ROTOWIRE.COM NFL MLB / Minors NBA NHL GOLF RACING    COMMUNITY FORUMS PODCASTS MYROTOWIRE ASK AN EXPERT GAMES

My Case Against Handcuffing

I have never been a believer in handcuffing.  My case against it is quite simple.  Handcuffing is a conservative play.  Handcuffing limits the potential of your team.  And in my experience, playing it safe rarely leads to winnings and almost never leads to domination.  And I play to win and always to dominate. 

Let me give you an example of what I’m talking about.

Team A has the following starters and bench players:
RB   Cedric Benson
RB   Joseph Addai
Flex  Shonn Greene
BN   Darren Sproles
BN   Marshawn Lynch
BN   Toby Gerhart
BN   Ahmad Bradshaw

Team B has the following starters and bench players:
RB   Cedric Benson
RB   Joseph Addai
Flex  Shonn Greene
BN   Bernard Scott
BN   Donald Brown
BN   Ladainian Tomlinson
BN   Ahmad Bradshaw

Team A has the greater potential and the greater chance of winning and of domination.  In Team A’s perfect world, Benson, Addai and Green stay healthy and effective and Sproles, Lynch, Gerhart and Bradshaw all gain starting roles due to injuries or the gross ineffectiveness of the starter.  That means that Team A’s ceiling or perfect scenario is eventually having seven starting players on the roster out of the positions mentioned. 

Team B has lesser potential and a lesser chance of winning and a remote chance of domination.  In Team B’s perfect world, Benson, Addai and Greene stay healthy and effective while Bradshaw gains a starting role due to injury or the ineffectiveness of Brandon Jacobs.  In Team B’s perfect world, Scott, Brown and Tomlinson all remain as they started; as reserves.  That means that Team B’s ceiling or perfect scenario is eventually having four starting players on the roster out of the positions mentioned. 

Looking at it that way, which team would you rather have?  Team A and it’s potential for having seven starters or Team B and it’s potential for having four starters?

There really is no argument I can think of for handcuffing.  One of the only cases that can be made for handcuffing is the drafting of an extremely talented player who also happens to be extremely injury prone (think Felix Jones).  My response to that argument is that you took a gamble in the first place by drafting that player.  Gamble further, play to win and live with having that injury prone player on your team without his handcuff.  Doing so will increase your team’s potential or ceiling. 

The only other case for handcuffing I can think of is in terms of draft day value.  If I draft Ryan Matthews in Round 2 and Darren Sproles is staring me in the face in Round 15, I have to take him right?  Well that scenario is the only situation where acquiring a handcuff is acceptable.  But in general, I am strongly against the practice. 

So do yourself a favor on draft day.  Avoid handcuffing.  Be aggressive.  Play not only to win, but to dominate. 

Comments

By: Erik Siegrist
On: 8/7/2010 12:07:00 PM		 dj, those are completely unrealistic comparisons. Stewart and Felix have ADPs way, way higher than Brown and Scott.

If you want to argue for upside, go for it. But stacking the deck like that does your argument no favors. Comparable ADP guys to Brown, Tomlinson and Scott would be something like Hardesty, Hightower and Derrick Ward.
 
By: djm1144
On: 8/7/2010 1:04:00 PM		 Erik, your right. I should have done similar ADPs. My argument is still the same but your right. I also shouldnt' have used FElix Jones as a bench player since hes a starter. Im gonna fix it now.
 
By: wurion
On: 8/7/2010 2:17:00 PM		 I totally disagree with your argument. I would clearly prefer team B. Look at what happens if one of your three starting players gets hurt for team A. You are forced to sub in either Sproles, Lynch, Gerhart, or Bradshaw. If none of them carve out a role, you are stuck playing someone who will not get the lion's share of carries for his team.

Team B on the other hand will just sub in the back up who WILL inherit the lion's share. The effectiveness of the back will drop slightly, but I'd rather have 85% of the production with similar touches rather than similar efficiency on half the touches.
 
By: Chris Liss
On: 8/7/2010 7:40:00 PM		 Your point is two players from the same team can't be feature backs at the same time, so having ones from different teams makes it possible to have the most possible starters. Okay fine. But is that really the only consideration? The long shot chance of having all your backups pan out? Or might Team B be happy when Addai is done for the year and Brown is a top-10 back? Is that possibility simply not worth considering at all? Obviously, one has to weigh the likelihood of each scenario, and also its payoff. Otherwise, you're way oversimplifying the strategic consideration.

Personally, whether I own Addai or not, I'd much rather have Donald Brown's upside than Marshawn Lynch's or Toby Gerhart's.
 
By: million_dollar_sleeper
On: 8/8/2010 7:08:00 PM		 case dismissed
 

Leave a comment

Commenting is restricted to registered users only. Please register or login now to submit a comment.

Tell Someone

  • Digg it
  • submit to reddit reddit
  • Add to Mixx!

Recent Favorites

How BABIP Affects the Value of Strikeouts and Walks
The league-average batting-average-on-balls-in-play (BABIP) has been on a downward trajectory for the last half decade, something that has implications for the values of different at-bat outcomes. BABIP is down precipitously this season (.289), though it's hard to tell to what extent that's due to all the shifting defenses (better data on where balls are hit have enabled this), or is simply just an April cold-weather/small sample anomaly.
NHL Playoff Observations -- Monday
Just a few things that caught my eye ...
  • Alexander Semin was on the wrong side of the grocery stick most of the night. You know, that spot between the back-up goalie and the rest of the team ... the one where the dead wood goes so it doesn't get in the way of on-the-fly changes.
  • Honey badger don't care. Honey badger doesn't give a $%!&.  T.J. Oshie gave up four inches and 50 pounds to Dustin Penner, but he didn't care. Then again, honey badger didn't care when he hit Rick Nash a few years ago, either. I wonder if the NHL would let me get a Blues #74 jersey with Honey Badger on the back.
Buy Lowest
Every year, we hear advice about how it's time to "buy low" on struggling stars like Albert Pujols, Giancarlo Stanton and Robinson Cano. "Get them now for cheap before they heat up!" Except that the market for superstars - at least in competitive leagues - usually doesn't move much after one bad month. (Whether it should in these cases is another question). It's more likely that the Pujols and Stanton owners are doubling down, figuring that only a hot streak from a player of that caliber can undo the damage that's already been done.

That doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the market's early overreaction, but you'll have to aim a little lower and take on quite a bit more risk. The players listed below are those who should be available at an actual discount.

Fantasy Rookies
Now that the 2012 NFL Draft is complete and rosters look about the way they will when training camps open in late July, it’s time to start the speculation train full steam ahead to fantasy draft days. Many players taken in this class will have a fantasy impact, some immediate, some in small spurts as rookies and some not for years to come.
Cowboys Draft: First Blush Thoughts
My initial reactions to the 2012 Dallas draft crop.

RSS Feeds