Pedro - Chelsea

[gooberman]

Mane at 8.0 is busy ruining gooberman's mood, and Coutinho despite scoring has been pretty ropey imo. Payet at ~7.5, after a burst of popularity appears to have lost some favour and has certainly lost the fixtures now. Siggy has been overshadowed by the other Swansea mids

He certainly is. This guy completely trolled my team last season so I should have known better than to trust him again!

I think you are judging the midfielders you have mentioned a little prematurely. The Arsenal lads have only played 2 games and Ozil got 7pts last game. Liverpool have also only played 2 and Coutinho and Henderson have already brought some attacking returns. Mata has scored a 9 in between 2 blanks and Chadli has a goal and an assist in last 2 games.

[Notned]

I still think one or two of the Arsenal lads will come good soon, and with Newcastle and Stoke in their next two know isn't the time to be ruling them out, particularly if any look decent tonight. Likewise, Mata. He has been steady if unspectacular, but I still think he has a lot to offer if ever United get themselves together in an attacking sense.

On the subject of Pedro; whilst many are questioning the likelihood of him taking points off Hazard, is there a chance of him actually having the opposite effect? Hazard quite often finds teams doubling up on him, but with Pedro around creating havoc himself he may draw a bit of attention away and give Hazard more space to do what he does best..

[Carlos Kickaball]

Taking points off other players on your team is absolute nonsense, unless someone actually takes some set pieces off you or moves you back in the team.

Are we trying to say that if Sánchez played for Norwich he'd be a better pick as Cazorla, Özil and Giroud would stop stealing his points?

[Notned]

Taking points off other players on your team is absolute nonsense, unless someone actually takes some set pieces off you or moves you back in the team.

Are we trying to say that if Sánchez played for Norwich he'd be a better pick as Cazorla, Özil and Giroud would stop stealing his points?

I'm not saying it's a point I necessarily agree with, but it is an argument that has been made nonetheless. Obviously having quality players around you is as much of a help, if not more so, than it is a hindrance, but I guess some players certainly thrive more in situations where they are the go to guy as it were. I think that is the angle they are coming from.

[gallus]

Look at it this way - Arsenal will average 2 goals a season. Normal teams have 3/4 players involved in most goals/assists, but Arsenal have 6. So the points will be more spread than in other teams. That's 1 attacking return per player if the returns are spread equally, which is not good enough. So the trick is to pick a player who will be more involved than others at a given time in the season, and that can be difficult.

[Pirlo's Beard]

Look at it this way - Arsenal will average 2 goals a season.

Only 2 goals a season?!? Jesus, that's not good! And they've scored their 2 goals already, against Crystal Palace. Are they being managed by Paul Lambert?

Ditch yer Arsenal players, lads. They're not scoring any more goals for the rest of the season!

[NoEyeDeer]

Look at it this way - Arsenal will average 2 goals a season.

Only 2 goals a season?!? Jesus, that's not good! And they've scored their 2 goals already, against Crystal Palace. Are they being managed by Paul Lambert?

Ditch yer Arsenal players, lads. They're not scoring any more goals for the rest of the season!

Call me crazy, but I'm going to give Sanchez one more gw in the hope they can smash that average this season and achieve a club record 3 goals this season.

[gallus]

Look at it this way - Arsenal will average 2 goals a season.

Only 2 goals a season?!? Jesus, that's not good! And they've scored their 2 goals already, against Crystal Palace. Are they being managed by Paul Lambert?

Ditch yer Arsenal players, lads. They're not scoring any more goals for the rest of the season!

that's what happens when you're in a hurry I'm gonna crawl into a hole and die now

[bigcliff2]

I agree with MPTree, but I think that it's quite difficult to free up a space for a striker at the moment.

I'm probably WC-ing next week, and I think I like the look of ditching Hazard and going with Costa, Aguero, Wilson/budget forward.

I've just been playing about with my WC and have come up with

Courtios/McCarthy
Kompany/Gomez/B Jones/Francis/Targett
Sanchez/Yaya/Milner/Mahrez/Westwood
Aguero/Costa/Wilson

EDIT: Actually have 0.1 tp upgrade Jones, possibly to Ben Davies

[Crooker]

Ditching Hazard to get Pedro + Costa. Don't think there's any need to wait and see for Pedro. He came over from Spain straight into the team for an away trip to the Hawthorns where it was pissing with rain all game and looked extremely comfortable, as if he had been playing with Chelsea for months prior. When you consider the impact the previous right wingers have had for Chelsea (Cuadrado/Salah/Marin/Schurrle etc) Pedro's debut was pretty special in my opinion.

[d2024p]

Taking points off other players on your team is absolute nonsense, unless someone actually takes some set pieces off you or moves you back in the team.

Are we trying to say that if Sánchez played for Norwich he'd be a better pick as Cazorla, Özil and Giroud would stop stealing his points?

Generally I agree with this view, but there is the occasional situation where players take points off each other. Think about if player X scores in the 80th minute. If you hold player Y, his attacking input is no longer required for the manager to secure the victory. Of course more goals can and do come, but the manager is more likely to play defensively, move player Y deeper or even take him off for a defensive player.

If you had player Z from another team which still needed to score to win, you have a better chance at this point.

Unrelated: If a footballer named 'Player Z' ever graces the EPL he will be my automatic first pick

[LAMPS27]

I want Pedro in my side because at the moment I have no Chelsea coverage at all.

Costa would require a complete overhaul of my team which having just WC the week before isn't ideal.

Hazard is just too expensive given Silva/Sanchez/Aguero are in my side.

This leaves Oscar, Willian, Fabreagas and Pedro as options.

Fabregas hasn't played well since January last year and the first two just can't be relied upon for their price tags. Willian at 7m makes more appeal than Oscar at 8.4 but I would rather have an Arsenal mid given the prices.

That just leaves Pedro, a very direct player who was also on corners I noticed at the weekend. I think he's a decent price so long as he holds down his place. We know Hazard is on the left which means out of Oscar/Willian/Pedro someone needs to drop out. Pedro is only a candidate for the right hand so Willian looks the odd one out.

Right now rotation is my fear more than ability and of course the potential price rises which will follow from Friday when he becomes unlocked.

[Finisher1]

I want Pedro in my side because at the moment I have no Chelsea coverage at all.

I'm not sure why anyone would need any attacking covers ever. Covers are myth. Each player is an individual pick in this game.

[SFC_Fan]

I want Pedro in my side because at the moment I have no Chelsea coverage at all.

I'm not sure why anyone would need any attacking covers ever. Covers are myth. Each player is an individual pick in this game.

Just makes certain teams more bare able to watch if you have some coverage.

[NoEyeDeer]

I want Pedro in my side because at the moment I have no Chelsea coverage at all.

I'm not sure why anyone would need any attacking covers ever. Covers are myth. Each player is an individual pick in this game.

I think the term 'coverage' can apply in this case when price points and funds become an issue.

Chelsea are a top side that will score goals, so in this instant, if the pricier and probably better attacking options in Costa and Hazard are out of reach, than the cheaper next best alternative in Pedro allows you to still possibly take advantage of Chelsea's attacking returns.

I would consider this coverage, as it's better than having no Chelsea assets at all, and still brings an opportunity of attacking returns from an attacking player in an attacking side, even if Costa and Hazard have the higher possibility of attacking points in their side.

[Finisher1]

It's all about points potential and price. The question is - does Pedro have a good enough points potential at 9.5m?

If yes, go for it. If not, I don't see any reason to pick him only because "I need to have someone from Chelsea".

[eastcentral1]

Of course, but when some people use "coverage" I think they are using that term to imply that a player from a high scoring team has in effect a higher points potential. Without the aid of a crystal ball, going for attacking players from high scoring teams is a valid consideration.

[First Sub Podcast]

Of course, but when some people use "coverage" I think they are using that term to imply that a player from a high scoring team has in effect a higher points potential. Without the aid of a crystal ball, going for attacking players from high scoring teams is a valid consideration.

+1 also in the sense that having say 3 Arsenal attacking players or 2 Arsenal attacking players and 1 Chelsea attacking player you are 'covering' yourself should Arsenal not score that weekend. Can also see the other side in that each player merits their own pick, though, and over the course of the season they will prove their selection.

[tamagotchi massacre]

it was pissing with rain all game and looked extremely comfortable

He's not a bush fire. I think he can deal with falling water

[NoEyeDeer]

Of course, but when some people use "coverage" I think they are using that term to imply that a player from a high scoring team has in effect a higher points potential. Without the aid of a crystal ball, going for attacking players from high scoring teams is a valid consideration.

I agree.

The term coverage only comes in to effect when talking about attacking assets who may contribute to an attacking teams overall attacking contribution.

Of course it doesn't quite work if your argument is, I don't feel comfortable not having any Chelsea attacking coverage with the likes of Hazard and Costa too pricey, so I'll get Azpi or Ivanovic in my team as coverage. Obviously, they don't have the same or similar attacking potential due to their respective positions, whereas Pedro does when compared to Hazard or Costa.

I guess the term coverage can only be used, or make sense, when discussing a specific area of the team. That being defence or attack, where any relevant player to those areas have the same or similar potential output to one another regardless of their price. E.g. I want Chelsea defensive cover because they have a higher chance of getting clean sheets, but will get the cheaper Azpi over Ivanovic as he's the next best thing despite Ivanovic's historically higher points potential.

That's how I see it anyway.

[gallus]

Of course, but when some people use "coverage" I think they are using that term to imply that a player from a high scoring team has in effect a higher points potential. Without the aid of a crystal ball, going for attacking players from high scoring teams is a valid consideration.

That's how I see coverage as well. Chelsea will score goals and when they do Pedro will be involved. How much? I don't know. But he will score some points as long as Chelsea is scoring goals. So yes, he's my Chelsea "coverage" because he's the only one of 3 players with similar points potentail I could get withou a massive hit.

[Sutter Kane]

Of course, but when some people use "coverage" I think they are using that term to imply that a player from a high scoring team has in effect a higher points potential. Without the aid of a crystal ball, going for attacking players from high scoring teams is a valid consideration.

I agree.

The term coverage only comes in to effect when talking about attacking assets who may contribute to an attacking teams overall attacking contribution.

I think that's one way to think about it. Maybe what Finisher is trying to say is that yes you can pick Pedro to get Chelsea 'cover' but as long as that doesn't come at the expense of owning a better prospect who's 9.5mn or cheaper, but plays for a different side. Then despite your want of Chelsea coverage, you'd be a little foolish to go against the points expectancy. It's that hedging your bets thing again which can work short term but rarely does long term, almost negating some risk but at the same time not going for the maximum expected points output. The constraints to this are obvious; we don't actually know who will 'beast it' in the coming weeks which I think is why people do hedge bets in this way but we can gauge expected output. I'd be surprised for eg if Toure didn't outscore Pedro over the next few games.

Same thing when you try and compare say Cech with Koscielny to save money on the risk of 'an Arsenal CS'. You can't compare them, only the competition in that slot you have in your squad.

[Mav3rick]

Finisher is right, in the way that the OP stated it he wanted Chelsea coverage rather than the best premium 9.5 midfielder.

However, these questions are always more nuanced than a simple "just pick the player with best points expectancy". Bonus points come into things if you're picking more than one player from the same team, and that's without accepting that the data or your judgement could be flawed or the match in question could not play out the way it is expected (red card, terrible weather, match cancelled, etc).

I also don't ever really believe that the expected outcomes are particularly accurate given the small number of discrete events that occur in a match, so if players are within 10% of each other I would assume them equal and I would hedge.

[thesilkworm]

I agree with Finisher's take on this subject.

Don't agree with your point about bonus Mav. Pedro has the same expectation of bonus points whether you also have Hazard in your team or not. Sure, it means that two of your players can't both get max bonus (except on very rare occasions where they are tied), but that doesn't mean that the expected bonus for Pedro/Sanchez is any higher than it is for Pedro/Hazard (assuming Hazard and Sanchez have identical points expectations when judged individually).

[Mav3rick]

It does affect BPs though doesn't it - if Pedro, Sanchez and Hazard all score equally (excluding BPs), then you're more likely to get 6BPs if you have one from each team rather than two. If Pedro is substantially more likely than Sanchez to score most points then he's a better pick regardless of Hazard, but when it's close the BPs are a factor.

Obviously if only one of your players score, or rather if they happen to score well on alternate weeks, then the BPs aren't really affected. To me, hoovering up the BPs is a consideration when decisions are tight.

[Carlos Kickaball]

It does affect BPs though doesn't it

Put simply - Not really because a player's expected points factor in the chances of him getting bonus or not.

And...

E[X+Y] = E[X] + E[Y]

Whether X and Y are independent or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value#Linearity

[Mav3rick]

But expected points, whether they include bonus points or not, are just an extension of the scoring/assisting odds or models based on shots on goal conceded/made which presumably feed into the odds in some way somewhere along the line (either directly or implicitly). They can't possibly be taking into account the number of additional factors that add to a BPS score, although if they are I'd be mighty impressed!

So for the same performance in a given match where you had equal odds going in and hence couldn't pick a clear "best" choice (Hazard, Sanchez and Pedro all score and assist one, say), the "expected" bonus points are less likely to be 6 if you own players from the same team because the awarding of a 3 to one player (usually) removes it as a possibility for the next player.

It's a niche market I'd agree but I still think it's real, if you have 3 equal players with equal prospects, more bonus points are more likely by picking players from different teams.

This doesn't mean I think you should pick Redmond instead of Hazard just because you own Pedro before anyone jumps in with a straw man I just view it as one of a few tie breakers (like price rises, etc).

[thesilkworm]

It does affect BPs though doesn't it - if Pedro, Sanchez and Hazard all score equally (excluding BPs), then you're more likely to get 6BPs if you have one from each team rather than two.

This is of course true, but it's only one of the many scenarios which can occur. Each player's expected points figure takes into account all scenarios. Having players from two different teams means you have a better chance of getting double max bonus, but having two players from the same team means a better chance of at least some bonus (if your first player gets none, your second player is now more likely to have some because he has less competition for them).

Edit: I see you've just posted again as I was writing this, but I think my argument above applies still. The best possible scenario of getting double max bonus isn't the only consideration for points expectation.

[LAMPS27]

Anyone else put off by the upcoming fixtures GW4-GW7? CRY eve ARS new

Ok Palace at home is a nice start, however Everton and Newcastle away are historically really bad places for Chelsea (Everton last year an exception in that freak 6-3 game). Then there's Arsenal who shut out a Pedro-less Chelsea in the Community Shield.

Chelsea also start their CL campaign between the Everton and Arsenal game abeit "only" Tel Aviv at Home but still it's another game.

The counter argument is that WBA was/is a "bogey" ground for Chelsea and they scored 3 there. Also with an attacking player like Pedro do we care if Chelsea lose/ship goals at the other end so long as they are scoring? Probably not.

I recall Spiderm4tt saying some players are fixture proof Aguero/Hazard/Sanchez etc but Pedro isn't. Even if he scores this weekend the next few games are not nice at all.

Or finally is this also a case of joining the bandwagonning that is likely to happen once he becomes unlocked as of this afternoon or should he score tomorrow. For those who ideally want him in GW8 (when the fixtures get much better SOU AVL whu LIV stk NOR tot BOU) we could be looking at what? 10m price tag?

A lot to digest for us pondering this move this weekend especially for a potential 4 point hit for most who WC last week.

Gun to my head I want to leave Depay in for this game week and get Pedro in GW8. However, reality is I'm likely to transfer him in Saturday evening (GW5) should he score/assist like Mav said, but I really don't like those up coming fixturess. However I hate the thought of his price being 10m too later on.

[Ezequiel]

I wouldn't at 5.0

Did Pedro sleep with your girlfriend or something?

He's won more trophies than anyone else in the League.

Coming off the bench in a teamsport.