NRL Fantasy 2020 Part 29 - Too many cows!

Welshy wrote:Murray or Munster? Holding Tolo

wolfking wrote:

Murray.

Welshy wrote:If I dump Taumalolo I’m looking at 2RF guns who have scored less than their usual seasonal average

Guys who are averaging well above already will ultimately scores less over remaining season to maintain their usual seasonal average. Taumalolo for example averaging 71, highly unlikely he maintains that so remaining games he’s going unders rest of the way

So I’m looking at guys like JTurbo/Murray. Both 55+ average players currently averaging under 50 after 3 rounds. To reach their usual seasonal average they are going to have to average over 55 from now until R20, I think that makes sense lol

GreenMachine wrote:
That is a super tough one god

On this weeks fixture Munster.

Full season Murray, just

Is it likely a case of the guy you don’t get you’ll never own?

ytsb wrote:
\

I would be careful having this opinion. Particularly for players like Murray who was playing 2rf before. Poor prior performance does not mean they're suddenly going to go gangbusters to compensate. Not to say they won't, because the average does capture a bunch of variance in their score (super low, super high, but generally tending towards a mean).

See this; it's probably the fallacy most responsible for people being cleaned at the casino. How many times have you see 5 blacks being spun on roulette, and thinking fuck it's gotta be red soon! only to have 4 more black spins? The odds are still 50/50, it doesn't matter what the 5 previous results were.

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the erroneous belief that if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa), when it has otherwise been established that the probability of such events does not depend on what has happened in the past. Such events, having the quality of historical independence, are referred to as statistically independent. The fallacy is commonly associated with gambling, where it may be believed, for example, that the next dice roll is more than usually likely to be six because there have recently been less than the usual number of sixes.

my tv broke wrote:I've added some of the common nicknames in the system so if you use the quick search and type "JTB" or "MOFO", the player will come up.

ytsb wrote:
\

I would be careful having this opinion. Particularly for players like Murray who was playing 2rf before. Poor prior performance does not mean they're suddenly going to go gangbusters to compensate. Not to say they won't, because the average does capture a bunch of variance in their score (super low, super high, but generally tending towards a mean).

See this; it's probably the fallacy most responsible for people being cleaned at the casino. How many times have you see 5 blacks being spun on roulette, and thinking fuck it's gotta be red soon! only to have 4 more black spins? The odds are still 50/50, it doesn't matter what the 5 previous results were.

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the erroneous belief that if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa), when it has otherwise been established that the probability of such events does not depend on what has happened in the past. Such events, having the quality of historical independence, are referred to as statistically independent. The fallacy is commonly associated with gambling, where it may be believed, for example, that the next dice roll is more than usually likely to be six because there have recently been less than the usual number of sixes.

Welshy wrote:
Thanks mate. Actually helped

Revraiser wrote:

Can you add 'Glass' and have the common players pop up  ?  Dugan, Moylan etc...

my tv broke wrote:

I get what you're saying but I sort of disagree, well, I don't think the example of random events in roulette is really applicable.

Fantasy players get stuck on last weeks score but I agree with Welshy's point, when you have a long history of scoring history for a player, they are more than likely going to follow that history rather than one to two weeks of this season's scoring.

Obviously rule change has some impact there but when you're comparing similar players they are likely to be similarly affected.

Role change is important too, if Taumalolo continues to play 70 mins as a "norm" then there is probably a slight boost to his average there.

my tv broke wrote:

I get what you're saying but I sort of disagree, well, I don't think the example of random events in roulette is really applicable.

Fantasy players get stuck on last weeks score but I agree with Welshy's point, when you have a long history of scoring history for a player, they are more than likely going to follow that history rather than one to two weeks of this season's scoring.

Obviously rule change has some impact there but when you're comparing similar players they are likely to be similarly affected.

Role change is important too, if Taumalolo continues to play 70 mins as a "norm" then there is probably a slight boost to his average there.

multiple.scoregasms wrote:Murray at lock over Munster for me. Papy is still lurking around stealing those sweep players that used to make Munster bulk points. Broken field they both seem to be together so will have some high scores, but think Murray will give a better base + same ceiling

ytsb wrote: JTurbo is a better example of point I was trying to make I think

Agree 100%, that's where the comparison breaks down. Just something to be mindful of anyway. In Welshy's case saying that Murray is a 55pt player and hasn't achieved that, that is because he was in a different position, not because of random variance.

Have to weigh up variance vs. something impacting your player. It's what makes fantasy fun