Discussion around good; very good or genius FPL players

[Beerfuelledman]

I confess it occurred to me that the difference (both literally and metaphorically) between Villa and I are that he had Ward and Moreno and I had Delaney & Sakho.

[Pirlo's Beard]

While Ville sails peacefully through the untroubled waters of the top 10k, tightly clutching Joel Ward.

What an utter luckbox. I suppose Ville would tell us he knew that Ward was going to roll the ball five yards to Puncheon so he could leather it into the back of the net for HIS FIRST GOAL OF THE ENTIRE SEASON.

I confess it occurred to me that the difference (both literally and metaphorically) between Villa and I are that he had Ward and Moreno and I had Delaney & Sakho.

He doesn't have Moreno though. He has Lovren and Sakho.

[mayweather]

ville's numbers are incredible. has anyone studies his team or anything? hope he's making money off it by running other people's teams in money leagues. he could make a fortune with that resume.

to think that he's never finished outside the top 5k is just mind boggling. even in this crazy season he is still well on his way to keep that record intact.

[NoEyeDeer]

ville's numbers are incredible. has anyone studies his team or anything? hope he's making money off it by running other people's teams in money leagues. he could make a fortune with that resume.

to think that he's never finished outside the top 5k is just mind boggling. even in this crazy season he is still well on his way to keep that record intact.

He's not real. He's a bot.

[Valeron]

So Ville goes in to that game with Alli and Dawson only and matches score those with Alli, Alderweireld and Kane (c). Another massive let off, and people were telling me the guy isn't lucky on top of being a very good player.

[Finisher1]

So Ville goes in to that game with Alli and Dawson only and matches score those with Alli, Alderweireld and Kane (c). Another massive let off, and people were telling me the guy isn't lucky on top of being a very good player.

I think that's lucky, but I think ditching expensive SGW striker while there were lot of cheap and reasonable DGW alternatives wasn't exactly a bad decision.

When I ditched Kane during my GW33 wildcard, I expected him to score a goal here and there, and I thought I wouldn't captain him in the near future. Well, he has scored two goals in three games and I wouldn't have captained him in any of these gameweeks, so I'm happy with my decision so far.

[wahine]

http://fantasy.premierleague.com/entry/1675/history/
last 2 weeks ive been been stalking this Fisoer, while most are scrambling to get Spurs players in hes done a -4 for Mannone VanAH and captained Mahrez -
yea a good move...thinking differently to everyone else and now a probable Fiso champion.

[The Dazzler]

So Ville goes in to that game with Alli and Dawson only and matches score those with Alli, Alderweireld and Kane (c). Another massive let off, and people were telling me the guy isn't lucky on top of being a very good player.

You're taking a 1 week score of Dawson vs Toby + Kane to indicate that Ville is a lucky manager?
A tiny subset of a tiny sample size.

Every player, every week, has a realistic point expectation. Every player, every week, probably exceeds or falls below that point expectation.
Dawson exceeded his realistic point expectation this week. Toby + Kane have both fallen below their realistic point expectation this week. It happens all the time. That's why sport enthralls us.
You could probably take 1 or 2 random players every week from every managers team that is playing, compare them to 1 or 2 other random players and make a point that that manager is lucky or unlucky, if that is your agenda.

Before the Enlightenment if people didn't understand how something worked, they often put it down to 'magic (or in this case, luck). Since the Enlightenment, we have tended to be a little more scientifically rigorous.
If you want to disparage someones achievements, go ahead and prove it instead of using silly cherry picked, tiny sample size, stats that prove nothing at all. This "his 1 player outscored my 2 better players this week" doesn't really cut it.


I'm not a stats guy but I guess you will require a realistic points model, perhaps FFS points projections will do? Then you'll probably need to plot all of his points against that. And then maybe measure it against other players teams and points returns to see if the model is accurate. And then you'll want a significant sample size.

[Valeron]

The Dazzler, I fully understand that, you could've condensed it to 20 words.

Nothing can change my opinion that Ville is highly skilled and also has had way more than his fair share of breaks over at least 3 seasons, there's no point in debating it any more and I certainly won't bother charting an analysis that breaks it all down. While most of the HOF guys are outside the top 25k this season, Ville is flying high again. Is he that much better than those guys? I don't think so.
In a sample of highly skilled players is it possible for any 1 guy to also get way more than his fair share of breaks over a large sample of GWs? In my opinion, absolutely yes. That's the debating point. Things don't always even out.

[Stemania]

I'm sure Ville is indeed thanking his lucky stars that his wildcard pick Jagielka (who got injured in the first game of DGW33, missing the CS in the 2nd) and his replacement Dawson (who scored an og) mustered a combined 11 points over 5 fixtures whilst underperforming Alder only mustered 23 points from his 3 games...

[Aldershot Rejects]

You could probably add that given that Dawson averages (from memory) a goal every 7 or 8 games, it was not unreasonable to expect one in the period GW34-38 (6 games), it just happened to come this week.

[Red Eye]

In a sample of highly skilled players is it possible for any 1 guy to also get way more than his fair share of breaks over a large sample of GWs? In my opinion, absolutely yes. That's the debating point. Things don't always even out.

I'd say its not only possible, it almost inevitable if your sample contains enough 'skilled players'. People overweight dispositional factors and underweight situational factors - its a natural attribution bias.

Lets say 1,000 people start up businesses and one becomes a millionaire. The typical explanation is that he is some kind of brilliant business mind when, the reality is, there was a lot of luck involved and it could have been any one of a number of them. Though obviously you need a degree of competence in the first place.

[Sutter Kane]

The Dazzler, I fully understand that, you could've condensed it to 20 words.

Nothing can change my opinion that Ville is highly skilled and also has had way more than his fair share of breaks over at least 3 seasons, there's no point in debating it any more and I certainly won't bother charting an analysis that breaks it all down. While most of the HOF guys are outside the top 25k this season, Ville is flying high again. Is he that much better than those guys? I don't think so.
In a sample of highly skilled players is it possible for any 1 guy to also get way more than his fair share of breaks over a large sample of GWs? In my opinion, absolutely yes. That's the debating point. Things don't always even out.

Look at his rank at gw12. He was 40k at that point, ridiculously high compared to many other HOF members. Somehow he managed a blinding start, after that I don't think he's had good/bad fortune particularly; it was inevitable he'd chip away from GW12 onwards to another brilliant season.

[The Dazzler]

Can 1 player get way more than his fair share of luck over many GWs? Yes. No one disputes this.
However there is nothing to suggest that Ville is that player. Maybe he's the unluckiest player in the world and should have won it a couple of times.
The evidence is all there for this season. Go and show us where he's running 100 points above expectation.

[Le Red]

Can 1 player get way more than his fair share of luck over many GWs? Yes. No one disputes this.
However there is nothing to suggest that Ville is that player. Maybe he's the unluckiest player in the world and should have won it a couple of times.
The evidence is all there for this season. Go and show us where he's running 100 points above expectation.

I haven't been following him like some people do but clearly he gost his fair share of good decisions in addition to the lucky events.
All of a sudden there's been some sort of jealousy strike over a defender goal in a bad gameweek when the focus should be to find out what he got right regardless of luck.
So far he's only proving he's still top of the tops.

[Carlos Kickaball]

FPL HOF ranking about finish this season [15/16]

1. Ville Rönkä - 1,450
2. Triggerlips - 35,280
3. Jay Egersdorff - 14,954
4. Martin Button - 27,481
5. Derek Simpson - 39,980
6. Craig Johnson - 9,978
7. Alianto Henry - 62,073
8. Simon Walsh - 15,734
9. Martin Gupta - 74,539
10. Jon Sumner - 44,573

As a bunch, I'd say for the second season running, despite their histories before being excellent, the spread of finishes from these managers is quite unremarkable.

[Finisher1]

I was definitely at the less lucky end this season, it was incredible to see how a coin toss after coin toss went against me, that was insane. I hope next season I will be at the opposite end.

Anyway, I'm glad to see that Ville Rönkä was the only one in HOF Top 10 who finished above me. Maybe I did something right.

[Ruth_NZ]

Ed Masters, 3rd OR this season as interviewed on FFS:

"I used the ‘RMT’ tool pretty much every week, but didn’t always take it as gospel. I think the stats available through the members tables gives you a wealth of information that can be used to good effect – it certainly helped me bring in some players I wouldn’t have, or perhaps more importantly ignore ones I would have been tempted to bring in.

I’m not really a fan of the Premier League, I only follow it for FPL, so don’t watch any live football and only looked at TV highlights once or twice. I think the most valuable tool on FFS is its community. If you read enough of the comments you spot trends and there is always great advice on offer."

I think that is sad. We are approaching the stage where we may as well have our teams managed by a computer.

[mayweather]

Spiderm4tt scrambling a top 20k finish was very impressive. Made up serious ground in the last couple months after a very tough season.

Ville's stats are crazy how consistent he is. He doesn't ever enter money leagues which is strange given he'd probably make a fortune every season. His early wildcard paid dividends. Went from 100.0 to 105 in about 5 gameweeks. No doubt this was vital in the 2nd half of the season. I wonder if there is any way to analyse exactly how he manages his teams - he obviously must stick to a system. One hit all season is all he took

[liquidfootball2]

An early wildcard paid dividends. Went from 100.0 to 105 in about 5 gameweeks. No doubt this was vital in the 2nd half of the season

Former FISOer gunnersaurus did much the same, wcarding early and built up an impressive tv. Latched on to Ighalo and mahrez early and despite a very poor last gwk finished 761.

[Pirlo's Beard]

Former FISOer gunnersaurus did much the same, wcarding early and built up an impressive tv. Latched on to Ighalo and mahrez early and despite a very poor last gwk finished 761.

Shame he's not around anymore to lord it over us.

[HQ Manoeuvre]

Former FISOer gunnersaurus did much the same, wcarding early and built up an impressive tv. Latched on to Ighalo and mahrez early and despite a very poor last gwk finished 761.

Shame he's not around anymore to lord it over us.

Good poster Super Hans. Big miss on here along with Billy Bongo.

[RidleyMTB]

I'm eagerly awaiting an HOF update

[maradonash]

I'm eagerly awaiting an HOF update

Fantastic season. Congrats.

[RidleyMTB]

Thanks

[The Catman]

I'm eagerly awaiting an HOF update

Fantastic season. Congrats.

Yes, congrats!

Interesting that at 49th o/a you were only 15th in the FFS ML...

[liquidfootball2]

I'm eagerly awaiting an HOF update

Fantastic season. Congrats.

Yes, congrats!

Interesting that at 49th o/a you were only 15th in the FFS ML...

Pretty well everyone is in the ffs minileague it's literally massive, so the law of averages says a good number will be in the first few in OR and bound to have the best top five and very possibly the worst bottom five too.

[The Catman]

Aye, liquid, I didn't think that FFS were only at the top of the FPL rankings!

[Stemania]

I'm eagerly awaiting an HOF update

Interesting that at 49th o/a you were only 15th in the FFS ML...

Pretty well everyone is in the ffs minileague it's literally massive, so the law of averages says a good number will be in the first few in OR and bound to have the best top five and very possibly the worst bottom five too.

It's actually surprisingly small in terms of numbers - 27k members this season compared to 23k last year, a drop in the ocean of 3.7m players. Just unbelievably strong - last year it had 25% of the top 4k and this season about 19% (after perhaps a relatively unpredictable year), quite amazing for a group of about 0.7% of the population. You only have to go through about 600 league members from the rear to breach the first 3m position (so 700,000 from the back of the field), whereas the 600th in the league is around 3k overall!!

Yet another example of how important the type of data/info/shared discussion the FPL community websites provide are to an FPL player - access to the various knowledge pools is by far the biggest differenciator in FPL fortune as far as I can see. We've seen a few Ed Masters type stories, where data/community is making a fairly reasonable case for being more important that the traditional practice of actually watching games, and we've seen the odd case of a player barely watching a minute.

I see it as a good thing personally - a few years ago even on FISO heavy stats users were fairly regularly derided. Perhaps the last laugh is theirs after all.

[liquidfootball2]

Thanks for that Stem, as you say it shows just how valuable their information and how strong their league actually is. Perhaps i shouldn't have been too surprised if i'd thought about it properly but it does seem to back up the notion that being a member of ffs (or other similar site) is one of the biggest contributory factors for success. Watching games possibly does add something but seems not as essential.