White wasn't the 2nd best QB on the team in minicamp. The verdict on White is still out.

For the purpose of WR value, Mike White as a gunslinger is an upgrade to check down Charlie, Teddy Bridgewater.

 

[SoBeDad]

I don't think White is an upgrade to Teddy. White wasn't the 2nd best QB on the team in minicamp. The verdict on White is still out.

For the purpose of WR value, Mike White as a gunslinger is an upgrade to check down Charlie, Teddy Bridgewater.

The longest completion in air yards in Tyreek's career was from check down Teddy. FWIW, Teddy had a better pff grade than White. And White's deep ball metrics haven't bee good.

The first reviews of Mike White in aqua and white have not been good. It's early, but Skylar's playoff game in Buffalo would've been a success if Waddle and others hadn't dropped so many passes and Coach has gotten the play calls in earlier. So, I think the question should be do you trust Sklyar if Tua misses games.

 

[zamboni]

So, I think the question should be do you trust Sklyar if Tua misses games.

I don't think I can trust any QB named Skylar, but I'm old school.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The longest completion in air yards in Tyreek's career was from check down Teddy. FWIW, Teddy had a better pff grade than White. And White's deep ball metrics haven't bee good.

Mike White isn't very good - but I don't take one outlier and create a narrative out of it. I believe we've all seen Bridewater in action long enough to know what he is. If you think he's better for fantasy value of his WRs, I'll let you do so.

The first reviews of Mike White in aqua and white have not been good. It's early, but Skylar's playoff game in Buffalo would've been a success if Waddle and others hadn't dropped so many passes and Coach has gotten the play calls in earlier. So, I think the question should be do you trust Sklyar if Tua misses games.

Once again Mike White isn't very good - but neither is Skylar. I'm guessing Miami wouldn't have made White a priority signing if they were so confident in Skyler - and Buffalo played terrible that game.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I always like to pick the guy who will score me the most points. If we're talking tiebreakers then yeah I might go with a guy on a different team.

 

[Insein]

I've been debating it because where I'm picking I could land Tyreek/Waddle or Aj/Devonta. Bye week would hurt and if the offense gets shut down for a game, you're pretty screwed. But the upside is huge.

 

[Deamon]

I don't think twice about it. They're independent stats/players. Won a league last year with Chase/Higgins and actually enjoyed watching those games a lot.

 

[C-Bound]

Just took Waddle in the 2nd in Underdog's BBM4 tourney. I took Tyreek at 5 overall.

 

[Deamon]

Just took Waddle in the 2nd in Underdog's BBM4 tourney. I took Tyreek at 5 overall.

Nice I like it.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Tua Tagovailoa is still the QB and likely to miss a couple games and that's being optimistic he doesn't sustain another concussion

That's a lot of risk and I like Tyreek Hill in the 1st Rd vs others going around him

 

[Dr. Octopus]

They're independent stats/players.

This part is true - but it ignores they are both dependent on a frail concussion prone QB.

 

[Gally]

I've been debating it because where I'm picking I could land Tyreek/Waddle or Aj/Devonta. Bye week would hurt and if the offense gets shut down for a game, you're pretty screwed. But the upside is huge.

I think it limits upside. The chance both players hit their celing is unlikely. Less likely than two WR's on different teams. It does raise your floor though as it should ensure that you have a solid game out of one of the two if the offense is decent.

ETA: I am speaking to the weekly output. Not yearly.

 

[Gally]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor

What is your opinion in best ball, maybe moreso you would want to diversify?

 

[Gally]

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor

What is your opinion in best ball, maybe moreso you would want to diversify?

I would think so especially with how high you have to take both of them. I also think this particular duo has an added risk of Tua and his concussions missing significant time. There is value in having some floor in best ball situations but I think the draft capital needed to get them may be prohibitiive for me. But I don't mind if Waddle falls a bit.

 

[humpback]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

 

[zamboni]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

True, although I think they are among the very few exceptions here, with perhaps Brown/Smith and Chase/Higgins also in that realm.

 

[Gally]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

Sure. It can happen but I would say it is not likely.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I would rather stay away from it (I am really directing that towards my starting line-up) for obvious reasons but that is not set in stone...all depends on the situation.

Same. I believe it will inherently lead to some give-and-take between them, where it will be difficult for them to consistently have big days simultaneously.

That said, a Tyreek Hill//waddle, or a Ja’Marr chase/tee Higgins combo could certainly pay dividends if those are the best players available when you’re drafting and if wide receiver is a need

My biggest concern for something like that is a “all eggs in the same basket” approach. I typically like to diversify my teams a bit.
That way, should Tua or Joe Burrow respectively get hurt it doesn’t take down 2/3 of my wide receiver corps. AJB/Smith another possibility.

But never say never. If it comes to pass that those are the best players available when it’s my turn to pick, I might just go for it.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

They're independent stats/players.

That's not true. If one is catching a pass or scoring a TD that means, by definition, the other is not.

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays. QB/WR stack is ceiling. Most other combos (QB/RB, RB/RB, WR/WR) are floor.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Most other combos (QB/RB, RB/RB, WR/WR) are floor.

If I recall correctly, I read an article that went over all of those combinations, and the QB/RB stock, and the WR/RB stack didn’t really make much of a difference for the positive or negative.

I think that was a footballguys article.

 

[humpback]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

True, although I think they are among the very few exceptions here, with perhaps Brown/Smith and Chase/Higgins also in that realm.

Sure, but that's what we're talking about here, exceptional #2 WRs. Plus Hill/Waddle is literally in the thread title lol.

 

[Gally]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

True, although I think they are among the very few exceptions here, with perhaps Brown/Smith and Chase/Higgins also in that realm.

Sure, but that's what we're talking about here, exceptional #2 WRs. Plus Hill/Waddle is literally in the thread title lol.

Even with them being exceptional WR's the upside is limited compared to equivalent WR's on different teams.

 

[humpback]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

Sure. It can happen but I would say it is not likely.

But what makes you say that? Hill's best game last year came in Waddle's best game. His 2nd best game was also Waddle's 2nd best game.

I don't think there's any evidence that say Tee Higgins is more likely to blow up in the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Besides, even if it were true, higher variance isn't necessarily a positive.

 

[eighsse2]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

Sure. It can happen but I would say it is not likely.

But what makes you say that? Hill's best game last year came in Waddle's best game. His 2nd best game was also Waddle's 2nd best game.

I don't think there's any evidence that say Tee Higgins is more likely to blow up in the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Besides, even if it were true, higher variance isn't necessarily a positive.

I don't know of any evidence to the positive or the negative, but my expectation would be that Higgins is more likely to blow up the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Maybe only slightly.

 

[Gally]

But what makes you say that? Hill's best game last year came in Waddle's best game. His 2nd best game was also Waddle's 2nd best game.

I don't think there's any evidence that say Tee Higgins is more likely to blow up in the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Besides, even if it were true, higher variance isn't necessarily a positive.

There is only one football. That is the reason I say that. It is more likely that WR's on different teams will have 2 TD+ games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game. I believe math will confirm that.

 

[humpback]

They're independent stats/players.

That's not true. If one is catching a pass or scoring a TD that means, by definition, the other is not.

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays. QB/WR stack is ceiling. Most other combos (QB/RB, RB/RB, WR/WR) are floor.

That's only true for that specific play, and it also holds true for every other player on the team. It also doesn't depend on whether you or someone else has them on their magic football team.

 

[eighsse2]

A similar reason to why, if you draw 10 cards from a deck, you have a better probability of getting at least one A, 2, 3, and 4, versus getting all 4 aces. Obviously there is a lot more going on in football, but that's the baseline reasoning.

 

[humpback]

I don't know of any evidence to the positive or the negative, but my expectation would be that Higgins is more likely to blow up the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Maybe only slightly.

But what is your expectation based on? I get it, it makes some sense intuitively, but the reality is Waddle blew up with his 2 best games of the season in Hill's 2 best games (and Higgins did not).

There is only one football. That is the reason I say that. It is more likely that WR's on different teams will have 2 TD+ games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game. I believe math will confirm that.

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

A similar reason to why, if you draw 10 cards from a deck, you have a better probability of getting at least one A, 2, 3, and 4, versus getting all 4 aces. Obviously there is a lot more going on in football, but that's the baseline reasoning.

A deck of cards has a finite number (of each and in total) where you can calculate exact odds, and those easily calculated odds change based on each card that is flipped. That's nothing like football at all.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

Sure. It can happen but I would say it is not likely.

But what makes you say that? Hill's best game last year came in Waddle's best game. His 2nd best game was also Waddle's 2nd best game.

I don't think there's any evidence that say Tee Higgins is more likely to blow up in the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Besides, even if it were true, higher variance isn't necessarily a positive.

For one, this is what’s known as cherry picking. For two, that was a flukey week against a meh secondary, and a massive shoot out. I know it well, as I happen to be facing a team that had Tua, waddle, and hill. Needless to say, I lost that week. By a lot.

But yeah, talk about a limited sample size.

 

[Gally]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

A.T. Perry got 2 total touchdowns versus the Falcons on January 7.

www.statmuse.com

 

[eighsse2]

I don't know of any evidence to the positive or the negative, but my expectation would be that Higgins is more likely to blow up the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Maybe only slightly.

But what is your expectation based on? I get it, it makes some sense intuitively, but the reality is Waddle blew up with his 2 best games of the season in Hill's 2 best games (and Higgins did not).

There is only one football. That is the reason I say that. It is more likely that WR's on different teams will have 2 TD+ games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game. I believe math will confirm that.

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

A similar reason to why, if you draw 10 cards from a deck, you have a better probability of getting at least one A, 2, 3, and 4, versus getting all 4 aces. Obviously there is a lot more going on in football, but that's the baseline reasoning.

A deck of cards has a finite number (of each and in total) where you can calculate exact odds, and those easily calculated odds change based on each card that is flipped. That's nothing like football at all.

You could be right, I really don't know. But it sure seems like there would be a negative correlation just due to the fact that unless the team stats reach crazy numbers, it's really hard to fit two monster receiver statlines inti the same game, especially since other players and positions are going to contribute too. Then again, certain circumstances, like going up against a terrible secondary or being in a shootout, could help yield a double-monster instance here and there, too.

 

[eighsse2]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

A.T. Perry got 2 total touchdowns versus the Falcons on January 7.

www.statmuse.com

To be fair, if there were no correlation, positive or negative, wouldn't you expect only 1/32 of instances of 2x 2TD WR in the same week, to be on the same team? So 1/6 is actually oretty high (though such a small sample).

 

[Gally]

To be fair, if there were no correlation, positive or negative, wouldn't you expect only 1/32 of instances of 2x 2TD WR in the same week, to be on the same team? So 1/6 is actually oretty high (though such a small sample).

I don't think that is quite right. I think it (same team) happened 1 time in 272 games (16 games a week x 17 weeks - assuming no bye weeks). While the two TD's games by multiple WR's happened many more times. I referenced 6 weeks of it happening but in some of those weeks there were 3 or 4 or 5 different WR's doing it so it greatly increases the chances of it happening by two receivers (not on the same team) in any given week.

 

[Deamon]

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays.

Strongly disagree on this. In bestball, sure.

It is more likely that WR's on different teams will have 2 TD+ games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game.

And would it also not be more likely that WR's on different teams will have 0TD games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game?

0 TD's hurts you as much as 2 TD's helps you.

 

[eighsse2]

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays.

Strongly disagree on this.

Interesting side debate there. My hypothesis: I would say for the season as a whole, ceiling is probably good. I'm fine with passing on consistent guys with a higher expected season total, to take someone who seems to have plausible McCaffrey/Kupp/Kelce potential. But for each individual week, high floor might be a better goal.

 

[Deamon]

In general, I think your fantasy strategy should focus more on ceiling plays than on floor plays.

Strongly disagree on this.

Interesting side debate there. My hypothesis: I would say for the season as a whole, ceiling is probably good. I'm fine with passing on consistent guys with a higher expected season total, to take someone who seems to have plausible McCaffrey/Kupp/Kelce potential. But for each individual week, high floor might be a better goal.

I'd guess it also has to do with many factors:

If I have boom/bust WR's like Gabe Davis on my team, I'd be very happy with Tyreek/Waddle giving me that high floor so that my ENTIRE team isn't as boom or bust.

Or, if I want a safer draft because I have confidence in my in season research/moves (maybe your league is lazy when it comes to waivers and you are confident you can "out play them"), then in that situation I'd more prefer high floor.

Or, if my league has a winner take all payout system, I might swing for the fences and rather high upside. If it pays the top 6 finishers, then maybe higher floor is best.

Lots of factors.

 

[Gally]

And would it also not be more likely that WR's on different teams will have 0TD games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game?

0 TD's hurts you as much as 2 TD's helps you.

I am in total agreement than the same team WR's raise your floor. The disagreement i was addressing was whether or not same team WR's diminished your ceiling or not. So my examples were showing that ceiling is limited to some degree when compared to WR's on different teams.

 

[Deamon]

And would it also not be more likely that WR's on different teams will have 0TD games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game?

0 TD's hurts you as much as 2 TD's helps you.

I am in total agreement than the same team WR's raise your floor. The disagreement i was addressing was whether or not same team WR's diminished your ceiling or not. So my examples were showing that ceiling is limited to some degree when compared to WR's on different teams.

I agree it probably diminishes your ceiling a bit, but not as much as some are saying. But of course it does a bit.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

There is only one football. That is the reason I say that. It is more likely that WR's on different teams will have 2 TD+ games in the same week more often than WR's on the same team will have that kind of game. I believe math will confirm that.

And in case they happen to be playing each other, there will be one of them on the field for close to the full 60 minutes with one football vs only 30 minutes for 2 on the same team with that same one football.

 

[humpback]

I try not to get too hung up on having two receivers from the same team if they're the right value when you're picking. I try to look at them independently, but maybe that's the wrong approach.

They are independent with regards to value vs WR's in general and this is the right approach but it does limit the total upside as it is less likely both players hit their ceiling in the same week when compared to two WR's on different teams.

Typically most rankings/evaluations are based on season long performance and when you rack and stack all WR's these guys are fairly high individually. Looking from that perspective it's better to take Waddle then someone ranked lower just because you already have Hill.

You just have to realize it limits your weekly upside while raising your weekly floor.

Hill and Waddle had some absolutely massive weeks together last year- Hill had 42 pts and Waddle had 40 pts vs Baltimore, Hill had 31 pts and Waddle 30.5 vs. Detroit, etc.

Sure. It can happen but I would say it is not likely.

But what makes you say that? Hill's best game last year came in Waddle's best game. His 2nd best game was also Waddle's 2nd best game.

I don't think there's any evidence that say Tee Higgins is more likely to blow up in the same week as Hill than Waddle is. Besides, even if it were true, higher variance isn't necessarily a positive.

For one, this is what’s known as cherry picking. For two, that was a flukey week against a meh secondary, and a massive shoot out. I know it well, as I happen to be facing a team that had Tua, waddle, and hill. Needless to say, I lost that week. By a lot.

But yeah, talk about a limited sample size.

For one, the discussion is about their upside, so discussing their biggest weeks of the season is not cherry picking at all. For two, it was two weeks not one. And yes, it was a massive shootout. That's really the point, the game circumstances are far more important than whether your teammate is also having a big game or not.

 

[humpback]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

A.T. Perry got 2 total touchdowns versus the Falcons on January 7.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

so discussing their biggest weeks of the season

You discussed 1 week. But not a hill I need to die on.

Random nature of football, there will be some dual spike weeks. There will likely be some dual dud weeks. And then everything in between.

Honestly not sure if the likelihood of Higgins/AJB or Waddle/Hill having spike weeks is, or is one is more likely than the other.

It seems like it would be harder for a tandem on 1 team to simultaneously have boom weeks with frequency because (as others have said) there’s only 1 football. The QB is only going to throw so many times. WR’s get a % of those targets & the 1-2 receivers in particular get a subset % of those targets.

Then there’s the defense, particularly pass rush & secondary. Is the QB getting pressured / sacked all day? Is the coverage tight? Is it a defensive battle?

Those are all pretty common things, any of which could stymie you with the tandem. If you only have 1 receiver from each team that would seem to negate that risk.

Again, I don’t have statistical proof of this, nor time to find it, but it seems logical that the tandem could produce a negative effect more often than a positive.

Of course, all that really matters here is that your WR1 & your WR2 are the best players you can draft. Hopefully the stats will take care of themselves.

If I get to a point where I have that decision, I’m still not what I’ll do.

 

[Gally]

Yes, there is only one football. However, that football can be put into play any number of times and any number of ways. Besides, there is also only one football for the WR from the other team, and they're going to be sharing it with the rest of their teammates as well. You keep saying "it is more likely", but I'd love to see the math confirming that because there hasn't been any evidence given showing that to be the case so far.

It appears that last year there were at least 6 times that multiple WR's from different teams had 2 or more TD's the same week compared to only one set of teammates (assuming that Waddle/Hill at the bottom of this chart were on the same day). Half the chart is blocked behind a pay wall but this seems to prove that it is more likely that WR's on different teams have a better chance of getting 2+ TD's the same week over teammates doing the same thing. I am not sure why you are having trouble believing this.

Which Wrs Scored Two Tds In A Game | StatMuse

A.T. Perry got 2 total touchdowns versus the Falcons on January 7.

www.statmuse.com

Do you play in one of those leagues where you get the entire field as your #2 WR, or do you have to pick a specific one? Also, are you in a TD only league?

These are irrelevant to the proof you asked for. You asked for proof that WR's on different teams are more likely to have boom weeks together than two WR's on the same team. I gave you that. Do with it what you want.